The Trump Presidency: A Teachable Moment for Handling Criticism

Is it not the case that instead of persistently bashing everything Donald Trump does and says, we should use his presidency as a teachable moment for discussing how to handle interactions with individuals and groups we don’t personally like?

If the crux of the issue lies in 'disliking' him, then your point may hold. However, the problem arises when we allow his actions to go unchecked, and in the process, we teach others that actions like hateful speech, violations of the Constitution, and theft, among other offenses, are acceptable and that individuals are above the law. It is a paradox that serves to undermine democratic values and legal principles.

The Resistance and the Teachable Moment

Indeed, the election of Trump created a teachable moment to confront and deal with those who don't share your political ideology. The election was driven by the desire to save America from liberalism. This instigated a fierce opposition from the Left, whereby the Left could not object on moral grounds because they themselves have propagated moral relativism over decades.

The Left has long espoused the idea that there is no inherent right or wrong, merely different nuances of understanding. This has infiltrated various aspects of society, including education and media. Yet, when it comes to those who love America, such as Trump, the Left accuses and criticizes without moral reservation.

Now, it is the Right's turn to utilize their right to silence opposing views. If you don't like what Trump says, you don't have to listen to it. This concept of choosing to listen or not to listen based on preference is a fundamental aspect of a free society, as long as it is done in a factual and rational manner.

Republican Party and Objectivity

The issue at hand is not solely about individuals but also about the Republican Party and its approach to handling factual information. The GOP has, intentionally or unintentionally, done its best to distance its base from various institutions that are vital in providing objectivity and facts:

MSM (Mainstream Media): These institutions are often vilified by the Right for not sharing their bias. Academia: Similarly, academic institutions are now seen as unreliable because they do not share the same biases as the Right. Science: Scientific institutions and findings are often mistrusted by the Right. Courts and Law Enforcement: These institutions are also viewed with suspicion by the Right. Intelligence Agencies: These entities are seen as unreliable or biased against the Right.

The problem with this approach is that it fosters an age of wishful thinking, driven by the least informed segment of the American population and the rise of a reality TV presidency. This narrative leads to a breakdown in trust in institutions that require a shared understanding of facts and reality.

Conclusion

Donald Trump's presidency presents a valuable opportunity to deal with and address criticism in a mature, fact-based manner. It is essential to maintain a balance between discussing differences and engaging in respectful dialogue. By doing so, we can foster a more informed and cohesive society that respects the rule of law and the value of institutional facts.

In essence, the Trump presidency is more than just a political conflict; it is a teachable moment for teaching critical thinking, fact-checking, and the handling of criticism in a pluralistic society.