But here's the thing... Donald Trump is not a comedian. He obviously doesn't know how to read the room if that room isn't full of
people who value fear over fact and charisma over substance.
Donald Trump doesn't know how to tell jokes... Donald Trump is the joke. The medium is the message. Meta/meme...blahblahblah.
Why did Donald Trump attend the Roger Waters concert in Mexico City?
He wanted to make sure that Mexico paid for The Wall.
I kid.
Rusty... your discussion of "instinct" and what is "natural" seems to be extrapolated from some sort of reading of Nature. One outcropping of that
methodology is Social Darwinism. Which is basically a partial reading of a section of Nature and extrapolating excuses for inhumane actions.
It's good to proceed with caution with that, since concepts like "racial purity" and eugenics have also branched out from such thinking.
If you want to take Nature as your cue for what is "natural" in the political or social sphere, then you should be in favor of "Political Correctness"
as a cooperative force that mediates individual behavior within established group norms (thereby updating group norms). Human beings are social creatures
who concurrently exist as individuals. So every culture has several systems that mediate between the group and the individual. Although human beings are
mammals and primates, they are also capable of cooperative group action, empathy and intellectual thought. So it is "natural" for humans to think about
what is, and project an image of what should be that they then try to live up to. And isn't group consensus that mediates individual experience the foundation
of democracy?
It is true that "stereotyping" is a foundational survival mechanism for human beings. If a group of hunters that hunted near some yellow grasses
were attacked by a lion, then each time the surviving hunters approached similar yellow grasses undulating in the wind they'd imagine that it
wasn't the wind, but lions moving through the grasses. To operate under that "stereotype" insures a greater probability of future survival from lion attack.
The problem is that human society is far more complex than that. If you work in a service industry, then your "lion in the grass" might be my
Saturday night out getting drunk and acting a fool. So people react like their lives and livelihoods are attacked when they feel "threatened".
On the one hand it might feel to some like society is being "fractured" by ever smaller group designations. If the Q in LGBTQ is "questioning"...
then isn't that ironic™ (Alanis Morissette, ©1996)? It seems like a category made by Groucho Marx for those who don't want to be categorized.
But then again... it's about self-categorization. The "fracturing" is actually more like "articulating", as groups of people identify themselves
and let everybody else know how they want to be referred to. If you don't want to develop categorical statements about your own identity,
then you don't have to. I think some of the anger some white people feel is when they perceive that their individuality is being stripped by being
placed in a larger, faceless, and perhaps historically problematic category that used to be called the "silent majority".
I also heard an interesting comment recently saying basically "Equality feels like oppression for those who have unknowingly benefited
from a system that has been working in their favor for years."
I don't see that as a positive attribute.
