Aren't Americans concerned by the loss of trust? (No visible reaction from the public?)

[viking8x6]

Inasmuch as no one has been banned for any post in this topic, nor in fact even given an infraction, you may be barking up the wrong tree.

I'm happy to cite my sources, and in fact I did so in a private message with the member whose content I had called out.

I agree that you have a point about transparency, and I'll be happy to try and make my reasoning clearer. But this is a private web forum and yes, the rules can not only seem, but be, arbitrary and even biased. We moderators are volunteers and we don't write the rules, we just apply them. 

[nanana]

Arbitrary rules are super hot 🙂

[viking8x6]

"insert tab A into slot B, repeat as needed"

--from an actual BBRT profile

[Westhamsmoker]

I have friends in California and have visited the US several times. I am also lucky that I have been able to travel a lot one of the advantages of living in the UK its easy to get to travel to most places in the World. I have been to many places in Europe and have also been to the Far East, and Africa in fact going to South Africa again in November.

I am not surprised that most Americans do not have a passport though may be surprised that Trump does as he seems ta have no idea about the World outside of the US and seems to rewrite history to suit himself. I think he says what a lot of American folk think.

My experience of US folk ( of course not everyone ) is that in the main they are super friendly and generous but have little knowledge outside of the US and I have had great debates with my friends in Cali. They previously voted for Biden but voted for Trump last time because of the economy and immigration they live not so far from the border and pointed out to me the last time I was there the white buses bringing in the Mexicans etc who had come through the border and were sick of it.

They told me that they never listen the media as they said it is too biased so unlike us Europeans never listen to the news. When I asked them where they got their news from they said podcasters which astounded me surely thats one persons view ? They are certainly not dim wits as they run a very successful business and have done well for themselves.

Trump seems to be totally focused on improving the US economy ( whether he is getting it right is yet to be seen ) you cant blame him on that.

In the past we have always looked upon the US as being the " protector " but he does not want that.

The simple fact is that from every sound bite I hear where ever I am there is now an anti American feeling. One American told me on returning from a trip abroad  that for the first time in his life he felt ashamed to be an American which I found sad.

There has been a shift outside of the US from the US and its something the US will not recover from. There is no longer a trust in the US. How Trump handled Zelensky was frankly disgusting and again it is something the US will find difficult to overcome.

The US has lost its position in the World , indeed the way the dollar is going it may lose its safe haven tag.

In Europe we do not see China as the big bogey man and countries are seeking to do trade deals with them. Not so long ago historically China was an ally.

Trump has caused a huge amount of damage to the image of the US and the question is will it ever recover from it.

[tallslenderguy]

"Map and List of Nationwide Anti-Trump Protests on April 19"

[think before following links] https://www.newsweek.com/anti-trump-protests-us-map-list-2061036

 

It seems to me that the world is (very roughly) divided into two camps, often reflected in their leaders, but not always.  A lot of individuals feel (and are) pretty powerless against their governments, but it does not mean they agree with them. i'm writing this from Mexico... i wanted to spend my vacation money here. i voted against trump in every way i could. 

What i have been wondering about it what is behind those who voted for trump?  i don't solely blame stupidity or evil. i think there are stupid and evil people on both sides of the coin.  i've never fully trusted my government, no matter who is in power. What sort of works is a system of checks and balances that makes it difficult for one side to have complete control.

 i think a lot of people voted for trump emotionally, not rationally. His core voter base is an arm of religion that bases decisions on trust.  Many of these people are waiting for the return of a god, and have been waiting for 2000 years.  These people have centuries of practice rejecting what is in front of them in favor of their trust in belief.  To me, i see a similar energy and attitude in those who continue to support trump with emotional trust. They watch their 401K's dwindle, and they doubt their self and trust trump. Trump said he'd end the war in Ukraine in one day.... yet they still trust him. The list goes on and on, but it doesn't matter. There is a certain type of person (on both sides of the spectrum) who makes decisions based on emotional trust... and there seem to be a lot of people in power right now who are exploiting that trust.

i don't think there is anything intrinsically wrong with trust, but i do think it can be exploited and violated and i think many who depend to much on trust end up being exploited. i am still hoping that our system is enough to put a halt and eventually reverse some of what is going on. Mostly i want to see president who is restricted by boundaries, right or wrong, i do not think one person should ever have the kind of power trump is taking... i do not trust anyone with that kind of power.

