Thursday, October 11, 2018

Reality vs fantasy in fiction and in politics

Several times in recent years I have tried to explain to a literary friend my lack of interest in fantasy fiction, dystopian novels, science fiction films, etc -- and haven't found quite the right words for it.   I could only say that I prefer looking at character development or human conflict within the world as we know it.

Then last Sunday's New York Times Book Review published an interview with author Andre Dubus III, in its ongoing series which asks authors about their reading choices, favorite books, best book they've ever read, etc.

In response to a question about the genres of fiction that he likes or dislikes, Dubus replied that he prefers character-driven stories that try "to illuminate truth . . . no matter how ugly."   He also said that he avoids nearly all forms of fantasy, not because there are no great works in that genre, but that "I tend to lose interest just as soon as magic of any kind enters a story, for this strikes me as escapist, as a denial of the mortal hand we've all been dealt, and I prefer to read those works that confront our reality and limitations and thwarted longings head on."

Yes!   That's exactly what I had been wanting to say but hadn't quite found the words.   And then it struck me -- as a bonus -- that this also explains my utter disdain and disgust with the Republicans' and especially with Donald Trump's tactics of lying and distorting the truth to the ordinary working Americans, who make up Trump's base.   They do it because they can't deal with the reality of the political truth:   that they are on the wrong side of progress in America in 2018.

The original version of this in modern politics is Donald Trump's stoking the false story that Barack Obama was not born in the United States and thus was an illegitimate president.    For those people who couldn't stand that a black man of such intelligence, charm, and rational maturity should become our leader, Donald Trump read their minds and spoke to their anxiety over their own perceived, concomitant loss of status.

You see, these people weren't wealthy;   they didn't have well-paying jobs;   but at least they were part of the "white men tribe" that had privileged status.    But even that was slipping away, if a black man could take over the Oval Office in the White House.   So, he must be illegitimate -- ergo, a conspiracy theory that refused to give way to facts and reason.

To sharpen the point:   Trump offered no real solution for them, only a focus of rage and resentment, at what had been "taken away" from them, along with a fantasy of jobs and overcoming those "others" who were taking their place and status.  But it was enough to give him a following.   Now, having done nothing much that helps this faction of his base, he has to continue manufacturing reasons for them to be enraged and resentful enough to come to his rallies and, maybe, vote for him.

That's not to excuse the Democrats, who seem to have trouble deciding on a message to unite around and effectively counter the negativity coming from the Republicans.  Democrats got badly outmaneuvered, both in managing the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings -- and the message that is flooding the air and tv waves since then.

Donald Trump screams to his rally crowds:   "Judge Kavanaugh has been proved innocent" of the allegations against him.   That is false;  lack of "proof" is not the same as being found innocent, especially when there was no real investigation of the allegations.  This is not a court of law;  it was a job interview.

In the staged ceremonial (second) swearing in of the now Associate Justice Kavanaugh, Trump issued an apology on behalf of the American people for what he and his family had been put through in the process, calling the allegations "totally untrue" and "brought about by people that are evil."

Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin wrote that the all-male, mostly older, white men that comprise the Republican majority of the Senate Judiciary Committee betray "a positively medieval attitude toward all women as sex objects who cannot be believed or taken seriously."

Even Sen. Lindsey Graham, who sometimes leads the rational minority in Republican circles, but lately has resorted to rabble-rousing rhetoric, snorted out this, referring to accuser Dr. Christine Blasey Ford:   "I'll listen to what the lady has to say . . . and then I'll vote for Judge Kavanaugh."   Is he really so clueless that he doesn't realize that, used in this context, calling Dr. Blasey Ford "lady" is an insult, as in the condescending "little lady"?  Or maybe he did realize it -- and, in fact, meant it as an insult?

Sen. Orrin Hatch said about Blasey Ford that she was a "pleasing" witness, but he still did not believe her.  Sen. Mitch McConnell, speaking as the Senate Majority Leader about getting the confirmation passed by the senate, said that he would "plow right through" the resistance.   Can you think of a better metaphor for rape?

