Welcome to Objectivism Online Forum

Welcome to Objectivism Online, a forum for discussing the philosophy of Ayn Rand. For full access, register via Facebook or email.

Michael J. Hurd Ph.D.

Reblogged:What’s Causing Post-Election Hysteria?

Rate this topic

15 posts in this topic

A reader asks if I have any insights into the post-election hysteria, i.e., melting down and having to grieve because Hillary Clinton lost. And the assassination threats on social media. And the verbal, even physical, bullying of people suspected to have voted for Trump.

“Hysteria” is not an official psychiatric term or disorder. So let’s look the word up in the dictionary. Oxford’s dictionary defines hysteria as an exaggerated or uncontrollable emotion or excitement, especially among a group of people: “the mass hysteria that characterizes the week before Christmas”.

Hysteria arises from profound anxiety. Kind of like the feeling of falling through space, helpless and hurtling toward inevitable death and destruction. It arises when an individual or group of people feel threatened to the point of losing everything. Consider the progressive point-of-view, the viewpoint represented by Hillary Clinton and her supporters. Progressivism means social engineering and activist government. It’s hard for those of us who don’t share that point-of-view to relate. But from this perspective, activist government — run by progressives, not by anyone else — is the only thing standing between a reasonable life and the kind of brutality or slaughter characterized by many governments throughout history.

It’s also the only thing standing between some unspecified environmental collapse or total and complete economic ruin. Progressives have faith in government, so long as it’s a government run by their kind of people. They really believe government is responsible for most (even all) of the economic and material progress we have. Given the importance of this responsibility, it’s imperative, in their eyes, that the government be run by people who share all of their core beliefs and attitudes. Given their premise that government provides most or all of what makes life worthwhile, their attitude (and some of the resulting hysteria post-election) actually makes a certain amount of psychological sense.

To the progressives, we avoid calamity only with the intervention of what they believe to be caring, compassionate, sensitive and unusually brilliant people who somehow keep things going. In their minds, Donald Trump represents hatred and hostility to all of their values. And now this man they view as a monster is in charge of “running society,” as if any government entity could (or should) ever actually do such a thing.

To many progressives and Democrats, it feels like a dictatorship merely to live among people they believe do not share their basic attitudes about group rights, taxes, environmentalist regulations, military policies, social programs and the like. The threat isn’t really racism, because there’s no evidence Donald Trump is a racist. He hasn’t attacked Hispanics, although he has attacked our immigration policies because he believes they’re irrational and unfair to existing citizens, including Hispanic citizens. He hasn’t attacked blacks, and more blacks voted for him — and fewer turned out for Hillary Clinton — than was the case four years ago when Obama ran against Mitt Romney. Trump’s highly critical of Islam, because that ideology’s staunchest spokespeople have called for ruthless, bloody Jihad against all things Western, especially America. When he puts down Islam, it’s a man-made, chosen ideology he’s after, not people for the color of their skin.

Despite all this, in the progressive mindset, Donald Trump is some kind of racist, white supremacist. If I believed Donald Trump to be 10 percent of how he’s portrayed in mainstream left-leaning media, I’d probably feel the same way. They haven’t taken the time to read other sources, and they haven’t even taken the time to listen to what Trump has to say, evaluating it critically, rationally and in context. I don’t see the evidence for how Trump is portrayed in these riots and protests. I have read his books, and I listened to all his major speeches during the campaign. There are things I like and dislike. But he’s no more of a racist than was Mitt Romney or John McCain. He’s basically a pragmatic fiscal conservative who leans right, and who many of us fear could change in a heartbeat. (That would be good news to progressives.) Most of all, he has a sense that America can and should be great again. Yes, that’s how a racist might talk, but so would a socialist or a progressive. From all the available evidence, Trump wants America great again so that it can be more of a land of liberty and economic prosperity. How to get there might be a question, but that’s what he wants, and that’s not what Obama or Hillary Clinton seemed to care about.

