Gruesome Visions into the Not-So-Distant Future: Biden's Weekend and CPAC 2021
There, Republicans used "populist" rhetoric— the same rhetoric establishment Dems have failed and even refused to use— that may just sweep across America in spiteful reaction to the out-of-touch Dems.
When the nature of political discussion is fixated on some frantic obsession with a "culture war" or the dangers of the other side, there is no political discussion at all. If the cable news-styled theatrics of arguing about frivolous things that have nothing to do with governing are to continue then policy, both domestic and foreign, ends up falling by well short of what we need. And the growing climate that surrounds it regresses into a ceaseless shouting match where adequate solutions are not discussed or considered, but rather every single qualm, complaint, and conundrum is singled out and given immense attention. And it's a process that's, like much of this world, recurrent.
It's hard to find your way out of those woods. The assumption about politics in this era of the Biden administration was that it would again become boring. Yet all eyes remain on him, Trump hasn't gone anywhere, and I'm looking around, and many of us still don't have much else to do than to watch the political workings unfold. It's like watching cricket or something: if you muster enough patience and focus— or in this case, enough free time in your schedule— you see that the players don't even know what's happening in their game either. Or at least that it looks that way from here. Anyways... I don't watch much cricket anyhow. Who has time for that?
What was I saying? ...Ah yes, the current political climate here in March 2021.
This is the point, 42 days in, where a new administration is supposed to be in the middle of making the most headway by committing to legitimate action backed by the convictions of personal philosophy and the support stemming from campaign promises. But this is no ordinary scenario, and no ordinary administration.
For one, Biden did not run on personal philosophy nor on the interests of the people. Frankly, he didn't have to. He had to run against Trump in a purely reactionary campaign. And whatever you feel about that, one thing is for sure: it's not that simple. It never is. Fundamentally changing things cannot be comprised of making the same right hand turn at every corner because that only takes you in circles.
As has been noted many times, dating back to when he hit the political spotlight, too, Biden is not a politician guided by his own beliefs or any ideological agenda... he's certainly not left, he's only a tad to the right, and he's center insofar as he is, at any time, left up for grabs among the playmakers of both parties... as his running mate said of him on the debate stage back in October, "he's all about relationships."
Here's another quote that won't go away: "Nothing will fundamentally change." Those are Biden's own words to his Wall Street donors in the lead up to to the 2020 election season. Yes, we knew that— the ways of another establishment Democrat president will not result in any meaningful and progressive change... it will not result in material improvement for average people with above average struggles... it will not end the pointless foreign wars... it will not fully commit to counteracting and adapting to the climate crisis. But perhaps he was trying to convey something about the larger implications of our nation's cyclical and very silly political machine... something about it's more subtly twisted essence. By saying nothing will change, it's not just that the elites will hold their power tightly and perhaps with even more zeal, but it's also indicating that a major part of this recurring reality is that as the political machine moves in circles, not very far behind is the senseless mob of voters who haven't noticed they've passed the same tree two-thousand times.
Hell, Biden had a big weekend in the "Nothing will fundamentally change" department.
On Friday, an intelligence report confirmed the Saudi regime's explicit order to have Jamal Khashoggi dismembered in 2018. In the Democratic primary, when asked about the murder of the journalist and whether or not he would take action if elected president, Biden said Saudi Arabia must "pay the price, and [we must] make them in fact the pariah that they are." It struck a nerve at the time, in a good way. It sounded like maybe he was serious about restoring "the soul" of the nation with a moral and ethical approach to foreign policy, but only for a moment.
With the report's release, Biden did the peculiar thing of doing absolutely nothing. No sanctions, no action, no protest of a pariah. The report's conclusion was well known when the murder first took place in 2018, Biden merely declassified it— something the Trump administration refused to do. While declassifying the document allows the world to gain a grasp on the atrocities committed by the Saudi Arabian royal family, Biden made no indication, through actions, condemnations, or otherwise, that other nations, along with the United States, should have second thoughts about working with the Saudi regime. As Khashoggi's fiancée put it in a written statement upon the report's release: "[. . .] It is vital for all world leaders to ask themselves if they are prepared to shake hands with a person whose culpability as a murderer has been proven but not yet punished."
This came just after Biden vaguely announced "ending all American support for offensive operations in the war in Yemen, including relevant arms sales." In addition to that, he vowed that the United States would continue to aid the Saudis in their defense against missile attacks which includes the Iranian-backed Houthis in Yemen. While the announcement appeared to show a morally-guided shift in U.S. policy in the Middle East, the change was not ever considered permanent, nor was it fully fleshed out. The Intercept reported that 41 Democratic legislators were demanding answers on what exactly differentiated between offensive and defensive forms of aid and support... the answer has yet to emerge.
