I’m sorry but to equate irrational, uncritical, even ludicrously self-harming action with being a ‘dimwit’ is not valid.
Even extremely intelligent individuals are not uncommonly duped and socialisation through its various means is essentially subtle, cumulative and almost impossible to avoid.
You may feel that I am defending Trump or his supporters. I am not. I am in opposition to virtually everything I know of him and his actions. However, blaming the victims, i.e. those whom you and others refer to as ‘dimwits’ is to miss the point and, ironically, only strengthens their resolve and Trump’s position.
An insidious aspect of our conditioning is that of predisposition to react to what we feel are, (and perhaps rightly so), negative, detrimental or abusive behaviours with ‘blame’. We are quick to jump to condemn what is readily seen but is actually the surface or end result of much deeper issues and/or design. This ‘blame game’ mentality solves nothing. It only makes matters worse and increases division.
As I suggested in my original comment, those who you and others choose to label as ‘dimwits’ are actually victims. To blame them is what is simplistic & shows little insight or result of ‘critical thinking’. On the contrary, it is a corollary of the justifications used to blame those victims as ‘dimwits’.
Useful and appropriate learning does not arise from abuse or negative labeling but from appropriate exposition of context, causes and motivation that underlay the actions, views or behaviour at issue. Most effectively, it is achieved by modelling and respecting that others may have views that differ from our own and that, no matter how incredibly nonsensical, mistaken or confused those views may be, that does not evidence negative intent or malice, though it may well show ignorance, misdirection, fear, experiences, indoctrination and manipulation.
A grave problem with a political system that bases electoral victory on simple majority is that it is *not* representative and that almost inevitably, no matter which group attracts the most votes, there will be other groups, and often very large ones, who represent different views or ideological perspectives. The result is that most ‘democratic’ governments represent the views and wishes of little more than half of the electorate that votes, let alone those that don’t or are ineligible to do so.
This is therefore another significant issue that Trump’s abhorrent behaviour as POTUS ought to cause us to consider. Playing the blame game and putting the focus on his supporters only strengthens his hand and diverts attention from the critical analysis and question that really should be asked about how North America arrived at this juncture. That analysis and questioning should not just be focused, as many have said, on ensuring that such a situation can’t happen again. Rather, it needs to take a clean page and aim to produce a system that it is equitable and inclusive and appropriate for the 21 Century and beyond.
