I would go a step further. Trump has no virtues, only vices. He is manifestly, obviously, relentlessly a terrible human being. He is always the worst version of himself. His core political message is: be the worst version of yourself and you will face no consequences, if you support me.
But, sooner or later, everyone-being-the-worst-version-of-themselves will precipitate economic and civic disaster. There WILL be negative consequences. So, the question is: how will our institutions react when consequences manifest? How will the public react?
You can see this in Trump's roots in reality TV. It's obvious that the central appeal of Reality TV to most viewers is getting to live vicariously through a profoundly disordered person who demands "fuck you, I get what I want" at every stage of human interaction. Trump had the advantage of being both a reality TV star and having a deep understanding (although I doubt he can articulate it) that modern "journalism" and entertainment are largely the same and share business models, and that he could ride his own incoherence and erratic behavior farther than anyone expected.
I agree completely and would take it a step further (in a different direction from the other guy) - this incentive structure is everywhere, held at bay by social norms and "elite" gatekeeping.
Both parties faced a challenge from Id-Populists in the past decade. For Republicans, it was Trumpism; for Democrats, it was "The Woke Mind Virus Is Real And That's Good, Actually"-style leftism (which simply replaced "The Leader" with "The Cause"). But the Great Awokening fizzled, while Trumpism ate the Republican Party whole. The old guard of the Democratic party doled out some lip service to the new cultural trends, and allowed leftist candidates to run in primaries - which is to say, they declined to deviate from their long-standing policy of paying lip service to new cultural trends, and did not violate their own rules about primary elections. The few leftists who managed to get elected - at or near the height of their relevance - have not been able to meaningfully suborn the mainstream Democratic Party. By contrast, the old guard of the Republican party is either out of the party entirely, or kissing Trump's ass.
I'm not entirely sure how to explain this difference, though I can identify a few candidates. For years before 2015, the Republican Party had been selling itself by degrees to its own Id-Populist wing, leaning on the Murdoch propaganda machine for relevance and replacing actual substantive talking points with lies, conspiracy theories, and outright racism; this would have weakened the political strength of the mainstream, while strengthening the Id-Populists. Or perhaps the disparity was in the strength of the challengers. Trumpism appealed to the id of the common racist and the Barnumite Sucker, which proved very powerful indeed. Maybe the id to which the leftist Great Awokening appealed - the id of terminally enlightened academics, unsullied idealists, holier-than-thou residents of ivory towers, and small children - just didn't have much juice in it. Even with the affluence of modern society, ivory towers are an exclusive club.
I would go a step further. Trump has no virtues, only vices. He is manifestly, obviously, relentlessly a terrible human being. He is always the worst version of himself. His core political message is: be the worst version of yourself and you will face no consequences, if you support me.
But, sooner or later, everyone-being-the-worst-version-of-themselves will precipitate economic and civic disaster. There WILL be negative consequences. So, the question is: how will our institutions react when consequences manifest? How will the public react?
You can see this in Trump's roots in reality TV. It's obvious that the central appeal of Reality TV to most viewers is getting to live vicariously through a profoundly disordered person who demands "fuck you, I get what I want" at every stage of human interaction. Trump had the advantage of being both a reality TV star and having a deep understanding (although I doubt he can articulate it) that modern "journalism" and entertainment are largely the same and share business models, and that he could ride his own incoherence and erratic behavior farther than anyone expected.
I agree completely and would take it a step further (in a different direction from the other guy) - this incentive structure is everywhere, held at bay by social norms and "elite" gatekeeping.
Both parties faced a challenge from Id-Populists in the past decade. For Republicans, it was Trumpism; for Democrats, it was "The Woke Mind Virus Is Real And That's Good, Actually"-style leftism (which simply replaced "The Leader" with "The Cause"). But the Great Awokening fizzled, while Trumpism ate the Republican Party whole. The old guard of the Democratic party doled out some lip service to the new cultural trends, and allowed leftist candidates to run in primaries - which is to say, they declined to deviate from their long-standing policy of paying lip service to new cultural trends, and did not violate their own rules about primary elections. The few leftists who managed to get elected - at or near the height of their relevance - have not been able to meaningfully suborn the mainstream Democratic Party. By contrast, the old guard of the Republican party is either out of the party entirely, or kissing Trump's ass.
I'm not entirely sure how to explain this difference, though I can identify a few candidates. For years before 2015, the Republican Party had been selling itself by degrees to its own Id-Populist wing, leaning on the Murdoch propaganda machine for relevance and replacing actual substantive talking points with lies, conspiracy theories, and outright racism; this would have weakened the political strength of the mainstream, while strengthening the Id-Populists. Or perhaps the disparity was in the strength of the challengers. Trumpism appealed to the id of the common racist and the Barnumite Sucker, which proved very powerful indeed. Maybe the id to which the leftist Great Awokening appealed - the id of terminally enlightened academics, unsullied idealists, holier-than-thou residents of ivory towers, and small children - just didn't have much juice in it. Even with the affluence of modern society, ivory towers are an exclusive club.