Subject: Being as one.

 

So it’s happened, as many predicted and many feared. An authoritarian, narcissistic deeply flawed personality whose vindictiveness is well known will now move against and seek retribution against the legal system which had sought to bring him to book. Trumps win has been so overwhelming and left the democrats scrambling for some sort of meaning to their defeat. What is it in his charisma, both within his followers, or the loathing within his detractors, this extreme position which has revealed itself to the the ordinary man/woman on the street. An egotist can rarely be described as attractive and there’s hardly any point of mutual contact between the pro Trump and anti Trump group.
Is it a case of male masculinity versus female consensus seeking, is there blood in the air amongst Americans due to the missteps by the ‘democrat’s’ being in part party to their country being weakened by the Taliban in Afghanistan and the Russians in Ukraine. America who felt supreme since they had financially remoulded the world since the Second World War, who had built up a ‘nuclear arsenal’ and a ‘ballistic delivery’ and a mobile naval platform during the confrontation with the USSR which made Americans believe they walk on water. The rise of China, the stomping of Kim Jung-un across the Korean/Asian peninsula and of course the resurgence of Russia under Vladimir Putin.
“Mine is bigger than yours” is a masculine phenomenon and leaders in some countries rely on this vision of strength to embrace their electorate. In totalitarian regimes there are no elections, (in the normal understanding of the word), no need to take into consideration the population at large which can hobble the act of leadership without needing  the delicate balancing act of  ‘accounting’ to a parliamentary opposition or the dissenting voices within one’s own party. The authoritarian totalitarian has no such fight on their hands, there word is gospel, there aim is unswerving.
Trump is vindictive, famous for suing his opponents he is a bully yet the American public when out in their millions to vote for him even though many of them disliked him as a person.  Part of it is due to the American personality brought up in amongst Wall Street riches and the Founding Fathers attitude of individuality and every man for himself,  maintaining a gun culture that astonishes the world and an intolerance of failure.
The hysteria of his supporters is fascinating ,it’s as if each had won the lottery nothing normal but then nothing is normal in that country.
The question of what is normal is characterised my the temperament of the Russian, the Chinese, or North Korean, the willingness to sub serve for the nations good, the strength of religious values, the idealism of political belief the blindness  of ‘follower culture’ formed by slogans and half truths.
The world is a tricky place if you believe in conformity, if you hold for commonality among humans if you believe in listening and evolving your own sense of what is right and wrong. If you believe there is a little bit of everyone in everyone, not too much not too little but enough to at least listen.
Where do we go from here as the global policeman hangs up his coat and a free for all becomes the norm much like Europe used to be 18th/19th century with boarders claimed and redrawn, wars fought over a family feud or nothing more than a squabble since human life is cheap to some people and sending young men to do battle on your behalf is par for the course.

Listening to Kamala Harris giving her ‘concession speech’ was remarkable, the difference between her and the belligerent  Donald Trump.
Of course one must remember that whilst the defeat was emphatic there are still many millions who voted for the Democratic Party and for Harris in particular. One also has to recognise the ineffectuality of the political system which often seems to be a talking platform without much resolution
Trump joins the ranks of the totalitarian class which now a days seems to represent the bulk of the worlds population as politics moves ever right.
Neo- liberalism hides the actual direction of political intent in that it largely rewards the wealthy in its urging of growth because it’s inflated by the views of individual entrepreneurs who’s ideals are fixated on what’s in it for them, not the public at large. Crumbs from the table will always be crumbs as we are encouraged to be thankful for them.
A states like the Scandinavian group of countries have as their objective the needs of the people not only the elite and prosper by planning their objectives to benefit the nation at large. We on the other hand are under the thrall of class, the division and the entitlement. We don’t have the confidence to minimise the anachronistic entitlement syndrome and trust in ourselves to prosper according to our needs.

'Ambivalence' is a state of mind, we are human frogs in a heated pot, the fear of inconvenience which smokes out 'doing the right thing' requires us to consider the consequences of any act we engage in. In this age of the narcist  where, because we have been exposed to hours upon hours of individualised self aggrandisement, where survival is seen as an individual thing not a social aspiration, is it any wonder there is tremendous resistance to giving anything up for the social good.

Climate change arguments side lined for the immediacy of profit and our unwillingness to step back and reappraise our lives of what really matters.
Social structures cost money and perhaps a relinquishment of rights and a reassessment of values would nudge us back to an awareness of others.
This appraisal of life's journey from its self attainment to an overall view of the opportunity to die with respect for others, not as brothers and sisters but as colleagues in the journey. Not all colleagues are respected for their views and we trivialise humanity if we seek unanimity everywhere but in dying, because it's such a mystery a but a black hole of endeavour which has ruled our existence whilst on earth.
 It's the death of the social compact which is important and one in which  we should be judged. From 'assisted dying to assisted living' we should be as one.