Ramaswamy vs Haley; Bannon and Musk?

The Republican Party should celebrate the dawn of a new golden age following the inauguration of US President-elect Donald Trump next week. Make America Great Again (MAGA) Party will now control both the White House and Congress. It will even dominate the Supreme Court. In this case, it seems strange that a multi-level civil war has already erupted in the party’s ranks.

In December, an acrobat occurred last December involving two Republicans of Indian descent, both former major presidential candidates. Experienced veteran Nikki Haley drew on weapons to challenge young upstart, Vivek Ramaswamy, to express a clear heretical view of American society. Recently, the Second Front of the Republican Civil War opened between Trump’s 2016 evil genius Steve Bannon and his latest (and richest) Rasputin Elon Musk.

Current UN Ambassador Nikki Haley slams Ramaswamy for daring to doubt the sacred quality of American culture, when the initial skirmish broke out when he sought a sociological explanation for the cowboy drawings of American-born engineers. The disagreement between Haley and Viraswamy, like the war Bannon launched against Musk, reversed the policy on the H-1B visa. This is clearly a sensitive topic for any party member, thriving by demonizing immigrants to the roots of all evil.

Viraswamy defended a visa policy that just proved particularly favorable to Indian engineers. For the first generation of Americans, the culprit was not a person or a party. That’s American culture. He illustrates a specific example: “A culture that celebrates the dance queen at the Olympic Mathematics, or Jock in a speech, doesn’t produce the best engineers.” For Haley Vivek, this is creating American exceptionalism.

Haley answered on X: “There is nothing wrong with American workers or American culture.” If you’re looking for something “wrong”, it’s the response she literally makes. “All you do is look at the border and see how much you want us to have. We should invest and prioritize among Americans, not foreign workers.”

Today’s Weekly Devil’s Dictionary definition:

American Culture:

The climax of human history is a completely adjusted system of social, economic and political customs, believed to be commanded by the power of God and mediated by a generation of outstanding political thinkers (the founder of the country) with the aim of providing a blueprint for mankind for all successful future human societies.

Context Comments

Hailey believes that other people “want what we have” is the most convincing reason because the United States doesn’t let them have anything. It is necessary to believe and publicly state that American culture is critical. If Americans fail to affirm this basic truth, they have the right to doubt their constitutionally established rights to regulate affairs in other parts of the world. If you can see Americans doubting this basic truth, consider all those who “want what we have” may also start to doubt.

As a Republican, Ramaswamy is an outlier here. The entire party has always accepted Hayley’s logic, or an irrefutable religious belief in American institutions and American culture. When protesters opposed the questioning of the Vietnam War, Republicans unanimously shouted, “Love or leave it.” In their worldview, criticism is a sign of betrayal of social contracts, requiring everyone to believe in their integrity even if they make blatant mistakes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odxopym4v6e

Vivek’s criticism is particularly surprising given his passionate recognition and loyalty to Trump, thanks to a culture that focuses on celebrity worship. Trump was elected president twice not because of his intellectual skills or political acumen, but because of two things: his wealth and celebrity. After all, his iconic long-term reality show is titled “Celebrity Apprentice.”

What is even more confusing is Bannon’s declaration of war against Musk. This may have something to do with the fact that Musk has recently manipulated himself to be a Republican in the right-wing magazine. In the past, he allowed most people to think that he was more likely to be consistent with Democrats’ values. Bannon might be upset about his becoming Margarino: the Marg Republican with only the name.

Even more confusing is that Bannon insists on branding Musk as a “racist” and a “real evil guy.” His characteristics may be correct, but does Bannon have a certificate of anti-racism? This isn’t someone who once offered the following advice to the right-wing French businessmen: “Let them call you a racist… wear it as a badge of honor?”

History

Ramaswamy could have been more thorough in his criticism of our culture. The fascination with wealth and celebrities is so deeply embedded in the psychology of ordinary Americans that generations of social critics have emphasized the inconsistencies it creates and the dangers it represents.

In the 1962 book Image: American Pseudo Event GuideDaniel Boorstin explains how strengths in the “pseudo-event” media distort public perceptions of topics in news and politician roles. Boorstin expects nearly two decades to be Jean Baudrillard’s surreal theory Images and simulations (1981). He also helps define celebrities as “people who are famous for their famous people.” When Boorstin wrote the book, the media turned John Kennedy’s White House into a studio for celebrity politics. By the time Baudrillard’s contribution, the United States elected the first president, whose image was elaborate and essentially apolitical Hollywood celebrity: Ronald Reagan. Kennedy is a professional politician. Reagan is the charming actor in the B movie.

Richard Schickel in 1985 Intimate Strangers: Celebrity Culture Focus on the role the media plays in shaping public perceptions of fame by effectively commoditizing artists and politicians. He accused media, including the news media, of elevating specific politicians to celebrity status. Although these ideas seemed surprising 40 years ago, today’s politicians, including Ramaswami himself, have increasingly cultivated celebrity status and are clearly attributed to their success. Trump is hardly unique, just more than anyone else’s life-long talent and no doubt about it.

Recently, authors such as Murray Milner Jr. (Celebrity Culture as a Status System2005) and Karen Sternheimer (Celebrity Culture and the American Dream: Celebrity and Social Mobility2011) analyzes multiple aspects of the increasingly common celebrity culture that effectively manages to transform campaigns into once the characteristics of political debates on practical issues into media-managed, politely popular contests between characters whose discourses of characters are oversimplified in any available political, social and economic issues chosen by the media to amplify through the media. Oversimplification puts those politicians in a serious dilemma, because once elected, they all try to act in their own unrealistic ways, so that any action they take seems to be a parody of the honestly proposed political solution. Whether it is a wall or a war, the same logic applies.

Trump’s “building the wall” remains a prototype example of this puzzle, although we have seen several “swing dog” wars that fit the model. Of course, it was Trump’s wall that, on the one hand, caused and caused a dark shadow to the debate between Ramaswami and Hayley, on the other hand, Musk and Bannon.

In short, celebrity culture and admiration for wealth eliminated the seriousness of what was once an American political debate. The result is comics and miserable at the same time. It makes the two parties incoherent. Can parties that once identified themselves as working-class friends maintain their traditional constituencies as their director elites identify and brotherly billionaires and Hollywood stars? Similarly, Republicans have had to give up their identification with traditional conservative values ​​to rallied behind personality, characters that are not only charismatic celebrities but also positive challengers to existing laws, customs and morals.

Now, the Republican traditional Wall Street Wealth, trying to avoid the focus of attention and focus on controlled economic and financial performance, is also complemented by Silicon Valley’s exaggerated greed and brave and faithful moral relativism. Can any leader now or in the future reconcile these relative trends from all parties that undermine their traditional cultural foundations?

Is anyone able to carry it?

* (In the time of Oscar Wilde and Mark Twain, journalist Ambrose Bierce produced a series of ironic definitions, ironic definitions of common terms, illuminating their hidden meaning in real discourse. Bierce eventually collected and published it as a book and used it as a book, and he mastered his depliment in 1911, and in the continuous effort, his title was ongoing, his title was shame, and his title was ongoing effort. Fair Observer Devil Dictionary)

((Lee Thompson-Kolar Edited this. )

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of fair observers.