Credo quia absurdum "I subscribe to the belief due to its incredibility." This is a frequently rephrased version of an argument attributed to Tertullian , an early Church Father. This sentiment has been echoed across the ages in different versions by religious defenders and serves as a classic example of thought-terminating cliché : An assertion that seems absurd at first glance, yet is presented with such bold contrariness and assertiveness that refuting it becomes impossible.
While this might seem like hyperbole, it isn’t far from reality when we claim that most religions, belief systems, perspectives, and personal development doctrines inherently possess elements of absurdity. These often include numerous unfalsifiable premises, contradictory beliefs, irrational claims, and appeals to unquestioning acceptance. Their apparent obviousness stems largely from their longevity and widespread recognition—much like how the tale of John Frum has gained credibility over time despite lacking concrete evidence.
A little over a hundred years ago, on the Pacific island of Vanuatu, a messianic cult emerged around a legendary figure known as John Frum The belief that these newcomers could bestow wealth and joy took root within the local community. This conviction grew stronger during World War II when Allied airforces set up runways on the island. Airmen provided sought-after items or "cargo," often trading them with locals for help in constructing the airstrips. When, in 1945, the apparently divine strangers left—alongside their exotic commodities—their impact lingered.
Following the conflict, the cargo cult evolved into a custom, with followers constructing imitation runways to entice John Frum to descend from the heavens bearing goods once more. In an amusing account, when an anthropologist challenged a tribal leader about the unlikelihood of Frum coming back, the chief retorted that they had merely waited 50 years; meanwhile, you Christians have awaited your savior fruitlessly for millennia.
So why, indeed, does the notion of a World War II-era sudden appearance persist? C-47 transport aircraft loaded with military rations , Spam and cartons of Lucky Strike Greens Is it any less credible than stories of virgins giving birth or people rising from the dead? Similarly, could we consider Karl Marx’s idealistic vision of communism or Friedrich Hayek’s belief in a seamlessly self-balancing free market to be more plausible?
The worldview characterized by a high number of logical inconsistencies, irrational doctrines, unfulfilled predictions, and shattered assurances appears to be gaining momentum in contemporary Western society. The reasons behind this resurgence parallel to historical phenomena such as periodic witch crazes in medieval Europe or the speculative frenzy over tulips in Holland remain subjects of considerable discussion. It remains an enigma why this particular set of beliefs would spread through countries enjoying economic prosperity, apparent educational advancement, and purportedly evolved civic institutions that surpass primitive superstitious tendencies.
I'm talking about far-right or fascist ideologies, despite their regional differences, share a consistent set of beliefs—or more precisely, stances and postures. Within the multi-party systems of Europe, these ideologies are often embodied by newly formed parties positioned to the right of conventional conservative ones. In contrast, within America’s two-party framework, this ideology has essentially taken over one of the pre-existing parties, overshadowing conservatism and leveraging long-standing partisan allegiances.
In the United States, at minimum, mergers and hostile takeovers have led to an indistinguishable line among conservative, extreme right-wing, and fascist ideologies, which are now closely linked with the Republican Party. Consequently, I will use these terms synonymously as they have essentially merged into one another.
Some previous members of the movement (commonly within groups such as the Lincoln Project They argue that the present tenets of the GOP deviate from "authentic" conservatism. This perspective is flawed because ideologies do not remain static; instead, like living organisms evolving through necessity, chance, and circumstance, they adapt over time. Conservatism has evolved alongside the pragmatism displayed by its leadership and the traits of the American voters supporting their political figures.
However, American conservatism wouldn’t be as it is today (whether one calls it authoritarianism, fascism, Trumpism, or labels it differently according to political science terminology) without having evolved towards this path, without inherently possessing within its ideological framework the roots of its current manifestation. Additionally, such development required an open-minded public ready to accept these ideas.
What are the characteristics of conservative ideology during the Trump era, and why do these logical contradictions and self-conflicts enhance rather than diminish their appeal to adherents of American conservatism? Here are some key aspects of this political trend: 1. 2. 3. (Note: Since specific numbered points weren’t provided originally, I’ve kept three placeholder numbers as requested.)
Exaggerated but brittle nationalism
If there is one message Republicans aim to convey, it is the depth of their devotion to America, symbolized by their bleeding red, white, and blue patriotism. No gathering of theirs feels fully realized unless adorned with countless American flags, participants dressed in gaudy flag-patterned outfits (occasionally crossing into what could be considered flag disrespect), traditional Uncle Sam attire, or depictions of Lady Liberty. This tradition dates back to at least the McCarthy period of the 1950s and perhaps earlier as well; the Republican business coalition Opposing Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal cloaked itself in patriotism.
