Archive: Opinions

I am profoundly disturbed by the rhetoric I am hearing from some people I hold otherwise very dear who are unhappy about the presidential election results.  In one breath they excoriate Trump for just about anything he says, claiming it is outrageous when he calls opponents names or worse.  With the next breath they refer to the President-elect as 'Pussy-grabber In Chief' or Hitler.  If one feels that Mr. Trump is a name-calling bully, is it not also true that resorting to name calling one's self is bringing the conversation down to that level, rather than elevating it or actually making one's point?

This self-satisfied, holier than thou attitude that seems to be prevailing in on and off-line conversations does the opposite of what is intended, at least as far as I am concerned.  Rather than convincing me that Trump is a boor (he does pretty well in boorishness without our help), it illustrates that my friends are boors who simply don't understand that what they find so offensive in the way Mr. Trump expresses himself is many times worse in themselves.  This is especially disturbing because I never viewed these individuals as boorish before now.  "Aw gee, Ma, he did it first."  Really?

Where I come from it is extremely tasteless to call someone Hitler unless you are actually talking about Adolph Hitler.  The atrocities he was responsible for were so unimaginably heinous that name calling using his name makes light of what he did.  Let's remember that six million Jews and 5 million other people were killed on his orders, not to mention 10 million soviet non-Jews and all the soldiers and civilians of many nationalities that dies in the war against Hitler's Germany, and today those are thought to be conservative estimates.  Calling Trump or just about anybody else Hitler is so unspeakably offensive that it defies words.

Certainly if, upon taking on the mantle of power, Mr. Trump begins a massive genocide the comparison will be appropriate.  But does anyone seriously believe that is likely to happen?  Unless it does, calling him Hitler is disrespectful to those millions of victims and their families.

As for vulgar references to the President-elect's abuse of women or the repeated inferences that his small hands mean he is less than impressively endowed in other parts of his anatomy, does it make his opponents feel better to voice their opposition in these terms?  Abuse of women is a serious issue that deserves to be treated seriously, not minimized by name calling.  Speculation and attacks on his wife and young son, especially the latter, are incredibly offensive.  It is inevitable that children of famous people find themselves in the spotlight, but adults should not publicly attack children.  For heaven's sake, they're children!

This has nothing to do with people's right to oppose public figures and policies.  Part of what makes America great is that we can do that here without being sent to jail or worse.  It has nothing to do with whether Trump's opponents are right or wrong.  Even if they are 100% right, the level of discourse is 100% wrong.

As for freedom of speech, well, sure we can say anything we want to.  But should we say just anything?  And does behaving badly actually make a point?

Donald Trump is certainly a flawed individual in the eyes of many people, including many of his supporters.  The very real fear for the future that many Americans feel as a result of wacko campaigns leading up to the election is, unfortunately, all too understandable.  But the very people who say the common discourse reached record low levels are simply perpetuating that low and making it worse.

It is time for everyone to take our fingers off the triggers of our internal 'send' buttons and resume thinking -- and editing -- before opening our mouths, or posting their online rants.  Arguments against a point of view or against a person's behavior carry a lot more weight when the arguers make them in a civilized, reasoned manner.

v12i45