 

[tallslenderguy]

Some more thoughts.

my story is all over BZ. i came out of a fundamentalist religious culture that had me tied in knots half my life. Ironically, being gay saved me from "God."  i put "God" in quotes because i am not asserting that there is, or is not, a "God,"  what i am wanting to convey is that anyones ideas and notions of "God" are influenced by human thought and emotion, and therefore subject to error.  

What i learned in processing out of my conditioned fundamentalist approach to life is what i believe to be an essential factor that leads people, or gets them to agree with or  support people like Trump.  i label it "fundamentalist."  Not the only label, and others may work better, but it's a familiar one to me because i came out of "Fundamentalist Christianity."  There was a time when "fundamentalist" was generally thought of as just a "Christian" thing, dictionaries would apply it to Christianity. The further i got in my processing away from fundamentalism, the more i realized that one can probably be a "fundamentalist" anything.  

The central issue i see with a fundamentalist approach is the notion of absolute knowledge and correctness that i believe is at the root of people gravitating towards or choosing fundamentalism.  Something that stands out to me about those who espouse a fundamentalist approach to life is, they cannot  be wrong about certain things that, apparently, give them a sense of security of 'rightness.'   To me, an over arching attribute of a fundamentalist person is they cannot be engaged in true discussion or debate. What that means to me is, they don't just believe they are "right," they "know" they are right.  When a person enters a discussion 'knowing' they are right, they do not look or listen with a goal towards seeing or hearing discovering what actually is, but instead have a goal of asserting their rightness.  Because they already 'know the truth.'  

i do think some who support people like Trump, or Putin or Xi Jinping or Kim Jon Un or ___________, do so because they trust in these peoples assertions of knowing or rightness. It appeals to their  emotional sense of security vs following someone who admits they are flawed and can be wrong.  But i do not think this is something that can be attributed to an entire population, or even a majority, in any country. i think that is way too simplistic.   

 

[PozBearWI]

Thanks @tallslenderguy.  I appreciate your thoughtful post.

How was your vacation in Mexico?  Were you able to at least temporarily avoid the noise from donnie for awhile?  

The rhetoric from him is divisive.  Donnie acts as the classic schoolyard bully.  As always with bullies, there are classmates who are "on their side" (at least for awhile) and those who perhaps have been bullied by him before, and actually learned what they needed to do going forward from that experience.  At his core though, his method has been to obfuscate facts.  If I can get others to believe in my "facts" which might be observably incorrect; he gets a member of his club (as it were).  Donnie opened his first full day in office in 2016 with a bald faced lie, in calling it the largest inauguration ever.  And perhaps, honestly I don't have the numbers to back it up and honestly, I don't care to compare success of an inauguration by what it cost; but rather by things like "what he said" and "crowd participation".  And in our modern world, how do we know how many people actually viewed it.  Does it matter if it was playing on an unwatched TV? (assuming network can track which channel has most endpoints tuned in moment to moment)?  There are thousands of public places with TVs playing things like the presidential inauguration in public places everywhere.  That doesn't mean people are actually watching it.  So I find it difficult to believe that viewership is a legitimate metric.  There are people who are attracted to donnies personality.  I find his personality repulsive.  He isn't the only human I've known like that.  

It is of course our society at large who votes.  So voting results are a blend of emotion and reason.  Political advertising has leaned hard into emotion.  One is to be pissed off at someone at the end of them; and they measure success by the number of calls made to the "call senator XYZ and tell him what a mutherfucker he is"...  With a number to call.  A whole lot of people conflate what the person says to what the party says; failing to observe any dichotomy.  They go after their winning team.  Some voters actually listen to the people they might vote for to hear directly from them what their platform is.  And votes might better be a metric of media success now than reasoned decisions.  This suggests some systemic changes we might make as a society on how we collectively come to beneficial decisions.  