For quite some time, Republicans have asserted that they alone possess patriotism; anyone who isn’t part of their group is seen as not being "true" Americans or even considered unpatriotic. They view constructive criticism of significant failures such as the wars in Vietnam and Iraq as giving aid and comfort to adversaries. Media exposés Incompetent and dishonest military leaders such as General William Westmoreland transformed into a sort of Dreyfus affair for conservatives: a loyal officer wrongfully targeted by the liberal elite aiming to exalt Communists at the expense of smearing an upright serviceman’s good name.
How does this history of extreme patriotism coexist with the Republicans' esteemed, nearly worshiped leader, Donald Trump, referring to America as " a trash bin for the globe ," a global " laughing stock " or a " third world country How does this align with a Republican president acting as an obsequious subordinate to Vladimir Putin, whose animosity toward the United States needs no further emphasis? If a Democratic president were to speak or behave similarly, accusations of 'treason' and constant media and congressional investigations would likely remove them from power.
The response indicates that Republicans' constant emphasis on patriotism has served as a superficial cover-up and successful protection against actions deemed unpatriotic. President Richard Nixon’s administration marked the initial instance where sporting an enamel American flag lapel pin emerged as a means to prove one's genuine allegiance to America; however, then-candidate Nixon did not adhere to this practice. by working with foreign entities to sabotage the 1968 Paris peace discussions , is very likely guilty of treason.
The America First Movement from 1939 to 1941, predominantly though not solely a conservative initiative aimed at keeping the U.S. out of World War II, had substantial elements that were focused on this objective. steered by Nazi interests , employing well-known conservative figures such as Charles Lindbergh as fronts.
The most "patriotic" political figures were often quick to undermine their nation's interests for the benefit of foreign powers, with many historical parallels abroad. After the German army breached French defense lines in 1940, a significant portion of the military leadership, economic elites, and traditional politicians shifted focus toward collaboration. looking for a swift truce with the Germans , and joining forces to quell an (assumed) revolt by the left in Paris, rather than standing against the Wehrmacht invaders. A comparable attitude can be observed in Trump, JD Vance, and Republican members of Congress: They see themselves as being more aligned with Putin and other anti-woke leaders such as Viktor Orbán than with most people they represent.
This conduct is nearly characteristic of ultra-nationalist organizations. Right-wing extremist groups in Norway exemplify this. Vidkun Quisling His own name became synonymous with traitor during his country's Nazi occupation. Anton Mussert held the identical role in the Netherlands throughout World War II, just as he did Léon Degrelle In Belgium, even now, multiple contemporary far-right parties across Europe continue to exist. get secret or open support from Moscow .
The contentious bond that right-wing extremists profess such passionate devotion towards their nation mirrors the "affection" an abusive partner might have for theirs: a possessive and unstable feeling of sole proprietorship instead of genuine fondness. If the companion considers thoughts beyond those prescribed by this controlling mate, they may resort to harming or dismantling what they purport to cherish.
Interestingly, the commentators have rarely recognized, much less examined, the neurosis behind ostentatious patriotism that masks underlying animosity toward their nation, even though a well-known movie, " The Manchurian Candidate , which captured its fundamentals over 60 years ago.
Populism: Tool for Billionaires to Govern
One of the most misconstrued, overused, and loaded terms in contemporary politics is populism. Even those who position themselves slightly to the left often misuse this term. Thomas Frank view it as a gradual uprising where ordinary folks stand up against the control of an elite few, acting as a bottom-up movement that gets taken over by figures such as Donald Trump due to the selfishness and ethical neglect of the progressive leadership. Ralph Nader has also referred to populism as a means for this transformation. the ability for both sides to move beyond partisan politics and drive the money changers out of the temple.
In the 1880s and '90s, populism emerged as a movement led primarily by farmers from the Great Plains and the South. Their aim was to challenge the systemic indebtedness that trapped them under the control of banks, railways, and grain merchants. Progressive thinkers supported this cause. celebrated What they view as the initiation of an alliance between white and black farmers and sharecroppers aiming to overcome racial divides and collaborate towards a shared objective.
