“Look at this little girl over here, everyone. Look at her.”
“Your voice Is meaningless.”
These were just a few of the comments made from the podium at a GOP town hall in Idaho. The comments were directed at a female protestor who was subsequently dragged out of the room by unidentified men, ostensibly enabled by the local sheriff, who encouraged their aggression.
The incident was alarming, but not particularly surprising. Since Trump’s 2016 campaign, bullying has been in vogue and free speech is endangered.
The most salient variable in the 2024 election was the aggressive reassertion of white male rights. The gender divide in the electorate was gaping. Trump’s victory was a result of many factors, but the overwhelming endorsement from white men stands at the top. White men in every age group preferred Trump and it had nothing to do with the price of eggs or some nuanced dimension of foreign policy.
When the history of this era is written, a primary theme will be the perceived assault on white male authority and the resulting backlash. It will be noted that white male authority was only slightly dented, never rejected. In every measurable way, white male dominance has persisted throughout my lifetime.
The “little” white men in Idaho are just like the “little” white men in every corner of our failing and flailing nation. Trump and his DOGE-y pal Elon are “little”white men. The simpering sycophants in the GOP Congressional caucus are “little” white men.
For years I’ve argued that the post-Obama years have been a long-simmering eruption of resentment over gay rights, women’s rights and civil rights. Because there were constitutional, rational and human rights justifications for social progress, the resentments were often subterranean, playing out more in passive-aggressive behavior. One wouldn’t have to visit many bars and sporting events to know that social change was far from universally embraced.
Most white men were restrained by polite society or at least modestly chastised by the women in their lives. But that changed dramatically with Trump’s ascension. The simmering resentments boiled over.
The possible/probable shredding of human rights in the United States is saturated in deep irony. The white men who reassert their social hegemony with apparent glee seem to believe that they can unwind the hard-won rights of “the other” with no impact on their own. That is wishful thinking. Fascism may ride in on a white horse of restoring a more advantageous social order, but fascism is ultimately only beneficial to the fascists. As has been true of authoritarian, fascist regimes for all time, the common folks are attracted to a bright populist flame that soon enough scalds them too.
In the case of Trump, his disdain for his own supporters is plain. He was and is a pathetic social climber. He is reliably stupid, but instinctively craven. He knew there was a deep reservoir of white male resentment and tapped into that to power his narcissistic and insatiable ambitions.
The angry “little” white men, like those in Idaho, think Trump “gets” them — is like them. On the contrary, Trump has spent his whole life trying desperately to not be like them. He knows, at some subconscious level, that without his father’s money he might still be a second-rate hustler in Queens. It’s why he sits on golden toilets, builds monuments to himself, and thinks he should be on Mt. Rushmore.
Many folks who analyze politics cite the impact of so-called “woke ideology.” Liberal pundits argue that the Democratic emphasis on things like Critical Race Theory (CRT), DEI, trans-rights and immigrant rights caused the loss of political power. As a habitual reader of comments appended to New York Times pieces, I observe a majority of allegedly progressive readers who parrot the same conventional wisdom. If only we weren’t so damn sensitive to other’s rights!
But consider the glaringly obvious . . .
The opposite of CRT is a worldview where race plays only a modest role. The opposite of diversity is homogeneity. The opposite of equity is inequity. The opposite of inclusion is exclusion. It’s easy math. The sum of homogeneity, inequity and exclusion is white male dominance.
Polls will never capture the full impact of white male insecurity. “Little” men in Idaho or elsewhere will never admit to it — or have insufficient self-awareness to see it.
They’ll come up with any number of other reasons to explain away their support of the monster who will eventually devour them too.
This post was originally published on here
