• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Donald Trump the result of a postmodern world?

ataraxia

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 18, 2016
Messages
47,193
Reaction score
24,504
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Postmodernism is often vaguely defined. But one common definition is the lack of belief in Meta-narratives: that there is no overarching truth or way to ultimately judge it. We all just have our own "truths" (based on the Nietzschean idea that "there are no truths, only interpretation").

Donald Trump has challenged the unanimous consensus of every single scientific organization on the entire planet on climate change, calling it instead a "Chinese hoax". Well, that's certainly a different narrative. He has turned the narrative of America as the land of immigrants into a narrative of America hostile to immigrants. He tells foreign leaders of allied countries that he will let them fall to the wolves if they don't help him defeat his political rivals here at home, and then looks incredulous when he is told that may not be appropriate, if not just downright illegal. He promises to drain the swamp in DC, but has had more of his top campaign officials in jail now for corruption and criminal activity than any other president is history.

But his stories stick. People are in shock when you say these may not be truth. Is this because we as a postmodern country have finally taken Nietzsche's advice to heart on the nature of truth?
 
Postmodernism is often vaguely defined. But one common definition is the lack of belief in Meta-narratives: that there is no overarching truth or way to ultimately judge it. We all just have our own "truths" (based on the Nietzschean idea that "there are no truths, only interpretation").

Donald Trump has challenged the unanimous consensus of every single scientific organization on the entire planet on climate change, calling it instead a "Chinese hoax". Well, that's certainly a different narrative. He has turned the narrative of America as the land of immigrants into a narrative of America hostile to immigrants. He tells foreign leaders of allied countries that he will let them fall to the wolves if they don't help him defeat his political rivals here at home, and then looks incredulous when he is told that may not be appropriate, if not just downright illegal. He promises to drain the swamp in DC, but has had more of his top campaign officials in jail now for corruption and criminal activity than any other president is history.

But his stories stick. People are in shock when you say these may not be truth. Is this because we as a postmodern country have finally taken Nietzsche's advice to heart on the nature of truth?

Trump is a [partial] result of a social media driven world with virtually no regulations, constraints, or filters on content.

Mark Zuckerberg is as toxic to truth as is Donald Trump.
 
Populism has touched a few countries; In 2018, an anti-establishment coalition took power in Italy. Populist Emmanuel Macron beat hard-right leader Marine Le Pen in France’s 2017 presidential election, but disgruntled citizens (known as the gilets jaunes) rioted in the streets and torched cars and buildings because of insanely high taxes.

In June 2016, British populists voted for UK to disconnect from the E.U. Three years later, Parliament is STILL trying to reverse the results of that referendum! Some even proposed nullifying it and having another! Silly Brits.

In November 2016, Americans voted for the populist D.J. Trump, knocking the D.C. elites on their asses. How could this happen? Hillary had been groomed for the presidency since the 90's.

The resurgence of populism is why Americans chose Trump to be their president.
 
Trump is a [partial] result of a social media driven world with virtually no regulations, constraints, or filters on content.

Mark Zuckerberg is as toxic to truth as is Donald Trump.

So whom do you nominate as Minister of Truth?
 
Postmodernism is often vaguely defined. But one common definition is the lack of belief in Meta-narratives: that there is no overarching truth or way to ultimately judge it. We all just have our own "truths" (based on the Nietzschean idea that "there are no truths, only interpretation").

Donald Trump has challenged the unanimous consensus of every single scientific organization on the entire planet on climate change, calling it instead a "Chinese hoax". Well, that's certainly a different narrative. He has turned the narrative of America as the land of immigrants into a narrative of America hostile to immigrants. He tells foreign leaders of allied countries that he will let them fall to the wolves if they don't help him defeat his political rivals here at home, and then looks incredulous when he is told that may not be appropriate, if not just downright illegal. He promises to drain the swamp in DC, but has had more of his top campaign officials in jail now for corruption and criminal activity than any other president is history.

But his stories stick. People are in shock when you say these may not be truth. Is this because we as a postmodern country have finally taken Nietzsche's advice to heart on the nature of truth?



Meh, Trump is just an idiot.
 
Most of us know that the real problem is a failed school system, Fox Noise, Rush Limpbaugh. The schools (mostly in the Republican South) do not teach critical thinking skills. (God will solve everything)..plus you have Fox garbage telling lies 7/24. Then Rush spews out his ignorant crap and you wind up with a populace that actually believes that spirits, angels and the GOP will actually make life better for the unwashed masses.
Frankly, I see a dark future for this country and I take zero happiness in pointing out most of this country's faults.
When you get a society where 2 people..working 40 hours a week.. and these two people can't even afford a decent place to live...your're in trouble.
 