This occurred sometimes, but most populist groups in southern states stayed strictly segregated. The instance of Tom Watson of Georgia Perhaps the most renowned populist of the time offers insights into how the movement evolved subsequently. Initially, his stance on establishing a politically inclusive coalition was progressive for a southern politico. However, following electoral defeats, he shifted gears; he transformed into a staunch segregationist and ultimately adopted anti-Catholic and anti-Semitic positions as well. His economic platform also grew more conservative over time, abandoning key populist causes such as state-controlled grain storage and monetary reforms, all while cautioning about socialist influences within the populist ranks.
From its start, populism showed a dangerous inclination to shift from progressive and inclusive stances to reactionary and exclusive ones. Even without considering the prejudices, its perspective clung to an outdated, romanticized Jeffersonian agricultural ideal that had become irrelevant well before the end of the 19th century. Industry was a reality set in stone; it might have been improved through forward-thinking laws advocated by people like those active at the time. Robert La Follette , yet it cannot be dismissed by populist demagoguery.
Maybe the final significant American populist movement with leftist policy leanings was Huey Long’s "Share Our Wealth" campaign in the early 1930s. While his stances on education, public works, and taxes were decidedly progressive and aimed at redistribution, his authoritarian approach, disregard for legal norms, and personal charisma mirrored the fascist trends seen across Europe during that same era.
Perhaps due to the New Deal and the initial post-World War II economic agreement reducing severe income gaps, left-wing populism hasn't been a significant political influence over the past seven decades. In contrast, populism now often emerges from the far-right wing of politics where societal divisions and blame-shifting are masked under different guises.
In the early 1950s, Joseph McCarthy orchestrated demagogue-led witch hunts targeting virtually whoever he wanted. Even General George C. Marshall ) as genuine national security concerns. Subsequently, George Wallace’s appeals to the average person were merely veiled attempts at racial prejudice. In the 1990s, both Ross Perot and Pat Buchanan ran for president with platforms focused on international trade deficits; however, their proposals amounted mostly to unfounded fear of foreigners rather than practical strategies to address the economic issue.
By the 2010s, following the emergence of the Tea Party (a "grassroots" movement), funded by the Koch brothers' money Populism has become a key campaigning tactic for the Republican Party. Whether Trump is involved or not, the GOP will consistently highlight populist messages since this approach serves as an effective means to push through a conservative, pro-millionaire platform onto voters.
Each hallmark attribute of traditional American populism—including its disdain for intellectuals, fear of foreigners, skepticism towards experts, animosity toward perceived elite groups, romanticization of rural life and small towns, wariness of established organizations, worldview characterized by paranoia and conspiracy theories, diffuse rage, and belief in quick fixes—aligns perfectly with the mindset of today’s Republican constituency. This alignment persists even as these traits are reshaped to fit the fragmented nature of modern American society.
The term “elites” continues to be used pejoratively in America; however, it no longer solely denotes a rich oligarch who preys on ordinary folks. Today, it could refer to individuals like librarians, part-time professors, or social workers—all of whom earn barely above minimum wage—but they have become the cultural scapegoats in the grand moral narrative constructed by Republicans. On the flip side, someone with a high-paying managerial job earning over six figures and residing in an affluent neighborhood might prove their genuine Americanness by adopting a JD Vance-esque beard and cruising around in a pricey $70,000 truck.
Regardless of the optimistic views held by the Franks and Naders regarding a potential left-right popular alliance, populist movements throughout recent history have primarily served as tools for the elite. These movements often use coded messages on cultural issues to prevent less affluent individuals from focusing on those amassing significant wealth and bearing the costs. Instead, they divert attention towards distractions such as the purported danger posed by around twelve transgender athletes nationwide.
This was necessary due to populism being liberal democracy’s dark sibling, sharing sufficient similarities with genuine self-governance to pose an insidious threat. Populism asserts that the muddled wishes of what claims to be a majority equate to Rousseau’s "general will" and should remain unchallenged by bodies such as legislative assemblies or autonomous judicial systems. However, considering the practical challenges of governing directly through millions of individuals, it is almost certain that a compelling leader will emerge, claiming to represent the collective will of the masses.
Thus, in countries such as Turkey, Hungary, and the United States, a cunning demagogue can seize and consolidate dictatorial power by misleading the populace into believing that he is their advocate fighting for their interests. their will, not his own.
Capability and the principle of realism
During the 1960s, when America's progressive reform era was winding down, Republicans positioned themselves as clear-sighted realists. They argued that Medicare, which had just been introduced, was financially unsustainable. Incidents of urban unrest were used to suggest that anti-poverty initiatives were ineffective. Even some former liberals, such as Daniel Patrick Moynihan, started leaning towards conservative ideas; he notably stated that for impoverished African American city dwellers, the most effective poverty-alleviation effort would come from the government’s " benign neglect .”
