Trump's Death Cult Explained

[Ted Striker]

https://www.salon.com/2020/04/07/cult-expert-steven-hassan-trumps-mind-control-cult-now-faces-an-existential-crisis/

For people outside Trump's cult and the Republican Party, it seems ridiculous and evil to suggest that people should go out and die from the novel coronavirus to save the economy. But Trump's followers seem willing to do so. What is going on in their minds?

If you are in a cult where the leader is claiming to be some type of apostle or prophet who gets revelations directly from God, and who says "just believe in me" and tells you to reject reality or outside information, then you believe that you will be fine. You will be "saved" and go to "paradise." Therefore, if Trump or his other spokespeople tell people to go out, get sick and then die, it is fine because the cult members believe they are going to heaven.

Unfortunately, there are millions of Americans who believe that Donald Trump is doing a good job with the coronavirus pandemic because they are not looking at any other source of news or reality testing. These people are doing a lot of praying and they have put their faith in an authoritarian leader who continually tells them, "I know better than everyone else, the experts, the doctors, etc." Trump says that all the time. He always tells his followers that he knows better than the scientists, generals and other experts. Trump is telling his followers that he is omnipotent.

Trump smilie --- >

[Arrian]

The thing about Mango Mussolini isn't that he's the worst. He is, obviously. No, it's about what he's revealed about ~40-45% of the country. Frankly, Hillary was FAR too kind.

[Ted Striker]

The thing about Mango Mussolini isn't that he's the worst. He is, obviously. No, it's about what he's revealed about ~40-45% of the country. Frankly, Hillary was FAR too kind.

Agree. Nothing Trump is doing is new, he's just shameless about it and doesn't try to hide it.

[Dauphin]

I think wrapping up saving the economy as a Trumpian message is wrong, and makes a false dichotomy.

We, as societies, let people die all the time for economic ‘good’. We permit a level of toxins to be pumped into the air that quantifiably kill in the name of economic progress. We send soldiers to go and fight wars of economic interest, whilst doing nothing where we have no interests. We don’t pay enough for everyone to have health coverage without limit - some treatments are too expensive is often the only reason to deny treatment.

We are constantly doing a cost vs life evaluation. Sometimes incorrectly, sometimes with different personal choices on what those costs are and what a life is worth. But we make them.

Would you accept a full lockdown like we have today if it saved no lives? What about 1? 10? 1,000? 1 million?

The argument of what a life is worth is crass, but necessary. There will be wide opinions, but don’t make the argument of economy vs life a night/day preserve of one group of people or party against another. It is a spectrum we are all on.

Also, on dichotomy - There is more to unpack - you can reduce economic cost and maximise life without a linear trade-off. Eg, shielding the sick and infirm will impact the economy less and save more people than shielding the young only, which will hurt the economy a lot for very little life saving.

[Arrian]

Obviously there has to be some sense of scale. That said, we're (as in the US) at 26k deaths and rising, likely to 50-100k, and that's *with* the fairly extreme measures we've taken. What's the economic cost of letting an extra, say, 100k people die? 200k?

The idea here is preventative. Ultimately, a high % of the population will get this thing (many will be asymptomatic). But if we spread it out - if we slow it down - we avoid overloading our healthcare system, or reduce that overload, and that saves lives. And that matters.

[Aeson]

I agree it's a false dichotomy. However, it's one that those who have guided the economy have guaranteed we end up with.

Sociopaths in good times: the rest of you are not important enough to the economy to warrant a share of the economic spoils.

Sociopaths in bad times: why won't the rest of you perform the critical work the system cannot do without?

[Aeson]

"We can't afford healthcare because how will politicians and bankers afford their hookers and blow?"

"You can't get a raise so you can get out of debt because how then will the CEO afford his yacht?"

"We can't possibly pay the people who make all our stuff more than $4/day because their skin is too dark."

"Oh, btw, we need you."

[Arrian]

"We can't afford healthcare because how will politicians and bankers afford their hookers and blow?"

"You can't get a raise so you can get out of debt because how then will the CEO afford his yacht?"

"We can't possibly pay the people who make all our stuff more than $4/day because their skin is too dark."

"Oh, btw, we need you."

"You're essential! … what, $15/hour? Are you crazy?"

I'm insulated from this stuff about as much as anyone - I'm affluent, I can work from home, and I live in a rural area. Still, it's absurd.

[Elok]

WOOT Arrian lives! Hi Arrian!

[Arrian]

IT'S ALIVE! Heya Elok!

[Lorizael]

We kept a vigil for you, Arrian.

[Dauphin]

Unfettered ‘let it happen’ will kill more Trump voters (old people), and economically benefit Democrat non-swing states more than Republican or swing states, and playing at a war time president and extending panic as much as possible gives him a huge poll filip. Irony.

[Arrian]

It's not this simple. Disease doesn't give a **** about your politics. Democrats are concentrated in higher-density areas such that even if we are all awesome about social distancing, mask-wearing and the like, we're going to be hit harder. Yes, some Red areas will be hit hard too (Floriduh!), but the reality is that rural areas have something of an advantage here. Even within states, the areas hit hardest will be cities and guess what, most cities are D. Rural areas R. Even in solid blue states, rural areas tend to be R leaning. Even in solid red states, cities are often blue.