Postmodernism is often vaguely defined. But one common definition is the lack of belief in Meta-narratives: that there is no overarching truth or way to ultimately judge it. We all just have our own "truths" (based on the Nietzschean idea that "there are no truths, only interpretation").

Donald Trump has challenged the unanimous consensus of every single scientific organization on the entire planet on climate change, calling it instead a "Chinese hoax". Well, that's certainly a different narrative. He has turned the narrative of America as the land of immigrants into a narrative of America hostile to immigrants. He tells foreign leaders of allied countries that he will let them fall to the wolves if they don't help him defeat his political rivals here at home, and then looks incredulous when he is told that may not be appropriate, if not just downright illegal. He promises to drain the swamp in DC, but has had more of his top campaign officials in jail now for corruption and criminal activity than any other president is history.

But his stories stick. People are in shock when you say these may not be truth. Is this because we as a postmodern country have finally taken Nietzsche's advice to heart on the nature of truth?
This Original Post is itself an interpretation, no?
Donald Trump is the result of the same biological process that produced you and me and everyone else.
On the other hand, if you mean "Donald Trump," then perhaps look to the Age of Television for your answer.
But if you mean what got President Trump elected, then the answer is a campaign and an election.
 
This Original Post is itself an interpretation, no?
Donald Trump is the result of the same biological process that produced you and me and everyone else.
On the other hand, if you mean "Donald Trump," then perhaps look to the Age of Television for your answer.
But if you mean what got President Trump elected, then the answer is a campaign and an election.

Angel!

I am shocked! I never took you for a postmodernist. I am shocked! Of all people!

I know that “The age of television” produced Donald Trump. But are you familiar with the French postmodern philosopher Jean Baudrillard and his writings on “the age of television”? On his ideas of “hyper reality” and “simulacra”? What about the postmodern philosopher Jean-Francois Lyotard and his views on understanding the role of science in our age? When I first encountered these guys, I was thinking “weird stuff. But naaah, couldn’t be. This is just taking it too far”.

Well,... but now, I am not so sure. With the stuff I’m seeing with Donald Trump and his supporters, I don’t know anymore. These guys really may have been on to something after all; and far more prescient and insightful than I initially thought. Television and media more credible to everyone than the unanimous consensus of every single scientific organization on the entire planet? What is this the Twilight Zone? What’s next, everyone takes their masks off and they are all really robots?

I really think that may be the case in this era we are living in. Look at me, I am talking to a religious Catholic (I presume) defending concepts of “God” and “Truth” online, going on to explain to me Nietzschean notions of how everything is just interpretation?

So weird. Never thought I would live to see the day!
 
Last edited:
Not sure why his supporters voted for him but I sure am amused to see how bent out of shape he makes democrats with everything he says or does. OCD can be amusing to watch play out.
 
Not sure why his supporters voted for him but I sure am amused to see how bent out of shape he makes democrats with everything he says or does. OCD can be amusing to watch play out.

What’s even more amusing is seeing the same people who were losing their minds with outrage because Obama once dared to wear a tan suit to a press briefing thinking there is absolutely nothing wrong now.

It really is all about interpretation, isn’t it?
 
What’s even more amusing is seeing the same people who were losing their minds with outrage because Obama once dared to wear a tan suit to a press briefing thinking there is absolutely nothing wrong now.

It really is all about interpretation, isn’t it?

I have no recollection of anyone even commenting about Obama's clothing choices, but I am not a wound collector, superficial or otherwise.

Interpretation, perspective, bias....it is about lots of things I suppose, interpretation being but one of them.
 
I have no recollection of anyone even commenting about Obama's clothing choices, but I am not a wound collector, superficial or otherwise.

Obama tan suit controversy - Wikipedia
Obama's tan suit controversy hits 5-year anniversary | TheHill

Interpretation, perspective, bias....it is about lots of things I suppose, interpretation being but one of them.

Is it OK to dismiss the unanimous consensus of every single scientific organization on the entire planet as simply just another interpretation?
 
Last edited:
Apparently this criticism of Obama carries some special weight for you.

It just seems to be an interesting example of how it’s all just about interpretation: a fashion faux-pas generates that much outrage, but an affair with a porn star with a third pregnant wife at home, and then paying her off to keep her quiet, is just all about triggered libs making a big deal out of nothing.

It’s just so interesting. It’s a good example of postmodernism, I think. Don’t you find it interesting? I never took that stuff seriously before. But now I am starting to wonder if there is not something to it. I can see a philosophy professor in an introductory class using these examples to explain these ideas to his class.