It continued like this. Irving Kristol, the recently converted conservative, described a neoconservative as “ a progressive who has faced harsh realities Republicans successfully positioned themselves as the authoritative party, contrasting with the Democrats' idealistic and emotionally driven sentimentality. During the Gary Hart and Paul Tsongas presidential campaigns when they tested themes associated with the Democratic Leadership Council, it was suggested that their followers embraced 'compassion on the left, pragmatism on the right,' an appealing yet vague concept that has muddied American political discussions.
Interested in receiving a summary of all the news and opinions from every day? Sign up for our daily morning briefing. , Crash Course.
Gradually, the continual recurrence of these ideas (supported also by Democrats such as Hart, Tsongas, and Bill Clinton) attained a form of cultural dominance that shaped public opinion for many years. Americans have consistently believed that Republicans are better on the economy than Democrats .
The Republicans' conduct while in office is another issue altogether. Multiple sources clarify that economic expansion has significantly outperformed under Democratic presidents compared to their Republican equivalents. The New York Times estimated In 2021, data shows that from 1933 onwards, the average annual GDP growth rate was 4.6% duringDemocratic presidencies and 2.4% during Republican ones. Do Americans seem oblivious to this information? It certainly appears that way.
Unlike those guided by the reality principle, Republican economic policies, much like several of their stances, rely heavily on wishful thinking. The firm conviction they hold—that lowering taxes leads to increased revenue, an idea originating in the latter part of the 1970s—should serve as evidence enough; following this line of thought, eliminating all taxes ought to generate unlimited income. However, mathematics has not traditionally been a strength within America’s education sector. Similarly, basic logical reasoning seems lacking: how many individuals supported Trump under the impression that foreign corporations, instead of themselves, would bear the cost of import duties?
Maybe it's due to how easily the public forgives Republicans that we've had scandals such as Iran-Contra and the Iraq War, where deception and illegal actions were paired with monumental ineptitude. Such events may temporarily unsettle voters against the GOP, yet they rarely result in enduring harm. People are willing to overlook gross misconduct as long as one demonstrates their "moral values."
The rise of Donald Trump has led to a scarcity of both the understanding of reality and qualified individuals adept at recognizing it, so much so that one might think appointments are made specifically from among the least suitable candidates. Could anyone be more fitting to lead the military and its 4,000 nuclear warheads than an obnoxious alcoholic? And who would be a finer choice to oversee public health agencies than someone who peddles conspiracies and opposes vaccines due to their alleged brain damage caused by parasites? Each member of the cabinet seems fervently committed to undermining the effectiveness of the very department they're tasked with managing.
The bizarrely comical delusion playing out daily—where self-proclaimed grown-ups debate covert military strategies through vulnerable social media messages brimming with emojis, exclamations, and abbreviations—is precisely what Americans opted for willingly. Years of criticizing Washington, dismissing experts in preference for supposedly practical answers, fostering an aversion to intellect, and embracing macho clichés like those from " Dirty Harry," has led us to this calamity, which leaves educated outsiders bewildered with amazement.
This mournful display is the result of an inevitable conclusion: Incompetence fuels dictatorship. Hannah Arendt outlined this logic 75 years ago:
Complete control leaves no room for independent action in any aspect of life, particularly when it comes to activities that cannot be forecasted precisely. When totalitarian regimes gain authority, they consistently replace top-tier individuals—regardless of where their loyalties lie—with incompetent and uncreative people who demonstrate low levels of intellect and imagination as the strongest assurance of unwavering allegiance.
Freedom and the Führerprinzip
Apart from emphasizing their extreme patriotism, Republicans also want you to understand just how far they would go for freedom, even if it means crawling through shattered glass. These politicians diligently strive to include the term "freedom" in the names of their policy initiatives, like the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. This act, when interpreted by the Supreme Court, grants employers the liberty to enforce religious requirements on their staff members.
As someone who previously worked for the House of Representatives, I remember with amusement an order issued in 2003 by Bob Ney, then-chairman of the House Administration Committee. In response to France backing out of supporting George W. Bush’s plans for the Middle East due to opposition from French President Jacques Chirac, Ney decreed that French fries should be renamed "freedom fries" at all House cafeteria menus. After his resignation in 2006 following a plea of guilt related to conspiracy and making false statements charges, I couldn’t help but experience a feeling akin to karmic satisfaction. Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal .
