Showing posts with label ethnic cleansing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ethnic cleansing. Show all posts

Saturday, February 2, 2019

Trumpian National Emergency

The moment the president declares a “national emergency” — a decision that is entirely within his discretion — he is able to set aside many of the legal limits on his authority. — DefenseOne.com 8 Dec. 2018

"You know, they have a word – it’s sort of became old-fashioned – it’s called a nationalist. And I say, really, we’re not supposed to use that word. You know what I am? I’m a nationalist, okay? I’m a nationalist. Nationalist. Nothing wrong. Use that word. Use that word." — Donald J. Trump, October 2018


Donald Trump should be taken literally and seriously, if for no other reasons than that key portions of his core supporters take him literally and seriously. So a wall at the US-Mexico border means a wall, and a national emergency means an emergency of the Nation.

This is important.

There is no "crisis of the Republic," except that posed by Mr. Trump and that hard core of authoritarian-populist followers. There is no emergency of the American State. There is, though, an emergency-level threat to the American Nation if, if only if, you see that Nation with its traditional modifiers: in fullest form, "White, Christian (i.e.,) Protestant, Anglo-Saxon Nation" — with recent wishy-washiness allowing in some conservative Catholics and even right-wing "White Jews" (yes, Virginia, that once was a fairly common term; check out Lenny Bruce). 

The slow-motion threat to that Nation is in the demographic trend that will have White a US minority within a couple generations (2050 in one projection). The more immediate threats can be seen in the 2018/19 Frosh class in the US Congress and the religious composition of the US Supreme Court: until recently lacking a single real (Protestant) Christian, and now having one only ambiguously, depending on how "Papist" one sees a Catholic-raised Episcopalian like Justice Neil Gorsuch. Plus, of course, ethnicity of both the Supreme Court and that Congress, and, spectacularly, the color-coding — African-American — of the US Presidency 2008-16. 

And we haven't even considered gender yet, with women on the Supreme Court and second in line of succession to the Presidency and, if she knows how to use the office, the second most powerful politician in the United States: the Speaker of the House, the Honorable Nancy Pelosi. 

And what people see in the media. White "hegemony" is certainly gone, but more important — and this is a serious complaint — is the handling of religion. Outside of specials and The Religion Ghetto (and serious animation satire such as The Simpsons and South Park), religion and religious people are pretty much invisible. To recycle a formula of mine on TV characters, ordinarily, as far as we see, "They don't piss, and they don't pray." 

Now there's really little President Trump can do about the larger, reality issues here. Dictator Trump, maybe. President Trump must deal with the edges of the issues and with symbols. 

As symbols go, the Wall is great.
• A monument to Donald J. Trump, in its expense and uselessness all the more potent as an image of power (cf. pyramids).
• A symbol of American holiness as separation, preserving the purity of that American Nation from penetration by all the evils Trump can remember to name. 
• A dike against inundation by the wog-gish flood, the horrifying Brownish Hordes, the embodiments of the forces of the post-Communist world that would, at least figuratively, "sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids".

And if Trump gets away with a National Emergency declaration over the Great Wall, there's a chance he'll keep pushing until he gets the powers to make real changes in the American State and remove the inconveniences of the Republic. There is justification (so to speak) in the arguments of authoritarian populism as a form of pure democracy, using the Leader-Principle to around convention, tradition, bureaucratic inertia, and institutional conservatism. And there are precedents; God knows, within living memory, there have been Nationalist precedents. 

As Ursula K. Le Guin reminds us in The Dispossessed (1974), all walls are "ambiguous, two-faced"; and the Berlin Wall made the point very well that walls can keep in as well as keep out. If Donald Trump rides a continuing National Emergency from President of the United States to Leader of the American Nation, some of us citizens of the Republic, people in the United States but not of the Nation — some of us may find that Wall a barrier to escape from another round of ethnic cleansing, National purification.


================================
If you're curious, my oath is to the Republic and the Constitution establishing it. If my courage holds, I'll defend both against all enemies, foreign, and domestic.





Saturday, January 27, 2018

HOSTILES (2017): An Art-Film Western

(No SPOILERS if you see a lot of movies.)

I was strongly moved several times during Scott Cooper's HOSTILES's 134 minutes, but more often impressed with the artistry of the composition and cutting ("montage"), with Christian Bale's accent and tone-perfect delivery — and with his ability to pop a head-vein, so to speak, on cue; with the thematically-appropriate costuming and hair styling; and with the nuanced handling of classic narrative premises and tropes of The Largely-Lethal Journey ("Red-Shirts" + "Pvt. Deadmeat") and Family Destruction and Re-Construction.
On the other hand, it was the first time I'd seen the movie, and I was still spending a lot of my time thinking like the cinema critic for an arty little magazine use editor liked words like "filmic."
According to the 1960 or so textbook based on the official US Army history of the US Army, the "Indian Wars" leading up to the 1892 setting for HOSTILES were the "nadir" — that's where I learned the word — of US military history; and the full-bird/bull-goose Colonel who taught the course thought our text soft on George Armstrong Custer and the Army's war crimes (the term he used) generally. But I wouldn't have taken a course in US military history if not forced the first time — I took it again to avoid Map Reading (which I really, really, *really* should have taken) — and most Americans "ain't gonna study war" in an academic sense. So HOSTILES does useful political work in showing this side of the US cavalry's coming to the ethnic cleansing, and at the same time not sentimentalizing the First Peoples here, and taking a nasty swipe at those who do. 
As Peter Debruge points out in VARIETY, the Indians in the film remain abstract and in service to the story. But the same abstraction holds with most of the Whites when moved around for impressive shot-composition.
So: I'll recommend HOSTILES and hope it makes money. It's still politically useful — given the low level of White awareness of the gory details of "the Conquest of the West" — and it is beautifully made. Perhaps too beautiful over too many minutes.