If someone you know or care about suffers from hysteria over the election, invite them to read Donald Trump’s books or watch some of his key speeches available on YouTube and elsewhere. Tell them you’re not trying to persuade them of anything, only to consider the possibility that reasonable people — about half the population — found reasons to elect him President.

It’s interesting to note we did not see this kind of hysteria after Obama was elected. People who didn’t want Obama elected president in 2008 and 2012 were every bit as unhappy as Hillary voters are today, believe me! We sucked it up and consoled ourselves in the knowledge that government is not everything, and if we end up having to oppose or fight the government to sustain our lives, so be it. But progressives are the ones who look to government as kind of a secular, urban religion to reassure them that the universe is a reasonable, benevolent and intelligent place. They need government for that. You see, that’s the whole problem with progressivism, as with every form of socialism and collectivism human beings have ever devised. The answer is not out there. It’s within ourselves, not in the group or the government. It always has been, and it always will be. The only government that helps us is the one guaranteed to protect and preserve our sovereignty over our lives, our individual rights, our property rights and, at least implicitly, our individualism.

Government should not be a religion. Yet to millions of people, it is. And right now, that’s much of the basis for all the hysteria, hurt, anger, rage and helplessness you see.

Follow Dr. Hurd on Facebook. Search under “Michael  Hurd” (Rehoboth Beach DE). Get up-to-the-minute postings, recommended articles and links, and engage in back-and-forth discussion with Dr. Hurd on topics of interest. Also follow Dr. Hurd on Twitter at @MichaelJHurd1

Dr. Hurd’s writings read on the air by Rush Limbaugh! Read more HERE.

 

The post What’s Causing Post-Election Hysteria? appeared first on Michael J. Hurd, Ph.D. | Living Resources Center.

View the full article @ www.DrHurd.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Michael J. Hurd Ph.D. said:

Tell them you’re not trying to persuade them of anything, only to consider the possibility that reasonable people — about half the population — found reasons to elect him President.

Voter turnout was 57.9% of eligible voters. Of this 57.9%, almost 50% found reasons to elect Trump as President. Conclusion: ~28.95% of the eligible voters, rather than about half the population, found reason to elect Donald Trump as President.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is so embarrassing that Hurd passes this quality of writing off as intellectual analysis, let alone Objectivist analysis. 

Eiuol likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Michael J. Hurd Ph.D. said:

If someone you know or care about suffers from hysteria over the election, invite them to read Donald Trump’s books or watch some of his key speeches available on YouTube and elsewhere.

So the way to help a hysterical person is to subject them to more of what made them hysterical in the first place?

TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP

Are you feeling better?

No.

TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP

How about now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/13/2016 at 3:30 PM, softwareNerd said:

It is so embarrassing that Hurd passes this quality of writing off as intellectual analysis, let alone Objectivist analysis. 

softwareNerd, I tend to agree. As much as I hate to sound like I'm "singling out" somebody, I think it's high time that Dr. Hurd's auto-post privileges, which automatically post everything he writes on his personal blog as a forum thread, are revoked, especially since he does not seem to be an actual participant on this forum.

You are this forum's administrator, if I am not mistaken. Thus you would seem to be the person with the power to revoke "auto-post" privileges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dr. Hurd's posts are not automatically posted, they need to be approved by a moderator first. I don't read his posts on politics because I don't think he's got great insights, but I did approved this one. Taking this post alone, the worst offense as I see it is that he speaks favorably of Trump. Am I right to assume the rest of his political writing plays into others' criticism of him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎15‎/‎2016 at 9:05 AM, JASKN said:

Dr. Hurd's posts are not automatically posted, they need to be approved by a moderator first. I don't read his posts on politics because I don't think he's got great insights, but I did approved this one. Taking this post alone, the worst offense as I see it is that he speaks favorably of Trump. Am I right to assume the rest of his political writing plays into others' criticism of him?

