A exchange in which I found myself engrossed with a friend prompted some introspection; and this is where I oppose myself; for, I had heretofore sworn this forum would not be one for political discourse. Especially about Donald Trump. Ewww.
Both my friend and I read Emerson and delight in sharing his perceptivity with each other, applying his wisdom to life and our lives and even appreciating a diverting side, when we assign his sagacity to humourous events in both our histories and presents. I, as an Emerson devotee, have categorically refused to relegate his words to Donald Trump (ewww); for to do so — for me — would be to mar a genius which I treasure.
I am no admirer of Donald Trump (ewww); I loathe him, find him malevolent and toxic, and even entreated a friend, who is a Psychiatrist, to analyse him for me (she says she cannot ascribe a diagnosis to him; that he is just a f***wit). That notwithstanding, I am of the sentiment that Trump-bashing, merely for the sake of it — as opposed to legitimate criticism — is misplaced; his misdeeds are numberless enough: attacking free speech and freedom of the press, misogyny, ostracising entire groups and nations, disregard and disdain for the planet and the law; and these are infinitely more distressing than his physical appearance and want of gentility. I decry attacking for the mere sake of attacking.
And, onto Emerson: I concede there exist myriad observations appropriate for this individual (ewww) and his ilk; and I presently contradict myself again by disseminating three such sentiments here.
On the mechanics of arrival: “Power first, or no leading class. In politics and in trade, bruisers and pirates are of better promise than talkers and clerks.” — Manners
On a deficiency of any semblance of virtue; and the simple presence of what may be perceived as power: “It is a spontaneous fruit of talents and feelings of precisely that class who have most vigour, who take the lead in the world of this hour…” — Manners
And lastly, on megalomania: “Fear, when your friends say to you what you have done well, and say it through; but when they stand with uncertain timid looks of respect and half-dislike, and must suspend their judgment for years to come, you may begin to hope. Those who live to the future must always appear selfish to those who live to the present.” — Character
See? I do capitulate to congruence and pertinence; however, when I read Emerson, I discern kindness, decency, intellect and happiness and I connect with it; and I informed my friend that for me, attaching his genius to malevolence feels wrong.
I am satiated with politics; everyone wishes to deliberate politics and some are inordinately single-minded, they discuss little else. Trump-bashing (sans legitimate critique) is tedious, as it seems, presently, to be perpetrated merely for the sake of virtue signalling or because one has little else to say. I witnessed this unfettered hate for eight years directed toward President Obama and despised it; I detest that “my side” behaves similarly; we are finer than this and it is, besides, hypocritical, as we did not approve when it came for us.
And, we exist in our own upheaval and disquiet here in the UK, with a government I oppose as much as their policies (Brexit and austerity to name but two); and whilst I don’t bury my head in the sand about world politics, I maintain this business should not roll from my tongue with every utterance, as there are more meaningful and lofty dialogues to be experienced.
And lastly, on Emerson: he contemplated of religion (the same is true of politics; in fact, replace the former with the latter): “What low, poor, paltry, hypocritical people an argument on religion (insert “politics”) will make of the pure and chosen souls!…” — Prudence
This is the last I will say on the subject…