Unfortunately, all of us can better understand today the difference between what donnie said when campaigning and what donnie is saying, and doing now.  Some will still blindly align with anything he says and never connect that to why shit costs more everywhere, and wonder where cousin ABC has gone to.  

 

[tallslenderguy]

1 hour ago, PozBearWI said:

Thanks @tallslenderguy.  I appreciate your thoughtful post.

How was your vacation in Mexico?  Were you able to at least temporarily avoid the noise from donnie for awhile?  

The rhetoric from him is divisive.  Donnie acts as the classic schoolyard bully.  As always with bullies, there are classmates who are "on their side" (at least for awhile) and those who perhaps have been bullied by him before, and actually learned what they needed to do going forward from that experience.  At his core though, his method has been to obfuscate facts.  If I can get others to believe in my "facts" which might be observably incorrect; he gets a member of his club (as it were).  Donnie opened his first full day in office in 2016 with a bald faced lie, in calling it the largest inauguration ever.  And perhaps, honestly I don't have the numbers to back it up and honestly, I don't care to compare success of an inauguration by what it cost; but rather by things like "what he said" and "crowd participation".  And in our modern world, how do we know how many people actually viewed it.  Does it matter if it was playing on an unwatched TV? (assuming network can track which channel has most endpoints tuned in moment to moment)?  There are thousands of public places with TVs playing things like the presidential inauguration in public places everywhere.  That doesn't mean people are actually watching it.  So I find it difficult to believe that viewership is a legitimate metric.  There are people who are attracted to donnies personality.  I find his personality repulsive.  He isn't the only human I've known like that.  

It is of course our society at large who votes.  So voting results are a blend of emotion and reason.  Political advertising has leaned hard into emotion.  One is to be pissed off at someone at the end of them; and they measure success by the number of calls made to the "call senator XYZ and tell him what a mutherfucker he is"...  With a number to call.  A whole lot of people conflate what the person says to what the party says; failing to observe any dichotomy.  They go after their winning team.  Some voters actually listen to the people they might vote for to hear directly from them what their platform is.  And votes might better be a metric of media success now than reasoned decisions.  This suggests some systemic changes we might make as a society on how we collectively come to beneficial decisions.  

Unfortunately, all of us can better understand today the difference between what donnie said when campaigning and what donnie is saying, and doing now.  Some will still blindly align with anything he says and never connect that to why shit costs more everywhere, and wonder where cousin ABC has gone to.  

 

Thank you too @PozBearWI.  i think you are a wonderful part of the BZ community and i am grateful for you being here and contributing.

i'm actually still in Mexico, staying at a gay resort. Lots of partying going on, but i'm not a party sort, more of a wanna sit around and discuss type... and of course, have sex. 🙂

Been walking around, a lot, feasting on street food (it's incredible).  i love the Mexican culture and wonder why anyone would leave here to go to the US. i know, there are reasons, many economic, but i'm tempted to move to Mexico.  i find it encouraging that Mexico elected Claudia Sheinbaum, a woman and a Jewish person.  i find the vibe here to be  progressive and accepting. i'm also struck by the general humility i encounter in this culture. To me, it is a strength and i believe the US benefits from immigration of Mexican people into our culture in so many ways... i think it should be encouraged, not discouraged. 

i appreciate and agree with your assessment of trump as a "classic schoolyard bully."  He doesn't lead, he coerces and uses fear and intimidation.  It was part of what i was trying to convey in another thread where i suggested some respond to trump as a 'dom.'  Some perceive/equate bullying with "dom" (i think it's opposite of Dom).  i think there are a lot of bullies in power in the world right now, i listed a few in my other post, and i think trump is part of the group.  

i think Germany is a good example of a society that healed and recovered from a bully  dictator, i hope our country can do the same. 