For Republicans, freedom does not As Epictetus stated, "No person is truly free unless they have mastery over themselves." In essence, this means genuine liberty originates internally via self-discipline and an understanding of boundaries and appropriateness. Conversely, what you described does not represent freedom; instead, it signifies unrestrained behavior and a deficiency in control—akin to a child indulging excessively in chocolate until feeling ill.
In the realm of Republicans, freedom often equates to remaining unvaccinated during a pandemic just to defy what they see as overreaching government control. The potential harm to those with compromised health seems negligible compared to asserting one’s autonomy. This mindset extends to opposing even minor regulations like using energy-saving light bulbs, all under the banner of personal liberty—freedom to consume more resources without restriction.
This intense dedication to freedom in its most distorted version, a sort of ecstatic celebration of unrestrained will and desires akin to Prometheus, contrasts bizarrely with a fanatical, self-punishing adoration of leadership. The development within the Republican Party mirrors this unsettling parallel. Führerprinzip In Nazi Germany, the concept held that all power originates from one leader, with unconditional loyalty directed solely towards this individual instead of the nation or its constitution.
The degrading subservience displayed towards Donald Trump by every individual within the Republican sphere, ranging from the MAGA-clad enthusiast adorned with keepsakes at a Trump gathering to Megyn Kelly. thankful to Trump for his insults towards her for sycophantic individuals as despicable as Lindsey Graham fawning in the Senate chamber — when compared to whom Caligula’s horse Would be an enhancement for senators—this observation is frequently made but inadequately comprehended.
The paradoxical arrangement between excessive liberty and blind submission forms an unspoken agreement between Trump and those who support him. By relinquishing their pride and respect through bowing down to Trump, they receive compensation: authorization to disregard the ethical standards upheld by civil society.
In the past, those who acted horribly were held accountable for their actions. Today, individuals can behave crudely with impunity since they feel no sense of embarrassment or societal disapproval, believing every action serves a greater political purpose. This mirrors the conduct of zealous religious extremists convinced that their rude behavior is blessed by an omnipotent god. It stands as another instance of conflicting psychological traits churning inside contemporary conservative adherents.
They march rigidly for the sake of their unrestricted liberty.
The "culture of life" — and the instinct for death
Starting from the 1970s, an intense aversion to abortion has become a cornerstone belief for conservatives. They firmly believe this stance forms part of what defines their pro-life ethos and justifies their assertion that all their actions benefit families.
Underneath the surface, things aren’t what they appear to be. The Republican Party has fiercely opposed neonatal care, subsidized childcare, and assured maternity leave—policies that are standard legal requirements in many advanced nations. The outcomes are clear: The U.S. boasts one of the highest infant mortality rates In the industrialized nations, and it is even more severe in regions where Republicans have solid control.
This also holds true at the opposite end of the age spectrum: Americans have a pathetically low life expectancy For a developed nation, this can partly be attributed to terrible elderly care policies (one must deplete their assets and essentially become destitute to qualify for Medicaid support when residing in a nursing home) as well as due to deaths of despair ," primarily among middle-aged white males due to suicide, drug overdoses, and dangerous behaviors. This trend is particularly pronounced in conservative states. It reflects certain aspects of the culture of life perspective.
One can’t illustrate this with the same rigor as a mathematical proof, yet such disregard for human life appears connected to a sense of fatalism or even nihilism. Consider, for instance, the Trump supporter from 2016 who explained to an interviewer that they didn’t vote for the candidate expecting positive change; expressed dissent with his middle finger Pollsters have observed how often participants say they simply wish to " burn it all down not bothering about what will happen to the societal framework that sustains their way of life.
Stronger proof of this attitude emerged during the COVID pandemic when many individuals put both themselves and others at risk through consciously hazardous actions. An instance I was somewhat acquainted with would frequently claim that COVID was a fraud but adamantly refuse to get vaccinated. Even as he breathed his final breaths on a ventilator, he refused to acknowledge the existence of the virus. .
This type of self-defeating madness gained theological approval in the pages of First Things, a conservative religious magazine that positions itself as a proponent of Thomas Aquinas' ideas but seems more akin to Torquemada’s style. In 2020, its editor, R.R. Reno, penned " Reject Death's Sovereignty Contrary to what the title suggests, he contends that we should accept death rather than fear it. According to him, individuals contributing to life-saving advancements in medicine are aligning themselves with evil forces. The author fails to tackle the sorrow experienced when losing a loved one, which he dismisses as 'catastrophic emotional indulgence,' all in an attempt to make misguided religious arguments.