It is obviously okay for the people who might do it.

Sure. You seem to be totally OK with it. Am I mistaken?
 
Last edited:
It just seems to be an interesting example of how it’s all just about interpretation: a fashion faux-pas generates that much outrage, but an affair with a porn star with a third pregnant wife at home, and then paying her off to keep her quiet, is just all about triggered libs making a big deal out of nothing.

It’s just so interesting. It’s a good example of postmodernism, I think. Don’t you find it interesting? I never took that stuff seriously before. But now I am starting to wonder if there is not something to it. I can see a philosophy professor in an introductory class using these examples to explain these ideas to his class.



Sure. You seem to be totally OK with it. Am I mistaken?

My philosophy class was more what does it mean to mean. All Semantics in the end.

As for the other, I don't worry much about it. People will believe whatever they want.
 
Postmodernism is often vaguely defined. But one common definition is the lack of belief in Meta-narratives: that there is no overarching truth or way to ultimately judge it. We all just have our own "truths" (based on the Nietzschean idea that "there are no truths, only interpretation").

Donald Trump has challenged the unanimous consensus of every single scientific organization on the entire planet on climate change, calling it instead a "Chinese hoax". Well, that's certainly a different narrative. He has turned the narrative of America as the land of immigrants into a narrative of America hostile to immigrants. He tells foreign leaders of allied countries that he will let them fall to the wolves if they don't help him defeat his political rivals here at home, and then looks incredulous when he is told that may not be appropriate, if not just downright illegal. He promises to drain the swamp in DC, but has had more of his top campaign officials in jail now for corruption and criminal activity than any other president is history.

But his stories stick. People are in shock when you say these may not be truth. Is this because we as a postmodern country have finally taken Nietzsche's advice to heart on the nature of truth?

You are way over thinking this. Donald Trump won because there was a significant portion of the right that were just fed up and sick of full of **** career politicians and there were enough people in swing states who felt the same way.
 
My philosophy class was more what does it mean to mean. All Semantics in the end.

As for the other, I don't worry much about it. People will believe whatever they want.

My question is more of a normative one: is there a way to say that one belief is better than the other? A postmodernist would argue that it does not. Do you subscribe to this view?
 
Most of us know that the real problem is a failed school system, Fox Noise, Rush Limpbaugh. The schools (mostly in the Republican South) do not teach critical thinking skills. (God will solve everything)..plus you have Fox garbage telling lies 7/24. Then Rush spews out his ignorant crap and you wind up with a populace that actually believes that spirits, angels and the GOP will actually make life better for the unwashed masses.
Frankly, I see a dark future for this country and I take zero happiness in pointing out most of this country's faults.
When you get a society where 2 people..working 40 hours a week.. and these two people can't even afford a decent place to live...your're in trouble.

I don’t know how America is going to get better. I know some posters are very positive about Trump leaving in the GOP changing, and will get a different president eventually. However I’m worried the base whenever change, and I worry the next conservative president could be just as bad if worse than Trump.
 
Part of the Postmodernist movement was with the notions of good and evil. The traditional or modern superhero was genuinely good and the bad guys were unquestionably bad. The postmodern superhero was not purely good and same with the bad guys. A good example of this was Spiderman 2, with Toby Maquire the one with Sandman.
 
My question is more of a normative one: is there a way to say that one belief is better than the other? A postmodernist would argue that it does not. Do you subscribe to this view?

I functionally subscribe to moral relativism
 
I don’t know how America is going to get better. I know some posters are very positive about Trump leaving in the GOP changing, and will get a different president eventually. However I’m worried the base whenever change, and I worry the next conservative president could be just as bad if worse than Trump.

That’s true. The problem is more than just Trump. Trump is just a manifestation of the problem. When he’s gone, they are going to pick some other stable genius- maybe Sarah Palin next time?
 
Apparently this criticism of Obama carries some special weight for you.





It is obviously okay for the people who might do it.

Interesting how to choose to spin the point on hypocrisy.
 
Is Donald Trump the result of a postmodern world?

No, he is the result of weak Dems not fighting back hard enough starting all the way back in the 1970's when The Powell Memo was released. Trump is the culmination of forty plus years of systematic destruction of democratic norms and values, with the help of a weak and compliant bunch of corporate establishment Dems who could do nothing more than hang their head in shame and spend their time trying to prove they are just as Right wing as the Republicans.

But that's also the risk one runs when one is a purity pony on the Left, too.
 
Back
Top Bottom