[tallslenderguy]

On 4/16/2025 at 5:44 PM, SomewhereonNeptune said:

 

So I don't know if everyone saw the outcomes published on these "major crowds", but quite a few bloggers pointed out some oddities. One, they were all reading from the same script. Literally, Written down word-for-word talking points. Second, many of them are paid protestors and they've been to a variety of these protests for various reasons. Same people, different city every day. Do they actually know or believe in what they're protesting, or are they protesting as long as the cash is flowing? Third, when you ask many of them what they're protesting, a lot are just angry but can't explain the anger or articulate it well. I watched the protestors by my local Tesla dealer. A couple anti-Musk or anti-Tesla signs, and then a lot of other signs. I was really waiting for someone to hold up "Pay toilets are fascist" because it lacked a cohesive message. Gonna protest? Super. Just make sure people come away with a resonant message while they drive by at 55 mph. 

 

Would you please cite your sources of "published outcomes," and explain how and why you deem them reliable? 

i'd like to know who is paying these "paid protestors" and what constitutes "many?"  i'm guessing it wasn't Elon Musk handing out million dollar checks in this case lol. 

p.s., none of this is intended as snark, i really do want to know this information. 

[tallslenderguy]

On 4/15/2025 at 3:54 PM, TT2025 said:

As the title implies, I'm not quite sure if US citizens are concerned how the perception of their country is changing.

When i read your topic title originally, i thought it was too general and simplistic. There are numerous world wide examples of long term heads of state being in power, who do not represent the attitudes or wishes of all the people, or even the majority of, those who live in the country where they wield power.

On 4/16/2025 at 12:02 PM, SomewhereonNeptune said:

Because, well, we ARE warm wonderful people for the most part. 😃 This is why I don't often wade into this sub-forum, but I wanted to give y'all some perspective, because most people can and do want to have civil dialogue and not have political division.

Consider that the majority of voting Americans had reasons to vote for a change as they weren't aligned with the Biden administration's direction. For 4 years, a lot of us were gaslighted about 'what was right' and 'what was wrong', told we were 'racist' for not buying into the narratives we were being fed by the media. The media out and out lied about the mental state of Biden, which has now come out in various books written by people who have worked with him directly, and people saw it fall to pieces during the Presidential debate. Simply, the emperor had no clothes and there wasn't anything to hide or explain away. And parents at school board meetings who are concerned about their kids did not deserve to be branded as 'domestic terrorists'.
 

i work in a fairly rural teaching hospital in a college town in Oregon. The population is about 70k, but half of that is college students.  i'm a critical care nurse and my guess is a good half of the people i work with voted for Trump, the other half against, yet i'd trust every one of them with my life.  

Now for the nuance. i'm sorta out as gay at the hospital where i work,  but don't wear a rainbow flag. i've had more than a few women i work with express interest, only to have to inform them that i'm gay (i guess it doesn't show?).  i've told several people i work with that i'm gay, just came up for one reason or another over a 10 year work history, but i know that there are those i work with who think gay is a disease to be healed. i would not love having one of those people caring for me, but i would still trust them to care for me in a conflicted way for them.  

i think there are "warm and wonderful people" in every country, that just as we cannot judge a book by its cover, we cannot completely understand or judge a countries people by its 'representatives'.  i do not think  that anyone anywhere in the world is completely represented by their government.  i doubt that even half of those who voted for trump support him 100%. While i voted for Harris, the democrat party is far from representing me 100%.  i think that is true about most people in most countries. 

[nanana]

6 hours ago, tallslenderguy said:

The central issue i see with a fundamentalist approach is the notion of absolute knowledge and correctness that i believe is at the root of people gravitating towards or choosing fundamentalism.  Something that stands out to me about those who espouse a fundamentalist approach to life is, they cannot  be wrong about certain things that, apparently, give them a sense of security of 'rightness.'   To me, an over arching attribute of a fundamentalist person is they cannot be engaged in true discussion or debate. What that means to me is, they don't just believe they are "right," they "know" they are right.  When a person enters a discussion 'knowing' they are right, they do not look or listen with a goal towards seeing or hearing discovering what actually is, but instead have a goal of asserting their rightness.  Because they already 'know the truth.'  

Hi Tallslenderguy, 

As I  hope you know, I  appreciate you and your way of thinking.  Though we are currently likely to have different views, I do not wish to debate your views, as in my mental model, it is probably best for the planet that we have people with very different views who are capable of jumping in and saving the day from the last set of leaders with incomplete insights.  

