Against the flow
The latent fear of being judged for sharing the ideas that take possession of us is partly the product of a society that tends towards the homogenization of thought. The scientific, the true, the truth, the method have become the tools to determine how right or wrong ideas are. My question is, are there, in a world that seems plural, misconceptions? The overwhelming majority would argue this over a particular issue: want Trump to win the presidency of the United States.
At first I came to think that this idea could only be exposed on a barren island, for many Mexicans would be worthy of exile; Nevertheless, Slavoj Žižek, the most controversial and incisive philosopher of our time, is on my side, or I of his own. And the two on Trump’s side. Calm! Do not judge us without first reading an idea that is worth reading, because of the short circuit that can cause.
I will return to a fragment of what the philosopher says about it:
“Trump is not the dirty water one should throw away to keep the baby safe from American democracy, he himself is the dirty baby that should be thrown away in order to obfuscate the real dirty water of social relationships that hold the consensus in Around Hillary.
For the message of this consensus to the leftists is: you can get it all, we just want to keep the essential, unimpeded functioning of global capital. Obama’s “Yes you can!” Now takes on a new meaning: yes, we can give in to all your cultural demands … without risking the global market economy — so there is no need to take radical economic measures. Or as Todd McGowan put it (in a private conversation): “The consensus of the” thinkers “in opposition to Trump is frightening. It is as if their excesses authorize the emergence of the true global capitalist consensus and they congratulate themselves for its openness. “ (Žižek, 2016)
This means that the consensus not only of American social groups, but of the world, leads one to think that Hilary’s democracy and the world will be reliable ports; Losing sight of the discontent that led to the generation of movements such as the activation of LGBTI and Occupy Wall Street. The failure of Trump leads to a democratic conformism, negative social reactions (do not win); Instead of realizing that this is the world in which we live, the great villain is the product of our fears and loves, however its failure will not necessarily mean that the evils of which it is effigy will disappear from the face of the earth And this is precisely the ingenuity in which some, if not all, are falling.
There are two other points I want to make: the first is that Trump’s controversial figure at the global level has led the expectant eyes to be on what he does, he says, has done, or said, since it is extremely simple to point and accuse Their follies. But it is precisely this morbidity that would prevent him to make decisions (such as unleashing a nuclear war) without counting the scrutiny of those with a screen in his hand. This situation would fulfill the dream of democracies and the world system of paying attention to public affairs, of being real zoones politikones. On the other hand, I think that this would not happen if Hilary was the president of the United States, because when she perceived that the danger of the populist ogre had disappeared, a kind of consensus could be generated in the style of the Pact for Mexico The vast majority of groups, even if they are antagonistic) to give rise to their policies, which incidentally, have not come very clearly to the light.
The second point refers to those who argue that D. Trump, knowing nothing of the political office nor having the temperament worthy of a politician in the Weberian style, will commit a series of atrocities that will end up leading to the world war. May God save us from such a curse! The mere fact of reading it through a digital newspaper in the 21st century, evolutionarily rejects this statement; Because much blood has been spilled to extract the absolutist power of political organizations so that we put ourselves in a posture that implies forgetting the struggle that has taken place for the consummation of the division of powers.
I end by inviting the reader to question his own beliefs, it is an exercise that is both reckless and reassuring. One will end up realizing that the promised free will and freedom of thought are only illusions that hide the force of the pressure exerted by society.