Also, because 'Murica, various underprivileged groups are hit harder. Black Americans are getting hit harder than Whites. Guess who votes D? Yeah. So, as much as you might want to see a Karmic outcome here, I doubt we'll get it.

[Berzerker]

I think its better we take the short term economic hit to suppress the bug until we can at least find a somewhat effective medical treatment. But I'm not hurting so I'd expect people out of work to be more anxious about ending or reducing these lock downs. My state's guv has extended our lock down until May 3rd.

[KrazyHorse]

EDIT: JUST REALIZED I SAID AESON, MEANT ARRIAN

Aeson, you're not forcing yourself to do even the roughest of math here.

1) Hospital capacity in most of the country is not even CLOSE to being overwhelmed. The lockdowns started far too early in these places to make a "bending the curve" argument be sensible. And in New York City & surrounding environs, close to 30% of the population HAS ALREADY BEEN INFECTED. We did nothing to bend the curve, and are now just delaying illnesses until the second wave in the fall. We should release the lockdown here NOW and get as many people infected as possible b/c hospital capacity utilization will be FAR below peak in 2 weeks when those newly infected might need it
2) without any intervening measures something like 50-60% of people will get it. In a demographically representative group that about 0.3% of those will die. Call it 500k people or so, with a median age of 75
3) you're not at all asking the question of how important to this death toll hospital capacity is - from what I can tell, the bulk of these deaths happen with or without hospitalization. Ventilation fails in 3/4 of cases
4) you're failing to account for the offsetting problem that the longer this is drawn out, the less able we are to attain differential infection rates between the young & old/vulnerable

Onan expected value basis,my guess is that nothing we've done can plausibly claim to have saved more than a few thousand lives (and possibly 0). Given that they were already elderly, that's a few tens of billion dollars' worth. Meanwhile, 22 million people have lost their jobs in 4 weeks and the rest of us have had to endure substantial restrictions on our freedom and our enjoyment of life. The costs outweigh the benefits

Let. It. Happen. Lockdowns are simply an ineffectual expression of people's fear and need to feel somehow in control. And they will end soon enough as the fear of the virus fades and the harsh economic pain sets in.

[Elok]

I'm not hovering over the COVID coverage nearly as much as I used to; mostly I'm hanging out on the FB RT group and yelling at people who spread the dumb "heme iron" theory. So I won't speculate on where this is going. Regarding the usual bit about Trumpers being horrible, let me reiterate: this is just what happens when right- and left-wingers have completely segregated institutions. Partly this is the fault of modern comm technology (cable and the internet), and partly it's the result of our response to it. Either way, as long as they continue to get their information from completely different sources than you do, they will continue to support people like Trump.

If Trump dies or quits or falls from favor, they will support somebody else toxic, because the alternative is taking sides with you and you hate each other. Then you will talk in your personal spheres about what horrible POS's they are, and they will do the same about you in theirs, and nothing will change. You will never simply impose your will on a country where 40% is opposed to your agenda (and that 40% is heavily armed and strongly associated with the armed forces and military EDIT: meant "police and military" see I'm not that eloquent). You will not convince them when all you do is call them stupid repulsive ****heads. Nor will they convince or impose their will on you. This will continue until either someone figures out how to compromise, or it escalates to violence, or some external force intervenes to render the contest irrelevant. I am not certain how COVID will modify things, but I suspect it will damage institutional education enough to give some boost to their side.

I will probably vaguely hope Biden wins this fall, assuming neither major candidate dies. I might vote for Biden, but it will be mostly symbolic if I do because I live in FL and I don't think it will be close. I do not expect a Biden administration to accomplish much of anything, but he will probably tweet less and be useless in a less inflammatory way.

[Ted Striker]

Your posts are far too eloquent and educated to be written in Florida.(no stereotype lol) :-) :-D

[Jon Miller]

I understand the media bifurcation (at least in part, it is about money), but that is the source of the problem. And that isn't from the progressive media sources like Jacobin, rather that is from the right considering all of the traditional media as invalid liberal media. And the conservative media (really reactionary media, only Fox News is maybe more conservative than reactionary) has a problem with facts.

JM

[Elok]

https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/05/01/neutral-vs-conservative-the-eternal-struggle/

TLDR version: when you kick them out of the party, they make their own party, and once they have their own party it inevitably becomes more extreme over time.

[Ted Striker]

I kept reading the article's "defected from institutions" as "defecating on institutions" which is exactly what's happened the past 4 years.

[KrazyHorse]

https://markets.jpmorgan.com/research/email/-9ovokf4/6P7NFgmiolotx-biD-kR1g/GPS-3334428-0

JPMorgan's research note laying out the problem pretty much as I've been describing it.

Time to stop the wishful thinking - driving toward herd immunity, carried mostly by the younger and healthier is the only reasonable solution. Shelter the old. Let. It. Happen.

[Uncle Sparky]

Yes, we know. Capitalism sees people as commodities to use or discard for maximum profit. Only recently have they started stating it outright.

[Ted Striker]

Amateur.

I take my moral leadership compass guidance from Lloyd Blankfein, especially when it comes to separation of duties and conflict of interest resolution.

After that I'll use Jared Kushner for quality of life and landlord/tenant relationship building.