While you raise an important distinction, I  am concerned about this line of reasoning though because it posits that there are only TWO types of people who should gravitate into CAMPS instead of promiscuously shifting alliances depending upon the issue.  This quality of being righteous that you distinguish in "fundamentalists" is a quality I have found on both the right and the left.  There is another critical distinction in this space: I may be a "fundamentalist" about the way I live but not believe it is my role to impose my views and ways of being on others.  (My sister is somewhat like this, her heart is loving, her conversations are very comfortable, AND for her the only way is the way of Jesus.)  Similarly, I  have found that "open-mindedness" sometimes manifests as lazy-mindedness when it comes to getting any deep insights about the pain points of different tribes we are doomed (or blessed) to coexist with.  

I run into both open-minded and close-minded people  on both the right and the left and share your preference for open-mindedness, though I have come to have a respect for people who hold fast to principles, and I see that it gives them some strengths as well as some weaknesses.  This may be a major simplification, but I personally have a hard time understanding why sodomites and fundamentalists cannot coexist if they are capable of minimizing aggression and respecting each other's spaces.  In reality it is way too messy since most of us are in multiple, sometimes contradictory tribes.

In your example, which may just be a case of having to be efficient with words, you seem to be implying that it is sufficient to classify Trump voters as "fundamentalists" and non-Trump voters as "non-fundamentalist."  I  bet that I  am missing a nuance in what you write, as this would seem to give away all the power you have to convince Trump voters to vote differently next time.  (Since we chatted offline before I  posted this, I    am aware that you liked the distinctions I was adding and agreed that it's okay to think you're right as long as you bring some level of humility to your rightness and some level of peaceful shared space for others to ALSO be right, but please correct me if I    mangled your meaning.) 

Thanks for raising this most interesting topic. 

Best to you and to all on the site!

[hntnhole]

On 4/16/2025 at 1:23 PM, jd13 said:

Trump is America

First, thanks for sharing your well-considered thoughts.  Sadly, they're mostly true.  

However, he is definitely not America.  He has, however, given voice to a certain subset of Americans that feel - for some unimaginable reason - they they are "deserving' when others are not.  They blame "immigrants", they lay the blame for their lack of achievement at all kinds of places that have zero to do with their life-choices.  They blame religious folks, irreligious folks, they blame any/everyone they can point at, with the assumption that it couldn't possibly be themselves.  Mr. Trump has fanned these resentments into a prairie fire, and it may consume us - it may not.  History is replete with con-artists pointing the finger of blame at "the other", and Mr. T. is only the latest,  fanning the flames of discontent.  I'm not sure what kind of media-coverage you receive in the UK, but here, there are two separate camps - the Maga camp and the Progressive camp, and the Magaroids are slipping down the scale of serious consideration fairly quickly.  I suppose that's the reason Mr. T has been forcing his policies (along with Musk) down Americans throats at such a fast and furious pace.  He knows perfectly well his days of action are numbered.  

There are still millions of Americans of good will, fair mindedness, generosity and kindness, despite the President's constant blaring, stirring the numerous pots, on and on.  

The "America" you remember is still here, we're doing everything within the law to resist, there are 100K+ demonstrations daily, all over the country,  protesting the policies of the President.  Understand that there's an undercurrent of dissatisfaction within a substantial number of Americans, now relatively voiceless, that detest what's happening to our country. 

Again, thanks for sharing your thoughts.   

[TT2025]

I admit, the kickoff was quite simplistic, but of course, I can elaborate: 

In past decades the US created and wielded what many call 'soft power' so it could nudge other states in certain directions, encourage/discourage some actions simply by asking nicely (or maybe not so nicely), nevertheless just by asking. And I'm pretty sure many things happened only after careful deliberation of 'what the Americans will think od it'. It was made easier for the governments of 'affected' countries the high approval rating of the US by general population. Poland for example had approval rating of USA above 90% (Poles, probably thought more highly of USA than its own citizens...). But actual establishment is deliberately ruining all that, so less 'soft power'.

I would think, given the chance, everybody would rather live in a country, which is loved and respected, than hated and mocked.

