Orange Flag Behavior
(An Observation)
I’m a big believer in expressing myself directly. If I share a meme, I made it. Disinformation converts my brain to cottage cheese. Ad hominem attacks or personal derision, especially on social media, is not my cup of tea. It convinces no one and just bounces around in the echo chambers of the people who follow such content. I’m not sharing my thoughts because I expect anyone’s opinion to change. I’m sharing them because it exposes the things I believe and the frustration I see all around me.
It’s interesting that when most of us grew up, family members would warn us not to hang out with people who misbehaved. They would admonish us that it invited danger. And that people would judge us based on the people around us. Personally, this isn’t true in my case. My parents and some of the people they associated with tended to be the actual bad example I’ve struggled to unlearn my entire life.
Being in a group of people in no way automatically defines you. If you are in a crowd of people and all of them have a top hat on except you, people will assume you forgot your hat, not that you’re the odd man out.
This is one of the things that people struggle with regarding their family and friends. You might be kind. You might be open to diversity. Your views on sexual identity might be universal.
If you are under an orange flag, the tendency to fairly or unfairly attribute affiliation with those holding the orange flag increases.
It’s why people who might normally otherwise vote Republican usually react with silence when they watch Mr. Orange. He is the embodiment of what’s wrong with living a good life and suitability for the office of president. He did not serve as a beacon of reason and inclusiveness. Objective observers can only conclude that he oafishly and cleverly co-opted a specific brand of religion while simultaneously hijacking a political party to gain office. Politics and religion don’t mix well precisely because such systems invariably become autocratic and blur the line that is required for large groups of competing ideas and interests to coexist. Religion is personal and should not be favored or codified into our law. If you think otherwise, I’ll wager your opinion will shift if you find yourself in a particular religious group that loses favor to another.
Politics is never a question of intelligence. There are extraordinary intellects along the entire spectrum of politics. The same is true for those who succumb to the allure of tribalism with their respective ideologies, parties, and candidates. It is supremely difficult to argue someone out of a position they did not argue themselves into. One of the basic truths is that overwhelmingly people choose an idea and then avidly search for evidence to support it. Once entrenched, it is miraculous that someone will fundamentally shift their ideologies.
Fair or not, some watch their family and friends avidly support someone who has proven that he is not a man of character in his personal life. Sometimes, we draw erroneous conclusions. You might be a fan of disruption or economic issues. There could be myriad reasons for you to support such a candidate. But we can’t shy away from the fact that people around you are recoiling. They recoil because voting for such a candidate is a package deal. In his case, you can’t separate the consequences of your choice, regardless of the main reason he will be getting your vote. By endorsing him for a particular reason, you’re also dragging the rest of his damaging type of politics into power.
The problem comes because Mr Orange marginalizes and demeans groups. They just want to live their lives without interference. When we see support for a person demeaning us, our interests, or the people we are close to, some of us cannot find the right words to explain to his supporters that they are inadvertently or purposefully endorsing some of his ideas. Mr. Orange is a failed businessman who doesn’t attempt to conceal his contempt and prejudice. Bullies empower other bullies.
Good people don’t want to attack those around them. But so many wince in silence because they are personally insulted by your endorsement of such a candidate. Good people also eventually stand up. Part of the reason is that people they love or respect are being harmed or marginalized. The other realization is that if we remain silent long enough, it could easily be us in the bullseye in the future.
Things that people explain away as “just politics” aren’t politics at all. Politics is running the government efficiently with core principles. We all get an equal voice regarding the collective rules we are supposed to live by. Prejudice and discrimination of any kind are among the things which have no place in politics. Furthering the interests of a particular group in such a manner that they receive special privilege through law counters one of our most basic principles.
It’s not my job to ridicule Mr. Orange. His record of fraud, coercion of women, and obvious attempts to avoid accountability for his actions speak louder than any condemnation I could utter. Even absent all the other behaviors in his business and personal life, he actively encouraged literal insurrection after the last election.
And of course, we wouldn’t be dealing with him if our antiquated system of presidential selection wasn’t based on an anachronism resulting from the power struggle of those who wanted to preserve slavery. A popular vote such as that which governs every other candidacy historically would have resulted in several different presidents in the last few decades. The Constitution is a living document, one which is supposed to embody our collective goals and ideas. Abusing one of the branches of government in such a way as to skew the balance of the separate branches will lead to ruin because people will lose even more faith in the fair process of elections and decision-making.
It is a shame that we do not have several political parties. Or even none. That the best idea and plan will overcome, but all of us know that this is a daydream. People across the spectrum, unfortunately, strive to exert power when they should instead focus on governance for the collective mismatch of people and groups that we are.
In so many ways, we are still that same nation of divided priorities. And we always will be. One thing we could count on was that even though we were not happy about the person occupying the presidency, we at least maintained the illusion that they were qualified for the office. That any party would put forward a convicted felon for a race in which said candidate could not even legally vote, we have a serious problem. I’m conflicted because I have believed for years that a felony record should not take away your essential right to vote. Fomenting rebellion or insurrection to destabilize a government or overturn an election is one of the unforgivable acts of a citizen.
The premise of this post was supposed to be a reminder that the candidate you enthusiastically endorse also comes with the perceived reputation and behavior to whom it is attached. Your alliance with particularly pernicious candidates comes with a raised eyebrow and a profound feeling of disappointment. Each time your candidate disparages women, minorities, and people of different religious groups, people are watching, expecting you to acknowledge that some people are a danger to democracy.
I don’t say these things because I question your intelligence.
I say them because some supporters say they don’t understand why they are arguing with their loved ones over politics. These are not political arguments. They are attacks not only on people but also on our entire process.
When you encourage authoritarianism, you place yourself in the future invisible line of being the target and losing freedoms that you take for granted. Each country that has succumbed to it couldn’t fathom that it could happen to them. The riots of January 6th should have been an obvious wake-up call that a certain faction of our citizenry was willing to upend the entire political process.
Joe Biden stepped aside because it was the best thing to do to further his political ideology. Who among us could imagine Mr. Orange swallowing his ego to further his political party’s goals? A party is not one person and a single party is not a government. We require competing and conflicting interests to maintain balance.
As damaged and erratic as the process sometimes is, you need to stop and realize that the entire system was constructed with checks and balances to prevent the subversion of the goal of collective politics.
Mr. Orange co-opted religion, a party, and populism.
We’d be wise to be done with him so that the Republican party of old might regain its stability and reason.
X
.
P.S. Parenthetically Speaking 