But it was the committee chairman, Sen. Chuck Grassley, who barked out perhaps the biggest insult to women in general when he responded to a question about the lack of any women in the eleven-member Republican majority on the committee:   "It's a lot of workMaybe they don't want to do it."    Immediately, to his credit, he seemed to realize that this was an insult to the four women Democrats on the committee's minority:   Senators Dianne Feinstein, Amy Klobucher, Maizi Hirono, and Kamala Harris.  So he tried to backtrack and talk about how hard they work.   Too little, too late, Senator Grassley.

It was obviously the Republicans' talking point of the day to shift the narrative to the protests over the Kavanaugh process and decision, calling the Democratic protesters "an angry mob," referring to "mob rule through violence," stoking the angry white men in Trump's base to fear the peaceful -- admittedly loud, but non-violent -- protests.   Because they have no better answers to give.   Their "solutions" to problems mostly do not benefit ordinary Americans -- like the tax cut for the wealthy and corporations.   Tariffs are a big failure and hurt farmers and steel workers.

Besides that distraction, this meme attempts to turn the Republican men into the victims.    Now they claim that mothers are worried about their sons, their brothers, their husbands being falsely accused.   "It's the men and boys we should be concerned about," some said.

Republicans use lies and distortions of truth because they don't have anything else to offer the people who oppose them.  Their supporters are of two types:  wealthy donors who do benefit from Republican policies and the working class people who do not benefit but who tend to be gullible and to believe a leader who boasts of his prowess in being their savior -- even if it is all lies.

In other words, they use lies and distortions to obfuscate the fact that they have no solutions that really help the average American.  [I will concede that unemployment is about as low as it gets;  but that decline began under Obama and continued.]   So they sell them snake oil.   No wonder they get energized by Donald Trump -- the champion con man purveyor of snake oil.  What if someone really got through to them that these same snake oil salesmen plan to take away their health care, reduce Social Security Medicaid  and other safety net protections?

Now it pains me to realize that even Pope Francis and the Vatican are not above using this same strategy -- invoking fantasy to avoid dealing with reality -- in connection with the sexual abuse scandals that have been rocking the Catholic Church for a decade.

In his sermon in St. Peter's Square on Sunday, Sept. 29th, Pope Francis asked the people to pray daily through the month of October to Archangel Michael "to counter the attacks from the devil who wants to divide the Church . . . [It] must be saved from the malign one."  In the Bible, Michael is the angel that casts the devil out of heaven.

So it's the devil that makes priests sexually abuse children?  Francis does go on to say that the Church must "at the same time be made more aware of its guilt, its mistakes, and abuses committed in the present and in the past."   But let's hope its more than lip service.  The author of the article quoted is Mary Papenfuss of HuffPost.   She writes that Pope Francis has previously spoken of the devil as "a real entity, not as simply a representation of evil."

To my Catholic friends, I apologize if I seem irreverent in linking Pope Francis and Donald Trump in this tactic.   But I have to go one step further to end on a lighter note, reminding us older folks of the old tv comedian Flip Wilson who gave us the phrase:   "the devil made me do it" as a way of trying to get out of being blamed for the mischief he had caused.

So, I've linked an old comedian, an old political party (as in GOP = Grand Old Party), the prime television con man, and a sometimes revered pope, as well as a genre of fiction, all in their use of fantasy (and lies) as defense against taking real responsibility for real problems in the real world.

So be it.   If only Trump's rally-goers could see him for the con man he really is.   And, no, I am not calling the pope a con man;  because I assume that he truly believes that the devil is a real entity and an opposing force in the world.   What he needs to see as the head of the earthly Roman Catholic Church, however, is that, whether that's true or not, it's up to the humans in the Church to grapple, as humans, with the problem of adult, trusted priests, as humans, molesting minors -- who are also young, vulnerable humans.

Pray about it all you want.   But perhaps God put you there to take action -- and you should.

Ralph

No comments:

Post a Comment