Schadenfreude Reconsidered
In this little news clip of Trump touring the new “Alligator Alcatraz” prison (or rather, “migrant holding facility”) in Florida with Governor Ron deSantis and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, Trump remarks in the end, “Biden wanted me in here. It didn’t work out that way but he wanted me in here, that son of a bitch.”
I thought, Wow, he’s still nursing resentment for Joe Biden after all this time! Resentment is unpleasant. Therefore, Trump must be suffering. Good. He is imprisoned in the hellhole of his own mind.
Now of course, having caught that thought, I had to ask myself why I should feel a little better to think that Trump suffers?
And in fact, how do I know he suffers, just because he is cruel and resents people? I read a book some 15 years or so ago entitled THE BRAIN THAT CHANGES ITSELF which contained all kinds of (then) groundbreaking data about how our brains work. There was a chapter in it, as I recall, devoted to masochists, whose brains process pain as if it’s pleasure. That’s why masochists like to be hurt – the way their brains are wired, pain feels good.
So why can’t the same thing be true for meanness and cruelty?
When I have resentful thoughts, or lash out in anger with my words, I’m always suffering on some level. But how do I know that’s true about Trump? Maybe it isn’t. Maybe his brain is wired differently.
And again, why should I care about that? Why should I want him to suffer? That wanting hurts me!
But then … if Trump’s brain is really so configured as to enjoy cruelty and resentment, it’s unlikely he gets to experience a lot of heart opening, which I deem to be the best experience.
Ah, that makes me feel better.
And by the way, don’t be fooled by that little clip. “Alligator Alcatraz” is a nightmare.
Was This Moment Inevitable?
My friend Shelby French and I have a new Substack we call Cut to the Bone, which contains, “personal, political, and spiritual analysis of madness and survival through existentially turbulent times. Shelby and I each contribute to it (feel free to subscribe!) and then sometimes we share dialogue within it. This is our most recent dialogue, published in our Substack just yesterday.
Marc: I feel there have been all these little things that led to our current situation, and if only any of them hadn’t happened, we would not be dealing with this. For example, Hillary Clinton in 2016 saying that half of Trump’s supporters were a “basket of deplorables.” I think that sunk her candidacy. I also thought it was the stupidest thing any politician ever said. It gave an enduring meme to the right wing and it totally calcified the perception that liberals look down on working class people.
And then, after January 6, 2021, Mitch McConnell not allowing Trump to be convicted in the Senate. That also was an inflection point, a stupid mercenary political gambit on McConnell’s part. And of course, next, Kevin McCarthy went down to Mar-a-Lago and posed with Trump, thereby resurrecting his legitimacy. And Joe Biden made a terrible error by not bowing out in 2022 after the midterm election, as he kind of indicated he would when he ran for President, when he said he’d be a “transitional” president. I thought he was an outstanding president, but he delivered us right back into the hands of Trump. We would have had a much better chance if Joe Biden had said in November or December 2022 “I’m not running again,” and then let the chips fall.
So my view is that this nightmare could have been avoided, if not for a perfect storm of various mistakes and cowardice. Rather than Trump being a reflection of our zeitgeist, I see him as a hideous mutant aberration.
Shelby: I agree that a perfect storm brought us to this point for some of the reasons you mentioned. But I don’t know that those specific reasons had the power to get us to where we are today.
Just going back to Hillary, I felt the same as you did when she said that. I was like: “You stupid motherfucker. Why would you call voters you are trying to attract ‘deplorable’?” But at the same time, Trump was using terms like that freely. And that’s what attracted people to him. He was saying these horrible things about Democrats. The gloves were off. So it’s just curious to me that we hold Hillary to blame for one thing that she said when she got a little bit real, and you say that’s what took her down.
Marc: Well, she said it twice. Once at a private gathering and then again in a public place. Which tells me that it was deliberate.
Shelby: Everything she does is deliberate.
Marc: I think she was trying to recreate the Sister Souljah moment that Bill Clinton had when he spoke to the Rainbow Coalition, and he criticized a black rapper for anti-white statements or lyrics. It was his way of signaling to “moderates” that he wasn’t going to have too much empathy for black people. I think Hillary was trying to do something a little similar: ruffle the feathers of some so that she could hug a larger demographic tighter.
I think her statement was both inaccurate and unwise, because I think we all have a deplorable side. We all have our better angels, and we all have our not-so-good angels. I think every single person has the potential to be fearful and hateful, and to cave in to their reactivity and selfishness and narrow-minded thinking. And also that everybody has the capability to open their hearts and be more expansive. I think that by dismissing and insulting people like that, Hillary was playing Trump’s game, and you can’t beat him at his own game.
Shelby: Well, Gavin Newsom is gonna try. But go ahead ….