Reno holds moral nihilistic views, just like the millions of religious fundamentalists who form a significant portion of Trump’s support base. people who believe in the end times If the end is near, why stress excessively about one life or another, or even about the well-being of society as a whole?
Although major news outlets still delicately characterize the Trump administration’s moves using conventionally mild language (as seen in a CNN headline), misleadingly states Given that the administration is "restructuring" an agency rather than disbanding it, sensible individuals ought to accept its actions as they appear and adopt the most straightforward interpretation, which aligns with the nihilistic approach of conservative ideology.
Hence, cutting back on the research into infectious diseases at the Department of Health and Human Services pressuring the head of vaccines at the FDA to step down It is precisely as it appears: an attempt to ensure that more Americans perish. The outcome will undoubtedly be akin to this. reducing state health service grants by $12 billion .
Why did the regime eliminate the terrorist database At the Department of Homeland Security? Considering that the majority of domestic terrorism incidents have a right-wing motivation They might desire increased acts of terror because such events intimidate the remaining populace. Like with other instances of terrorism, these incidents could be used as justification for imposing military rule. In a similar vein, we may deduce that the obliteration of communities and the destruction of lives caused by natural calamities are seen as desired outcomes. slashing FEMA .
We have only just entered the third month of what can be described as Trump’s mafia rule. The state of affairs after four years under this annihilating upheaval of nothingness, I shall let your imagination determine.
When reason sleeps, monsters are born.
Loyal supporters who turn against their nation; opponents of elites who idolize millionaires; pragmatic individuals lost in an idealistic realm; independent thinkers showering adoration upon their supreme leader; advocates for life who paradoxically champion demise. American conservatism is a perplexing mix of conflicting ideas, making it challenging to know where to start. What factors led to its widespread appeal?
Umberto Eco, in his essay "The Myth of Superman," discusses Ur-Fascism He stated that fascism (which has become nearly interchangeable with contemporary American conservatism) was eclectic; it encompassed various and sometimes opposing ideas, which contributed to its allure. It provided something for everybody, so an individual drawn to one viewpoint could easily overlook the aspects they did not agree with.
This statement holds considerable validity; individuals often exhibit carelessness and disorganization in their thinking patterns. However, an underlying factor contributes more significantly. People aren’t simply negligent; they display deep-seated irrationality driven by emotions. Their desires can conflict with each other at various moments—or even concurrently. Additionally, what appear to be opposing principles might actually complement one another rather than being true antitheses.
International reporters noted that the Germans would greet Hitler’s motorcade with wild, almost hysterical enthusiasm Their radiant expressions revealed a kind of genuine affection towards their leader. However, this fondness was merely the flipside of their intense animosity toward Jews; both sentiments coexisted because each justified the other. Similarly, a conservative's claimed reverence for the unborn serves as compensation and justification for their obsession with automatic weaponry and support for extrajudicial aggression.
Certainly, humans can be irrational. However, consider the scenario where Trump's policies start having real impacts. I've spoken about this with various political analysts who suggest that once Grandmother’s Social Security payment stops coming through, or when an Iraqi war veteran discovers the Veterans Affairs hospital has shut down, or when Bubba from Pascagoula ends up amidst the ruins of his home without any Federal Emergency Management Agency assistance, a moment of truth will come.
It’s possible, yet I wouldn’t count on it. A supporter of Donald Trump mentioned that his recently married spouse was held as an unauthorized immigrant. He continues to have no regrets about his choice. Farmers faced punitive tariffs during Trump’s initial term just as severely as we all will be impacted during his subsequent tenure. farm bankruptcies soared , as did Farm Belt suicides That did not stop farmers from casting their votes almost entirely for Trump. 2020 and 2024 .
Facts are unyielding entities, yet so are beliefs and delusions. By the conclusion of World War II, Germany found itself Lost between 5 million and 6 million military personnel and civilians. , Twenty percent of its housing units were demolished. , and Many major urban areas were nearly obliterated. The population survived on an average of 1,200 calories a day . But in 11 polls conducted from November 1945 to December 1946 On average, 47% concurred with the assertion that "National Socialism was a sound concept but poorly implemented." According to an August 1946 "German Attitude Scale" poll, 37% endorsed the view that "the annihilation of Jews, Poles, and other non-Aryan ethnic groups was essential for Germany’s safety."
Many people, perhaps too many, continue to cling to the same delusions that led to the ruin of their world. They find belief in these absurdities compelling.