I know that even in the United States when
you have someone like Donald Trump, I know
that there is a lot of elitist liberal reaction.
Like here we see the limit of democracy but
in the wrong sense, in the sense that you
see stupid ordinary people are seduced and
so on and so on.
Well, although Noam Chomsky doesn't like me
very much, I admire him sincerely and I must
admit that I like his term.
I think it's not just a journalistic term,
it's a concept, which he took over from American
tradition even mainstream right wing liberal
of manufacturing consent.
You know, Democracy is not only formal rules
of elections, democracy is an entire thick
network of how political consensus is built;
a lot of unwritten rules.
And now I think the United States are at a
very important moment, at the moment when
this machine to build consensus has broken
down.
Now these are moments which can be catastrophic.
In such moments direct fascism can take over,
but this can be also moments when the left,
or whatever would be the new left, provides
a new answer.
So my first reaction to those elitists liberals
who claim you see the stupid rednecks, white
trash or whatever are voting for Trump, yes
but it's your responsibility.
One moment of truth in all those enraged people
who vote for Trump it that they nonetheless
so clearly that this traditional machine of
manufacturing consent no longer works.
To put it in this slightly bombastic and exaggerated
Marxist term, the ruling ideology mobilizes
certain machinery to keep people in check,
to control the excesses and so on.
That machinery no longer works.
And here I'm not just a pessimistic, in contrast
to liberals for whom Trump is the ultimate
devil, it's a nightmare and so on, I claim
it's much more complex.
Of course Trump is almost but not quite proto
fascist phenomenon, but it's because they,
the liberal centrist mainstream because they
failed.
And that's why, not that I like in anyway
Trump, Trump is scum, trash and so on, but
my but is this one, first Trump nonetheless
if you are a leftists you should admire him
sincerely.
He did something wonderfully.
He almost single-handedly destroyed the Republican
Party.
What I mean you have two main vaguely orientations,
the Christian fundamentalists in the party
hardliners and this Republican liberal enlightened
big business elite.
Both of them are more or less horrified of
Trump.
And Trump is vulgar, but in his very vulgarity
you can see a common human baseness, opportunism,
now I will say something horrible, but for
me people like Ted Crews or you remember eight
years ago Rick Santorum, there's something
much worse.
Trump is a dirty disgusting human being, do
you really think that Rick Santorum is a human
being?
I think that they are aliens.
There's something so monstrous about them.
That's my first one.
My second point is that I never trusted this
absolute obsession with Trump.
Oh now we should be all together just to stop
Trump, for this we sacrificed Bernie Sanders.
This is how Hillary got us.
Hillary is not just LBGT rights, a little
bit more progressive, Hillary is today the
vote of the establishment even of the Cold
War establishment.
Do you know that most of the big names of
from the area of George Bush, Paul and so
on.
They moved to Hillary now.
Hillary is not only the voice of the liberal
establishment, she's also the voice of let's
call it Cold War establishment.
Now in the last days there was some propaganda
against Trump saying oh but can we trust this
guy?
He will bring us into a new world war.
No, I'm much more afraid that Hillary will
do this.
So again, in no way I am for Trump.
He personifies what I was talking about this
disintegration of public values, of public
manners, this obscene situation where you
can talk about whatever you want.
Again, things which years ago were unthinkable
as part of a public debate are now normalized,
open racism and so on.
And here I think political correctness doesn't
work.
Because political correctness is a desperate
attempt when public mores all these unwritten
rules which tell you what is this and what
is not, break down, political correctness
tries directly to legislate.
This expression is to be used, that expression
is to be used and so on and so on.
What makes me afraid of these this procedure
is the following: do you remember how to years
ago or even three or four when all this debate
about torture began, waterboarding and so
on?
The U.S. Army did something very nice, they
no longer talked about torture but about I
think the term was enhanced interrogation
technique.
And this is for me establishment version of
political correctness.
You put a nice her name like I can well imagine
that ten years from now, and it's not a joke
I claim, rape will be called well why not
enhanced seduction technique.
Like this basic politically correct idea that
you use words which will not hurt other, I
totally subscribe to this when we are dealing
with all this marginal sexual identities which
can traumatize you and so on, but I absolutely
don't think that this is any kind of universal
right, not to be called in a way which hurts
you.
Let's take a big criminal corporation boss
who maybe also wants to see him as a humanitarian.
No he should be publicly called with words
which will hurt him and that's the whole point
that he should be hurt and so on and so on.
So again, I don't to like this narcissistic
idea of the ultimate horizon do feel hurt,
are you wounded or not and so on and so on.
I mean this is a very ambiguous topic.
Of course you can in this way defending gay
rights, the exclusion of LGBT people and so
on, but then what would prevent white Arians
or whatever, white power people to say sorry
guys but we are hurt if you attack us like
that and so on.
No, in politics we have authentic enemies.
Everyone should not be respected in politics
and so on.
Politics is a real struggle of life and death.