I haven't much to say about Dr. Hurd.

I would more interested to see links, content, blog entreis etc. from ARI or TOS... than content from the likes of Dr. Hurd, but that's just me, and there may be very good reasons why its not the case.

MisterSwig likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/15/2016 at 6:05 AM, JASKN said:

Taking this post alone, the worst offense as I see it is that he speaks favorably of Trump. Am I right to assume the rest of his political writing plays into others' criticism of him?

I'd say his worst offense is his evasion of (or apology for) everything that makes Trump absolutely horrible. He writes as if the Left is completely delusional about our President-elect. And that's a sign that he's been brainwashed by the likes of Limbaugh and Newsmax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, StrictlyLogical said:

I would more interested to see links, content, blog entreis etc. from ARI or TOS... than content from the likes of Dr. Hurd, but that's just me, and there may be very good reasons why its not the case.

The main reason to republish posts into threads at OO.com is the potential for member discussion, not so much for the value of the content itself. ARI, for example, publishes content drawing obvious conclusions for most regulars at this forum, aiming instead at a less versed public. There needs to be an angle of contention to make the auto-reposts worthwhile.

Dr. Hurd's political content may not be the best example, simply because it is stupid and thus makes for a bad starting point for discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, JASKN said:

The main reason to republish posts into threads at OO.com is the potential for member discussion, not so much for the value of the content itself.

Then I suggest renaming this sub to "The Not Really Objectivism Meta-Blog."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, JASKN said:

The main reason to republish posts into threads at OO.com is the potential for member discussion, not so much for the value of the content itself. ARI, for example, publishes content drawing obvious conclusions for most regulars at this forum, aiming instead at a less versed public. There needs to be an angle of contention to make the auto-reposts worthwhile.

Dr. Hurd's political content may not be the best example, simply because it is stupid and thus makes for a bad starting point for discussion.

I agree, but hopefully we'll get some more diverse content from him, now that the election is over.

One of the good things about Dr. Hurd is that he doesn't avoid controversy, or going out on a limb on topics. So, even if he's wrong, he's never boring.

JASKN likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MisterSwig said:

Then I suggest renaming this sub to "The Not Really Objectivism Meta-Blog."

Fine with me. :) Seriously, though, it can't be so far off so as to contradict Objectivism explicitly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MisterSwig said:

Then I suggest renaming this sub to "The Not Really Objectivism Meta-Blog."

My policy is to delete all his posts though so most don't really get through. They fail to meet standards of rationality and objectivity that should be a lot higher than what's expected of posters.

Suggestion: suggest more blogs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, StrictlyLogical said:

I haven't much to say about Dr. Hurd.

I would more interested to see links, content, blog entreis etc. from ARI or TOS... than content from the likes of Dr. Hurd, but that's just me, and there may be very good reasons why its not the case.

Changes at ARI appear to have altered how their newsfeed works. (Reference.) This will have to be investigated to remedy.

TOS has podcasts available in rss format, but the same does not appear to be available for the blog section. Alternatively, consider starting threads in Intellectuals in the Media such as:

Quote

See Craig Biddle's summation of the presidential candidates here: Hillary, Johnson, and Trump, Oh My!

As for whom to support in the coming presidential election, consider the short list of alternatives:

  • Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee
  • Hillary Clinton, the presumptive Democrat nominee
  • Bernie Sanders, a likely independent or third-party candidate (I think his desire for attention will push him to stay in the race one way or another)
  • Gary Johnson, the Libertarian nominee
  • Some other third-party candidate
  • A write-in or protest vote of some kind
  • Abstinence

Craig's assessments of the candidates . . . .

to bring new releases to our attention. Otherwise, there are links on the Portal for several independent site for extended reading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ARI newsfeed has been updated. I'll double check it after the next update, to make sure the bugs are worked out.

TOS does have a newsfeed. Authorization will need to be acquired prior to implementation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.