Biden has so far botched his policy in the Middle East: both on the basis of being a supposed "liberal" and based on the contradictions of his own words. Trump promised to end wars; funny thing is he didn't end any. Before that, Obama failed to reduce the role in Afghanistan, and was far more willing to keep up with suggestions to stay and even escalate in certain regions, and all while fighting tooth and nail to punish whistleblowers. George W. Bush was the biggest warmonger in American history. Hmm...
The Khashoggi report was actually the insult to the injury. Before the release of the intelligence report— and to further complicate a flurry of matters— on Thursday Biden bypassed Congressional authorization and ordered airstrikes on Iranian-backed militias in Syria, keeping up America's effort in an attempt to regime-change and continue a proxy war that is entwined with Al-Queda, Al-Nusra, and HTS ground forces. That's who these militias were fighting, not to mention our old friend ISIS.
This fell right in line with the the commotion from Israeli bombings and the inhumane sanctions against Syria. On top of sanctions that adversely affect Syrian people, Northeast Syria is a region the Biden administration has dug into, occupying it and plundering its resources, including oil. The stated reason for being there: fending off the recuperation of ISIS.
As journalist Aaron Mate put it: "Rather than conduct the diplomacy he promised [...] Biden [opted] to act as ISIS’ Air Force."
If you thought Biden could arrive at this week without dropping another ball, think again. Biden said to Bernie Sanders and to America in the passing of the torch ceremony last year— that Zoomcast where Bernie, with his hands tied behind his back, gave his reluctant blessing to Biden as the nominee— that he is committed to raising the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour. The stars were aligned for Biden to follow through on this one; the change in minimum wage could be passed through the budget reconciliation bill along with the COVID relief bill and be passed with a simple majority. Since raising the minimum wage has implications to the budget, the track was laid out for Biden to make good on a promise.
However, two weeks ago, Biden said on national TV regarding the raise of the minimum wage: "I put it in, but I don't think it's going to survive." Right then and there, Biden signaled that he was, in fact not for it. If he had been, he would signal his administration's unwavering support for the minimum wage increase, and most certainly not have planted, coordinated, and initiated it's controlled demolition on national television.
If the president of the United States, especially the professed reincarnation of some kind of decrepit savior figure, puts all their support and effort into something, we would not see any problem with getting it through along with the rest of the COVID relief bill by way of budget reconciliation. Instead, he and his administration are fighting to get 50 votes for that foreign money-stashing, oil-thirsty, Clinton family bruiser Neera Tanden, all while not not signaling any exertion into the "Fight for 15" even though that path is paved. (Yes, Democrats are courting Alaska's Lisa Murkowski to muster a confirmation vote from her.)
Alas, here we are.
On Thursday, the Senate parliamentarian ruled that the $15 minimum wage could not be included based on the rules of budget reconciliation. This comes from a non-elected, high-ranking senate staffer whose decision can be overridden by the Vice President. There is no sign that Kamala Harris—despite trying so very desperately at several points of her career to crown herself as the most progressive person since perhaps Jesus Christ himself—will override her. It is now out of the relief bill and can only be passed through regular order... Good luck with that.
(Note on that: Sanders announced he intends to force a floor vote for the raising of the federal minimum wage to get legislators on the public record regarding the manner.)
Biden had a rough weekend. Or he didn't. But either way, there's no in between. And it all depends on who you watched, I suppose. Or at least there's a good chance that plays a heavy role. So you force me to ask a disgusting question: Did you watch CNN/MSNBC or CPAC?
We're about a month into the Biden administration and it's clear nothing has fundamentally changed. The resistance is in the White House and controls Congress, and the Republican hustlers are rubbing their greedy little hands together, awaiting their turn. Biden was supposed to beat Trump and Trumpism, not give it a four-year vacation to recuperate...
...But here we are...
Biden was not elected because America wasn't dropping enough bombs, or letting enough murders slide without punishment, or because they felt their lives were economically getting too good and had to be taken down a notch. If it were, there would be no reason to worry about the political future with a sense of angst that is more violently troubling than at any such point that preceded it.
...The wheels keep turning...
Rachel Maddow, Don Lemon, and SNL are the Fox News of the period between 2017 and the 2020 Election, or even that of the W. Bush years— sycophantic modes set on sharpening and refining their and their viewers' blind allegiance to an administration through the soft-ball coverage and showers of aggrandizement that get shot through the speakers with the pumping pressure of an automatic fire sprinkler system. So focused on one faction of the country, their narrow-minded, out-of-touch tactics are destined to fall flat on the ground.
And on the other hand, "the resistance" bandwagon is abandoned, so naturally those dingbat conservatives jumped on board. We saw this last weekend. Yes, it was almost too blatant, this past weekend. It was almost too much of a look into the immediate future... a horrible, gruesome image... one that is a sordidly obvious blend of Animal House mixed with Night of the Living Dead...
