Thank you Gail for your comments and thoughts. I agree with the point that some voters may not have been fully informed. But that is the human condition and as I see it we need to respect each others' autonomy and decision-making, and do our best, each of us, to keep each other acting rationally and reasonably, even as we accept that some of us, maybe all of us at one time or another, may not make the right choices. Sandro
Sandro, I respect you to the moon and back, but I must humbly disagree with you now.
". . .Americans, of sound mind and body, decided they wanted to reelect [Trump]".
1. I believe research shows that many Trump voters did not have the benefit of a robust education, for many reasons often beyond their control.
2. Many of these same voters had access to a very limited amount of "information" coming from the media. Fox News is recognized as the most popular source of news for many Americans, yet their broadcasting content has been proven to be filled with misinformation, the vast majority of which supports Trump and his policies.
Personally, I've forced myself to look at some pro-Trump media, and I found it very powerful and troubling. If I were a person of limited education and resources, exposed to only pro-Trump misinformation, I would likely be a Trump voter.
Sandro, let me repeat how much I respect you. I share my opinions solely to add another voice to the important dialog that you facilitate.
I really appreciate the thoughts presented in this essay, as well as the lines of thinking it has brought up for me. The way I see it, the left is full of observers and analysts debating what is unfolding and what the best ways to act are, while the right is full of foot soldiers, acting on their mission. We seem to be caught up in getting things just right and attempting to maintain neutrality and invite discourse that it seems we mistake the process and maintaining these values for the end goal. Which, of course, is power. The left’s values, as another commentator so observed, are being steamrolled in this environment, and with it, the chances of having power. There is a way to be both powerful and principled. Let’s figure out how, sooner rather than later.
Hi Sandro, some other thoughts. Although the commentary does make some reasonable points, my overall impression is that it treats the Trump administration policies as a laundry list among which some are reasonable and worthy of discussion and some are not because they are cruel. Missing is the fact that the overall goal is anti-liberal and authoritarian. A liberal discussion requires honest discussion on both sides, and I don't see any of that happening, nor do I think, while some critique of the public health community is justified, there's any sort of moral equivalence between illiberalism in the public health community versus illiberalism among those who hold most of the power.
I also question whether it’s correct to treat elections as exercises in liberalism, given the outsize influence of the rich and corporations and the pernicious effect of social media and the misinformation that floods the media landscape. As liberalism often does, it posits a largely fictional situation in which there are good actors on both sides and with relatively equal power. There are certainly times and places where the liberal approach is the appropriate one, but I am afraid the situation in which we currently find ourselves is not one, and we will find that liberal and humanist values are steamrollered if we ignore the power dynamics.
Excellent post. I fully agree. However, Trump, I believe, is not setting his sights on good governance as we have known it—whether liberal or conservative. He is establishing his dynasty. It is a different game than we have experienced in any administration in my memory.
Thank you Gail for your comments and thoughts. I agree with the point that some voters may not have been fully informed. But that is the human condition and as I see it we need to respect each others' autonomy and decision-making, and do our best, each of us, to keep each other acting rationally and reasonably, even as we accept that some of us, maybe all of us at one time or another, may not make the right choices. Sandro
Sandro, I respect you to the moon and back, but I must humbly disagree with you now.
". . .Americans, of sound mind and body, decided they wanted to reelect [Trump]".
1. I believe research shows that many Trump voters did not have the benefit of a robust education, for many reasons often beyond their control.
2. Many of these same voters had access to a very limited amount of "information" coming from the media. Fox News is recognized as the most popular source of news for many Americans, yet their broadcasting content has been proven to be filled with misinformation, the vast majority of which supports Trump and his policies.
Personally, I've forced myself to look at some pro-Trump media, and I found it very powerful and troubling. If I were a person of limited education and resources, exposed to only pro-Trump misinformation, I would likely be a Trump voter.
Sandro, let me repeat how much I respect you. I share my opinions solely to add another voice to the important dialog that you facilitate.
I really appreciate the thoughts presented in this essay, as well as the lines of thinking it has brought up for me. The way I see it, the left is full of observers and analysts debating what is unfolding and what the best ways to act are, while the right is full of foot soldiers, acting on their mission. We seem to be caught up in getting things just right and attempting to maintain neutrality and invite discourse that it seems we mistake the process and maintaining these values for the end goal. Which, of course, is power. The left’s values, as another commentator so observed, are being steamrolled in this environment, and with it, the chances of having power. There is a way to be both powerful and principled. Let’s figure out how, sooner rather than later.
Hi Sandro, some other thoughts. Although the commentary does make some reasonable points, my overall impression is that it treats the Trump administration policies as a laundry list among which some are reasonable and worthy of discussion and some are not because they are cruel. Missing is the fact that the overall goal is anti-liberal and authoritarian. A liberal discussion requires honest discussion on both sides, and I don't see any of that happening, nor do I think, while some critique of the public health community is justified, there's any sort of moral equivalence between illiberalism in the public health community versus illiberalism among those who hold most of the power.
I also question whether it’s correct to treat elections as exercises in liberalism, given the outsize influence of the rich and corporations and the pernicious effect of social media and the misinformation that floods the media landscape. As liberalism often does, it posits a largely fictional situation in which there are good actors on both sides and with relatively equal power. There are certainly times and places where the liberal approach is the appropriate one, but I am afraid the situation in which we currently find ourselves is not one, and we will find that liberal and humanist values are steamrollered if we ignore the power dynamics.
Excellent post. I fully agree. However, Trump, I believe, is not setting his sights on good governance as we have known it—whether liberal or conservative. He is establishing his dynasty. It is a different game than we have experienced in any administration in my memory.
#PublicHealthHaiku
In a time of flux
Need for connection crucial
Voices, actions, spirits.