Marc: For example, when Trump was accusing the Haitians in Springfield, Ohio last year of eating people’s pet dogs and cats. He was going for the basest, most despicable, hateful, xenophobic nature in people, and that’s what his art is – to recruit the hateful parts of people. But I also felt Kamala Harris made a mistake in their debate when this came up, because she was laughing about it, and it was not a funny thing. Those Haitians who’d come to Springfield to work — and who were legal citizens — were cowering in their apartments, terrified to go out in the street. But I guess someone coached Harris to ridicule and “dominate” Trump, which, again, I think was playing his game. So yeah, Trump can get away with calling people names because that’s intrinsic to his brand. But when other politicians do something similar, with the sneering and so on, they just reinforce his brand, and thereby reinforce him.
And, by the way, Trump didn’t call whole swaths of voters names; he called specific people names.
Shelby: Oh, he’s cast a wide net. He just said recently that he hates all Democrats. And I don’t think Hillary called all his voters deplorable. Remember, 2016 was when the whole reactive, conservative, online bro culture was really coming into its own, and it was fostering people who’d work alongside Trump and his agenda. I think Hillary meant those folks.
Marc: She did say half of his voters. That was a lot of people.
Shelby: Okay, we all have the ability to be deplorable. But in the nuts and bolts of a high level campaign, did it really give more fuel to the fire of Trump’s voters or turn off those committed to Her? To jump into the gender pool, my reaction is: our blaming of Hillary leans toward how we judge women versus men, particularly on the political stage. People have done great analyses on how we look at what male politicians say versus what women politicians say and how we tend to dig in and disapprove of what women might say and put them at greater fault. What Hillary said was dumb, but I don’t think it was a defining moment that allowed Trump to win.
Marc: I think it was one of the determinative factors, just like Russian interference, just like the news story about her emails on Anthony Weiner’s computer a week and a half before the election. I think you remove any of those factors, and she would have won.
Also I think it’s the nature of media to focus on those moments. It’s not just sexism. “Basket of deplorables” was a fucking bombshell moment, and Hillary should have known. A lot of people stayed home and didn’t vote in ‘16 because they were sour on Hillary and figured she’d win anyway.
Shelby: There were elements on the left, like the Bernie crew, who did not think Hillary was forceful or liberal enough. Maybe she was trying to appease those on the left who would think: “Yeah, deplorables! That’s right!”
Marc: That’s what I’m saying I think she was trying to do. And it was a really bad, cynical strategy.
Shelby: But they all do it. And I don’t think it was any more cynical than a lot of things that are done in a campaign. But again – my main point: We would have gotten here anyway.
Marc: I do want to hear your theory about why we would be here anyway. What is it about the trajectory of our country that you think would have led inevitably to this stew of toxicity and horror?
Shelby: Let’s talk about theory of extinction burst. So, start with the idea about the moral arc of the universe bending towards justice, as MLK put it. We’ve seen that to some extent with ending slavery and the improvement over time with women’s rights and civil rights and gay marriage. So there’s been a general sway in the direction of more tolerance and acceptance. But for the most part, I would still say that this is a White Christian Nationalist country, and there is still a critical mass of our population that would like to hold on to the traditional white society that has served them and kept them comfortable (even if in reality they are truly uncomfortable).
And so the extinction burst theory says when things are going through great evolution and change, that which is dying as a result of the change – in this case, traditional white society — growls up with great force and resistance. It doesn’t want to die. Look, very rapidly, we have had more and more questioning of what a lot of people consider “traditional values.” We’re mainstreaming terms like “patriarchy” and “gender fluidity.” There are all these currents that are changing what our culture looks like, and what our culture accepts. And so we get “extinction bursts” i.e. repellent behavior, from people who are frightened or feel displaced by these changes, and of course there will be politicians who take advantage.
White men have ruledthe direction of this country almost exclusively. A hundred and sixty years ago no one but white men could even vote. That’s not that long ago. Our country clearly still has those vestiges of that power imbalance, and many white men now fear they’re losing their power, privilege, and exceptionalism.
So combine that with our social media, and all the crazed messaging that gets out there. And in a weird way, much of it flatters people who are ill or way under informed. They think, “I read an article about where our country is going and now I’m an expert.” So you’ve got this cacophony of voices that are saying all these insane things. And you get a lot more people who feel like they are participating in the “national conversation,” but they’re doing it from a place of ignorance and hollowness.
That’s why, to me, all those precipitating factors you mentioned … they could have been other things. I feel like this time we’re in now is an inevitable reckoning for our country to grow beyond its sins.
Marc: Its sins being …?
Shelby: Slavery, racism, sexism … all these things that have harmed people and continue to do so.
Marc: So you’re perceiving mass reactivity, millions of people clutching to structures that have advantaged them and provided them a sense of stability for generations.
Shelby: Yeah.
Marc: Well, one thing that is surprising is that we haven’t seen any of that reactivity to the normalization of legal weed. I think in about half the States now we’ve got legal pot, and none of the MAGA people are going after that.
