Your rage at Trump is justified: Don't let scolds like the New York Times shame you for it
Theres a myth that goodness exists independent of rage. Its a lie to keep those being held down from rising upWhen they go low, we go high. But even at an elevated altitude, there's plenty of breathing space to vent. Justifiable outrage isn't rude. And beware of anyone who tries to silence you by suggesting otherwise.
It's really been something to watch staunchly decorous institutions like The New York Times flail to grasp the profound repulsiveness emanating from the current administration. It's the aristocratic friend who has fallen on hard times, eating macaroni and cheese off the best china, naively wondering why their venerable family name doesn't impress the person taking their job application at Walmart. This, after all, is the same paper that recently went ahead and presumed that owning a Kate Spade handbag was "a coming-of-age ritual for a generation of American women."
On Wednesday, the paper of record took to task the grotesque national tone in yet another of its quaint attempts to, you know, look at it from all sides. Under the headline "In Trumps America, the Conversation Turns Ugly and Angry, Starting at the Top," the subhead that ran Wednesday read "Trump rails against undocumented immigrants as 'murderers and thieves' who want to 'infest our country.'" It added, "Some of his opponents respond with rage." (The subhead was later softened to "The politics of rage that animated President Trumps political rise now dominate the national conversation." )
The piece, by Peter Baker and Katie Rogers, goes on to report that "Mr. Trumps coarse discourse increasingly seems to inspire opponents to respond with vituperative words of their own. Whether it be Robert De Niros four-letter condemnation at the Tony Awards or a congressional intern who shouted the same word at Mr. Trump when he visited the Capitol this week, the president has generated so much anger among his foes that some are crossing boundaries that he himself shattered long ago." And it noted "the trading of crude insults on both sides." An example of the "both sides" rhetoric was the Duluth protestor holding a sign that read "My Grandpa Didnt Fight Nazis for This." Oh my stars, my delicate sensibilities were not ready for that.
More: https://www.salon.com/2018/06/22/your-rage-at-trump-is-justified-dont-let-scolds-like-the-new-york-times-shame-you-for-it/
ck4829
(35,072 posts)They are saying don't trust your mind and perception, and reject gut instincts and feelings. NYT needs to stop playing the game, stop with the both sidesism too.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,001 posts)eShirl
(18,491 posts)Martin Eden
(12,864 posts)Although it matters how that outrage is expressed and harnessed to produce change, the NYT piece totally misses the point, to wit:
Failure to express outrage is unhealthy to a person inwardly and it is unhealthy outwardly to our democracy because that failure amounts to tacit acceptance if not endorsement of what is truly outrageous and destructive.
marble falls
(57,081 posts)dalton99a
(81,485 posts)randr
(12,412 posts)in Trump statements or Melania's apparel.
They are saying exactly what they mean loud and clear, no interpretation needed.
It is time to call a pig a pig.
jayschool2013
(2,312 posts)american_ideals
(613 posts)Peter Baker is the king of NYT bothsidesism.
Paul Krugman was talking about bothsidesism in ** 1999 **.
Do the NYT politics reporters not read their own paper? Its unbelievable.
mountain grammy
(26,620 posts)We have a fake president who lost the election.
PatrickforO
(14,573 posts)And I am enraged by Trump and his disgusting, corrupt, treasonous administration.
Those little children...God, how can Trump preside over something like that? It's funny - the guy is doing everything he can to dehumanize the immigrants, the Democrats, and basically everyone else but white people. But it is him who seems lacking in basic humanity.
True Blue American
(17,984 posts)Narcissists seldom do.It is all about them, no one else.
True Blue American
(17,984 posts)He was a Republican. He would despise these thugs today.
His life was built on helping others. Neighbors, Friends all told me that.
True Blue American
(17,984 posts)Evangelicals have to say about Jesus Righteous Anger when he threw the Money changers out of the Temple for cheating people? They might want to think about that!
PatSeg
(47,427 posts)Do we wait until American citizens are hidden away in military run detention centers?
Do we keep our anger controlled and subdued until elections are canceled?
Do pull back our outrage until the entire nation devolves into third world conditions?
Or do we wait until every democracy on the planet falls and is replaced by autocratic rule?
I am all for civil discourse and I don't believe we should become what we are opposing, but this is an emergency situation and outrage is not only permissible, it is required.
c-rational
(2,592 posts)plate part. We too cancelled our Times subscription after too much equivalence. It was the headline question "Is Drump redefining the presidency". No he is trashing it. Yesterday a super at one of my client buildings says we should show respect for the man in office. I had a difficult time swallowing this. Like the army, one respects the rank, but the man in the suit needs to earn that respect, and this dumpster has not. He is only president to the deplorables. Every other President that I have known has always reached out to all Americans on both sides of the aisles and people of all stripes. This travesty of a man, a racist whose father was arrested at a KKK rally makes no attempt, and he is not called on it by the macaroni and china set. They can pound salt.
Uncle Joe
(58,359 posts)Thanks for the thread Rhiannon