Kilmar Abregio, US, and El Salvador

    Be suspicious of what's happening with the US and El Salvador. Reports of unjustified deportations [1, 2], shaving the heads of deportees [3] which has the effect of visual homogenization which can lead to dehumanization [4, 5 (pgs. 48-50)], and selecting brown-skinned people from South America all point in a very uncomfortable direction. Most people are seemingly indifferent or docile. It feels eerily similar to atrocities like slavery and the Holocaust that were committed by governments while their citizens were complicit by manipulation, apathy, or fear [6]. This is a stream-of-conscious personal reflection with persuasive elements. In it, I attempt to explore by expression my strong feelings about current events using emotional rhetoric, valid evidence, and potentially biased or uninformed speculation. I will attempt to back up my factual claims with substantial evidence, but I will not hold back in emotional expression. The goal ultimately being to recognize the strengths and weaknesses in my argumentation and essay-writing ability. 

    Donald Trump, a narcissistic egomaniac, is a banal impression of a dictator. A man who smirks as the El Salvadorian president (who referred to himself as "the coolest dictator" [7] refuses to return a mistakenly deported man, Kilmar Abrego Garcia (against the ruling of the Supreme Court) [8], , calling him a "terrorist" [9], is no man at all. Instead, he amounts to a fluid, corrupt hedonist with no regard for anything or anyone outside of himself. If I believed in God, I would find some solace knowing he would spend an eternity in Hell. Instead, I wonder what the trajectory of his life is, and I fear he dies in the same ignorant mud pile he currently lives in. I wonder what the damage will be until then. I wonder if I will become the citizen who lives in complicit apathy or fear. Then I wonder what I'm capable of doing in opposition to growing authoritarianism.

    A quote, possibly out of context, from White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller: "Under this country, under this administration, under President Trump, people who hate America, who threaten our citizens, who rape, who murder, and who support those who rape and murder are going to be ejected from this country." [10] Trump has already admitted that he plans to deport "homegrown criminals" or US citizens who've committed violent crimes [11]. Trump has frequently called illegal immigrants "rapists and murderers," [12]. With that anti-immigrant rhetoric, he could frame those in support of Kilmar Abregio Garcia and other perhaps unjustified deportees as supporters of "rapists and murderers." This narrative, based on Stephen Miller's quote, would seemingly provide adequate justification for the Trump administration to deport US citizens based purely on subjective opinion of those opposed to unjustified deportations. 

Update, not even one day after writing this: Sebastian Gorka, Deputy Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Counterterrorism said, on Newsmax, "It’s not left and right, It’s not even Republican or Democrat. There’s one line that divides us. Do you love America or do you hate America? It’s really quite that simple. ...the other side that is on the side of the cartel members, on the side of the illegal aliens on the side of the terrorists. And you have to ask yourself, are they technically aiding and abetting them? Because aiding and abetting criminals and terrorists is a crime in federal statute." [x]

Are you kidding me? Is the United States government blatantly creating a narrative that would allow for the criminilization of hating America? For supporting unjustly deported persons? "The party of free speech," they said. Let's hope one man doesn't speak for the administration, and let's hope the concerning escalation in rhetoric is cleverly disguised propaganda by the left or a trick of the mind. 

    The First Amendment seems to be under attack as the President has already banned certain reputable members of the press from the White House [12]. He has attempted to discredit and pull funding from NPR and PBS as they're "biased and radically left-wing"[13]. He continues to push blatant lies, such as Ukraine being the country who started the war against Russia [14], and the alternative and mainstream media play with the narrative in whatever direction they prefer. 

    It's hard for me to understand how we got here. Trump seems to be using the playbooks of many historical and current dictators and fascists, much of which was taught in history class in grade school. Regardless of that even, how he speaks in absolute terms and in big and little, great and terrible rhetoric is clearly meant to fearmonger and induce emotional states that guide us away from relevant facts. [15]

    It's not hard, though, to look across the aisle and see much of the same style of rhetoric. I believe this is a false equivalence, but there are similarities that make it valid to question the intentions of politicians who employ this style. Simple, emotionally provocative rhetoric exists everywhere in politicians attempting to gain favor. I think it's a popular idea to be skeptical of the government and for good reason. However, if we are going to move forward we HAVE to find a way to create a bridge between the politicians and the common person. We should be comfortable knowing our Representatives and leaders are not influenced by the market or lobbyists. We should be aware of their intentions because their actions can not contradict their rhetoric.

    When Democrats start to play our emotions using transgender murders, Trump authoritarianism, or women who have been raped being unable to have their "right to choose" abortion, it feels eerily similar to Republican talking points about illegal immigrants killing children, authoritative wokeism, and murdering babies in utero against the will of God. Again, I am not saying these are equivalent in terms of moral reasoning and statistical fact. However, the fearmongering and emotionally manipulative rhetoric, especially when it isn't followed by correlative action, grows and validates skepticism of the entire political sphere.

    Unfortunately, it is much easier to blame the other side rather than looking at what the actual issue is. A seemingly nonpartisan issue, as Donald Trump ran on "draining the swamp" of bought and paid for politicians (who turned out to be mostly Democrats or those who dissented from the MAGA agenda).  What baffles me is the idea that one could possibly view Trump as somebody with that good faith intention. Putting aside his billionaire status, would he not attempt to pass bills that limit or ban insider trading, lobbying, and the accepting of money from corporations by all members of the government? Until our politicians have no personal economic interest in what laws get passed, we can not trust them. [16]

    Donald Trump, in my view, took the opportunity to capitalize on this known problem and it has led way to an even more dangerous type of politician in the business of supremacy. Maybe for Trump is started with economic interest, but the cult he's cultivated is about the ideology of MAGA and anti-wokeism. Not for America, not for Democracy, not for freedom. If our Democratic structure holds up during Trump's second term, then we'll have to contend with the very real problem of corruption by economic interest at the heart of our government. Until then, we practice and preach opposition to authoritarianism.

"Some walk out winners of those who've lost /

Can it be said at any price this is the cost /

Hard is perception, easier is blame /

Is this the only life for everyone, is it the same?" 

- Gene Clark, "Life's Greatest Fool"