Shelby: That’s because they use it too.
Marc: I know. That’s my point. I think society has embraced a paradigm shift. I believe cannabis expands your thinking. I mean, maybe some people have a paranoid experience with it, but it generally gives perspective on one’s accustomed world of thought. So I’m wondering why that isn’t more of a counterforce. Weed may not necessarily make you more loving or even more mellow, but I think it always sets you into a different frame of mind.
Shelby: Maybe it can also reinforce your habitual worldview. We don’t know that the type of mental expansion you’re talking about is what somebody else living in a completely different context will get from it.
Marc: You were talking about how the traditions of racism and sexism and white supremacy and privilege and Christian nationalism have provided people with a container of security and predictability, and how that’s now being threatened by concepts like gender fluidity and patriarchy. What I’m saying about weed is, even for people that don’t necessarily feel their hearts opened by it, I think it can soften those hard edges of dogma.
Shelby: Why hasn’t it done it yet then? You see weed being more widespread and accepted than ever before as a progressive development in our collective evolution. But I don’t see that reflected, for example, in online culture. I suspect weed could even enable someone to cling to their backwards beliefs more strongly. I would love to see cannabis as this great doorway to collective consciousness but I don’t. For many people, it’s just a mind-altering escape. They zone out and watch movies or play video games when they’re stoned. Maybe they laugh more, I don’t know, but they’re not necessarily taking it to some spiritual place.
Marc: Okay, I concede your point. I don’t know how pot really affects masses of people.
But with respect to your extinction theory, I’m afraid the climate crisis makes it different from ever before. Maybe in the past, we have collectively evolved into something better after a spasm of disgustingness and cruelty. So sure, more people will die, suffer, be deported, lose their health benefits, whatever. That kind of human atrocity has been going on for centuries, millennia even. But we’re in a unique situation now, with habitability of the planet at stake, because the earth will not just bounce back once Trump is gone.
Shelby: Unfortunately, when people are trying to figure out how to survive, climate obviously comes last. And there are going to be more people just trying to survive, at least in our little pit of the United States. So climate will go even further down the list of priorities for people, I think even for people on the left.
Marc: Short-term selfish interests will become more paramount.
Shelby: And I think short-term selfish interests are fine. We all need a degree of selfishness to keep ourselves breathing, right? There’s a whole bunch of things that need to happen to keep yourself alive, and the economy unfortunately is a big part of that. So you have to deal with what’s directly in front of you and what’s available to you in the moment.
But yes, it’s devastating. The administration is taking actions that are purposefully destroying the environment – just to own the libs! Taking away electric vehicle tax credits, going back to coal etc. just doesn’t make any fucking sense unless your motivating force is “owning the libs.” Hey, the economy was responding to renewable energy initiatives. This anti-climate shit makes no fiscal sense, much less ecological sense.
Marc: There seems to be something so uniquely, starkly evil about Donald Trump, and his appeal feels out of this world to me, as if anything he does, people will accept. They just sign on to his cruelty and nihilism, and his anti-climate crusade is just one example. So what IS that? Where does all that nihilistic, sadistic … strain that he seems to have harnessed come from?
Shelby: Try not to make him bigger than he actually is. He’s not a literal Godzilla monster. He’s a living, bloated embodiment of the United States as a culture, particularly popular culture as it’s developed and occupied more and more of our time and attention.
When TV first came out, people called it “the idiot box.” Well, it’s gotten a lot more idiotic since those days. Reality TV hit big and people globbed onto that. Now Trump is saying he wants to have an Ultimate Fighting Championship bout on the White House lawn next year. That’s the chef’s kiss of exactly where we’re going. He’s turned our government into a reality TV show. That’s what people relate to now.
Today, attention is currency. The Kardashians understand that and boy, were they brilliant at positioning themselves in this zeitgeist. And many people now take delight in seeing rich people and thinking that they’re just a lottery ticket away from living like them. Trump understands it too. Celebrity Apprentice was his first platform; everyone loved to hear him berate people. Everyone loved to hear him say “You’re fired.” And analysts chime in, “he’s a poor man’s idea of what wealth and power looks like.” And the gaudiness! I mean, the golden sneakers? The golden Trump coins? The golden Trump bibles? It’s like we’ve just taken every bit of weird American culture – the entertainment, the distraction, the suppressed pain we all carry – and shoved it all into the ‘success” of this bloated motherfucker.
And underneath all this distortion and shallowness are the issues that Americans have wrestled with for centuries, about how we treat each other. We still have people who are alive now that lived under Jim Crow. The black community, and others who have been most vulnerable in our society, sensed that this was coming for a long time, and it’s not surprising to them.
Marc: Obviously, there are still people who are at the impact of all that’s dysfunctional and chronically unjust in our country.
Shelby: That’s right. So I think we had to get to this huge reckoning for our country and for the human race. And yeah, we had the perfect storm to get us here.
Leave a Reply