Loyal To An Injuriously Lost Cause In Trump
Trump and his administration flout these fallacious arguments as a nativist mean to a grim hierarchical end to white resentment, particularly towards people of color. This also puts an end to democracy, diversity and any attempt at putting forth equality outcomes for America’s nation of immigrants. For the alt-right and white apologists this is seen as a redeeming quality and characteristic of Trump’s presidency.
How could this human rights abuse tactic in the enforcement of a zero tolerance policy decree of separating young children or babies from their mothers be even plausible let alone be used for deterrence to unlawful entry and or a negotiating tactic for this administration’s border wall funding? How does one justify this?
With more lies of course. Lies that only an ignorant and racist populace with insensitive beliefs would want to believe.
The DHS Secretary, Kirstjen Nielsen, has made it clear that like WH Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, and like UN Secretary Nikki Haley, she too has no conscience. Not only is the esteemed opportunity to serve in their respective capacities worth the moral and ethical costs, but the implications of using these institutions to callously instill the racial hierarchy in this way is hard to resist on account of the motivated ignorance that drives and benefits them and their in-group.
“It is important to note that these minors are very well taken care of — don’t believe the press,” — DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) told reporters on Tuesday that Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen has not visited a migrant detention center that houses children since the creation of a policy separating migrant families.
There is this underlying consistency with this particular in-group within the Trump administration that tends to misinterpret the evidence of racialized harm before them in a contorting display. All in an attempt to reconcile (their own) nativist and racialized beliefs. The opportunity embedded in all aspects however, is in this all encompassing scam of a social construct which is tremendously vast and rewarding to them.
Even those who allege to know Nielsen well enough like Mr. Arick Wierson, her alum from Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service, can’t understand how she could could attempt “to defend the indefensible”. This excerpt from his commentary published by CNN is telling.
Privately, many of us who know Nielsen from Georgetown cannot believe that she is the same person who we see as, if not the architect, then certainly the engineer of this tragically dark chapter of our nation’s history. “How does she bring herself to do this?” questioned one mutual friend in a recent group chat among several SFS alums.
The issue is that among those of us who know her, we can be fairly certain that Nielsen hates this policy and hates defending it, but she feels that in the oddball “Game of Thrones”-like environment of the Trump presidency, she was handed an opportunity to land a Cabinet level position — one that she might not have gotten in any other administration. For Nielsen, her reasoning for staying on and pretending to defend the policy could be quite simple: This is the most important role she will ever hold in her life, and to give it up after just a few months on the job would be asinine.
How does she not know when she should know?
Especially with all that privileged education and privileged networking? Nielsen and the like have an agential insensitivity that is unconscionable. That insensitivity to the truth about the president’s actions and directives is cultivated, and they are very much committed to this cult of Donald Trump.
And perhaps if Nielsen does hesitate or seems troubled by what her boss wants her to do, but has been able to suppress it nonetheless for all the wrong reasons, I suspect the underlying reason for that may be to avoid the burden she faces to have to revise her compounded and layered beliefs — publicly.
You see there is a lot of emotional investment to unpack in her self-concept of being the best fit candidate for this job — which foundationally means she has cultivated herself into being a good law abiding person. She has also proven to be a loyal person to Trump, no matter what. A person with admirable and good qualities reinforced by a presidential pick to one of the highest and most visible cabinet posts in the land. She can’t possibly be an adherent to institutional racism or the dehumanization of people immigrating to the United States under grave circumstances. That for her would negate all the good qualities she cultivated making her essentially a bad person — more appropriately a person motivated by ignorance who is carrying out immigration law.
NPR and I beg to differ on this.
As many fact-checkers have found, there is no such law requiring children to be separated from their parents if they illegally cross the border. And Republicans control Congress, not Democrats.
My last article titled What Are They Planning To Do With US spoke to the frightening vision of America in our present and future states under this administration. I reasoned how it is more than just shameful to sit back, watch and learn how the Trump administration — our government, is consenting to human rights abuses by separating children from their parents and caging them in detention camps. One of the comments from a fellow respected Medium writer stated this…
What disturbs me most about all of this, is how Trump’s supporters use the principle of ‘how much do you add to society’ as a metric for qualifying to exist. — Caleb Ramsby
What is more to the point that Caleb has correctly described in this subjective metric being proscribed for an immigration policy is the apparent ease and underhandedness that has already been transcribed over to its current citizenry by determining who is subject to entitlement programs and how much is granted.
Exhibit A. The disgraceful Republican Budget House Committee House proposal called “A Brighter American Future” has been making its way on the House floor clearly intends to cut Medicare, and transform Medicaid in a further attempt to repeal the Affordable Care Act. It will attempt to cut Social Security by $4 billion over the decade through cuts to unemployment benefits and disability insurance. It has provisions that will reduce education and training programs as well as Pell Grant awards.
All of this in exchange for the tax cuts Trump and the republican leadership has passed this year (that more than just entitles the rich) to reduce the huge deficits that it creates for the future. The neglible amounts seen from this tax cut for ordinary Americans compared to the windfall amounts for the top 10% is preposterous yet is seen as another redeeming quality and characteristic of Trump’s presidency thus far.
So for the alt-right nativists, the Trump offensive sounds good and feels good when it is applied to people who don’t look like them or people they plainly dislike, and distrust. They don’t realize that similar policies are being applied against them in discriminatingly class driven (socioeconomically) ways. The very same way they enjoy seeing deployed on minorities coincidentally and ironically.