Information icon.svg

Campaigning for the RationalMedia Foundation 2021 board of trustees election is underway!

Essay:Attacking Trump from the right

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Essay.svg This essay is an original work by Summa Atheologica.
It does not necessarily reflect the views expressed in RationalWiki's Mission Statement, but we welcome discussion of a broad range of ideas.
Unless otherwise stated, this is original content, released under CC-BY-SA 3.0 or any later version. See RationalWiki:Copyrights.
Feel free to make comments on the talk page, which will probably be far more interesting, and might reflect a broader range of RationalWiki editors' thoughts.


President Trump has been much maligned, mostly for perfectly legitimate reasons. However, there are some ways it seems to go too far. One of the most dangerous and misguided lines of attack is that the President is a "fascist", Neo-Nazi, or something along those lines. Not only is this a blatant case of "crying wolf", but it is also wrong. To show why, I have decided to attempt to put myself into the shoes of a Nazi intellectual [note 1] and attempt to figure out what their position on the current President would be.[note 2] I then did research on their positions and came up with their likely commentary on what political strategy would be most useful to them. I have penned a screed below from their point of view, detailing their likely positions, as well as their logic behind said positions.

Main Body[edit]

We should truly hope Trump is a good president, but we need to take urgent steps to hedge against the possibility he might not be. What we need to realize is that the MSM articles linking Trump to us are not an attempt to damage Trump by linking him to us. They are an attempt to discredit us by linking us to him, a man who is unpopular and whole policies will likely be disastrous. They want to take us down with him. To prevent this from working, we should therefore lessen our support for Trump and cut ties with him. Continued linkage also risks non-disgruntled supporters of his flooding our movement with their ranks and effectively neutralizing it as an organ of opposition. Trump's policies include extreme military aggressiveness, strong support for Israel, and support for fatal deficit spending, ideas which are antithecal to the movement. If Democrats win the White House in 2020, we can maneuver to make up significant opposition and boost our ranks while remaining ideologically pure. We may even be able to launch a Tea Party-style takeover of the GOP. If, more likely, Trump wins reelection, we can probably count on a 2008-style financial crisis and large recession before 2024. If we were still to be chained to him, this crisis would bring us down with him, as the leftists shout with glee that we are corporatist stooges, not anti-establishment activists. Worse, they would be right.

Assuming Trump somehow stays popular, disassociating from him will have minor ill effects. We can always get closer to him. At worst, him being popular will set us back to where we were in 2014. Trump is a deeply flawed and dangerous person, not a man to treat as a savior. He has been married three times, always abandoning his wife for a younger woman. He has the exact morals Jewish propaganda says a man in his position should have. The average brown person has better morals and less baggage, and would be far less lethal to us to associate with. He has fast-tracked the citizenship process of his two foreign wives, dodged taxes, refused to pay his workers, and generally shown his elitism and disregard and disdain for the common man.

Fascism is the revenge of the oppressed common folk against their (((globalist elite))) oppressors. By adopting our language and rhetoric, Trump seeks to make us obsolete. His election was a mockery of the people -a successful attempt to redirect their anger into a result that ruffled no feathers. He has betrayed us at every conceivable opportunity. DACA lives. The war in Syria goes on. Military spending is up. Sanctions on Russia have been tightened.

Yet there are still those who think he is for us and will lead us to victory. They are deluded. These people believe this because they want to believe it, with devastating results. Trumpism is just another Jewish lie, yet it has convinced many (perhaps former, in light of its positions) members of the true opposition. It was a lie of (((theirs))) that succeeded where so many others had failed. We need to convince those deluded alt-right members of the truth. Without it, they are lost.

Trump, by making our promises, then breaking them, discredits us. We are being made to look untrustworthy and must punish him for damaging us.

Last, but not least, we need ideological independence. Our cause is righteous, and we have a lot of thinking to do. No thug, no loud-mouthed bully who spits out garbage to get brainwashed voters to vote for him, accidentally (or probably not, which is even worse) agreeing with us some of the time, is fit to be our leader. We should be a movement of intellectuals, one that thinks for itself, otherwise we will be corrupted. We deserve better than to become the GOP's minions, shouting "LIBTARD" on internet forums, fighting one false ideology in the name of another. For both moral and amoral purposes, we must reject Trump.

I rest my case.


It is unlikely that the radical racist right will actually realize that the above essay makes generally correct points. Judging by recent events, they seem in thrall to him, and this is unlikely to change. In fact, as the essay pointed out, the next financial crisis will help to persuade the voters of their lack of useful ideas.

However, there is always the possibility, however small, that they will adopt the techniques proposed in it. Due to this, preemptive action must be taken. The fact is that a financial crisis is likely coming, [1] and action must be taken to guard against it.


  1. Assuming such a nebulous entity actually exists. The jury is still out on this question.
  2. Assuming said Nazi intellectual was capable of thinking rationally, another controversial proposition.