I'm sure, US (its actual government) could have much of what it wants by just playing it nicely (tariffs, border security, probably not Canada or Greenland). Its called diplomacy, I think (not an expert).

When I saw Donald's: "...pease, please, we do everything.." speech I was horrified and I would have been even as US citizen (maybe more so). US is now just spitting insults with nothing to gain from it and it starts to have real consequences (eg. consumer boycotts, reevaluating strategic purchases). And there are probably some psychological consequences of being citizen of a country that used to be 'greatest in the world' to 'that odd bunch which wants to annex Canada and believes that Ukraine invaded itself with Russian tanks'.

So my position is that public should be concerned.. It visibly was during Occupy WS in 2011 (but it was about the money.)

I actually promoted it here once, but people still bumping into the subject which is explained in essay TWO CONCEPTS OF LIBERTY, Isaiah Berlin. In short its about difference between freedom from and an sinister version of liberty, which always ends up in totalitarian disaster. It is short and enlightening, promise 🙂

Edited yesterday at 08:57 PM by TT2025

[jd13]

9 minutes ago, hntnhole said:

However, he is definitely not America... There are still millions of Americans of good will, fair mindedness, generosity and kindness, despite the President's constant blaring, stirring the numerous pots, on and on.  The "America" you remember is still here, we're doing everything within the law to resist, there are 100K+ demonstrations daily, all over the country,  protesting the policies of the President.  Understand that there's an undercurrent of dissatisfaction within a substantial number of Americans, now relatively voiceless, that detest what's happening to our country.

Yeah, to be honest I feel a bit bad about saying 'Trump is America'. Really I was reporting more on a British stereotype of a certain type of American characteristic that looms large in the British national consciousness. Of course it is a lot more nuanced than that. For example, it is very clear and obvious to me that Barack Obama is America too - that elevated, soaring eloquence he has... yeah, you don't find that very often anywhere else outside America either...

And you're right about blaming it on 'The Other' being a standard populist playbook thing. And I recognise that a lot of the British media coverage is skewed because you are to us, after all, a foreign country. I'm fairly sure your news coverage of British politics will be similar lacking local nuance.

What really resonates is what you say about those who are resisting. Not really seeing that reported in our news much here, but if you go on social media - wow wow that American resistance is visible everywhere. So yeah, I'm gonna stand that 'Trump is America' comment down, and apologise fully and completely for it. Really I was kinda reporting on a stereotypical British perception, and yeah... should've made that clear. Shouldn;t have been so unfair.

[jd13]

But on the matter of Trump being a Crisis Cult... at least to the evangelicals (and let me say: crisis cult psychology doesn't operate consciously or even unconsciously in the individual: it is a kind of collective hysteria), I found these lines on the Wikipedia page for the John Frum phenomenon of Melanesia. Tell me you don't see the parallels - again, I am talking about the MAGA/Evangelical Die-Hards here, not the average American voter...

"In one analysis of the cult, the figure was first known as John Broom, who was believed by followers to one day return from a distant land to sweep away the White colonials and return riches to the islands. In some versions of the story, a native man named Manehivi, using the alias "John Frum", began appearing among the native people of Tanna dressed in a Western-style coat, assuring the people he would bring them houses, clothes, food, and transport.

"Others contend that John Frum was a spirit vision induced by kava, a plant with mild psychoactive properties. Said to be a manifestation of Keraperamun, this John Frum promised the dawn of a new age in which all White people, including missionaries, would depart the New Hebrides, leaving behind their goods and property for the native Melanesians. For this to happen, however, the people of Tanna had to reject all aspects of European society including money, Western education, Christianity and work on copra plantations, and they had to return to traditional kastom (the Bislama language word for customs).

"In 1941, followers of John Frum rid themselves of their money in a frenzy of spending, left the missionary churches, schools, villages and plantations, and moved inland to participate in traditional feasts, dances and rituals."

See [think before following links] [think before following links] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Frum  for more and for citations of the above. D'you not see the parallels or is it just me??

 

[Edit: yes yes I know I'm totally grinding an axe here, and nobody asked me to riff on this Crisis Cult thing, but... yeah... 🤣🤣🤣 ]

Edited yesterday at 09:05 PM by jd13