Yes, this last weekend was the 48th annual Conservative Political Action Committee in Orlando, FL— home to Disney World and stomping ground for the oncoming Republican charge. That's what it felt like: a charge. And not because Ted Cruz screamed "freedom" at the top of his lungs in his best Mel Gibson impersonation... luckily, we weren't around the senator later that night when he had broken in a bottle of Cazadores tequila and suggested going for a ride around town so as to maybe yell a little more.
The three-night event was part pep rally, part draft combine... an utter clown show mixed with big, ugly players, and not to mention many comedy routines, sparse mentions of policy, plenty of verbal masturbation, the fanning of the flames of the invisible culture war, infinite elements of a high school spirit rally... a place with the drums pounding and the war cries growing shrill.
It's fascinating to watch those CPAC speeches— they always speak for the blatant brutes of this land. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with brutes— I know plenty. But get a few of them chanting catchy phrases about freedom, open schools, the Green New Deal and AOC, and you might have a riot on your hands... One not of a physical nature, but of a horrible electoral one— like a wave of votes. The brief tidal flooding that arose from the Tea Party wave a decade or so ago comes to mind... This year was no different in that respect, only this year there was a certain amount of confidence that struck me.
See, in CPAC's of the past, this enthusiasm and sense of confidence is there— honestly, CPAC isn't much different than a specifically-targeted party convention in that sense. This CPAC had all the usual features— from the attempts at humor (jokes like Japanese planes in World War II: some land, many don't) to the Liberty Porn (perhaps more like erotic ASMR where they just say words like "Patriot" and "Freedom" over and over in far-reaching attempts to finish the job for millions of like-minded dudes).
But for once in a long time, the Republicans and their arrogance have an open field now. In the years of Bush, the party of "C" students and Rush Limbaugh was a wrecking ball of nonsense in a horrific eight years in American history. Against Obama, the Tea Party is well... the Tea Party. And in the first years of Trump, it was a transitionary period that existed off of just enough steam gained in the 2016 election. But now, it's different. Now, the Republicans have one thing they haven't had since 2008: a clear party image and a clear vision... one that many like and many disdain.
Of course, whether or not that image and path is good for America (and I'll tell you it's not, because it's a horrible, straightforward scumminess), if the Republicans have a relatively stable platform to run on in 2022 and 2024, then they will be in a good political position to post some wins. Add to it Biden/Harris' Democratic Party with their "nothing will fundamentally change" attitude and it spells trouble.
Everybody seemed to call this from miles away: that the Democratic establishment would fall flat behind Republicans because they spent so much of their time actively ignoring progressives and by extension the people because progressive policies are overwhelmingly popular... a raise in the minimum wage is supported by 59% of Americans, and a proposition for a $15 minimum wage won about 60% of the vote in Florida last November... Medicare For All is supported by more than half the population... and two-thirds of the country agree with the idea of a wealth tax.
Juxtaposed with the Democrats performing characteristically underwhelming, the Republicans and their semi-coherent message have a lot to rail against.
Another bad sign was that this year, there was something lacking: a singled-out enemy for the conservative power dynamic. No Clintons. No Obama. Biden was hardly mentioned, and when he was it either had to do with the Sleepy Joe trope or his son Hunter Biden (...who, again by the way, is probably in a lot of trouble... but before any of that we know we all really just want this: Hunter Biden vs. Don Jr. LIVE on Smackdown.)
Rather than a single enemy, the Republicans posed the question of the freedom and liberty soldiers vs. the elite oligarchy. The Republicans have begun to weave a route forward for them to take the pseudo-populist approach... the Trump approach... the Hawley approach... the DeSantis approach. The approach that says: "Look at them try so hard."
See, the Republicans are dead set on not explicitly saying that nothing will fundamentally change, but using that breath to put on the appearance that they really care. They're better at utilizing distraction. Especially because that distraction is predicated by the one man that now controls the party.
The Democrats got elected pinning their platform against a single man, that same guy: Trump. As bad as Trump is, and that varies from person to person, it is a foolish tactic. It worked in the short term, but now that that single man is essentially out of the way, the vast amount of "resistance" Democrats that leaned so heavily against Trump, a single figure, are already falling on their face.
Conversely, those conservative cretins took another approach that was clear this past weekend... that populist, us vs. the oligarchs rhetorical approach. The Republicans, right now, are setting themselves up as one party set against a particular political and social climate... playing the role of defender in the imaginary culture war. The conference was called "America Uncanceled" and was filled with terms like personal freedoms, oligarchies, lockdown states (vs. "free states"), and other political and rhetorical tools to rally against a reduction of liberal ideology that liberals and liberal media created for themselves.
There was an excited coalition of Republicans who used populist rhetoric— the same rhetoric establishment Democrats have failed and even refused to use— that may just sweep across America in spiteful reaction to a very out-of-touch and smug Democratic leadership. As far as the Republican Party is concerned, they are here as the challenger and, as Mike Pompeo (the Trump GOP's bridge to the national security state) put it, they are the only ones who "have upended the status quo" and continue to do so... Or so they tell you.
Despite all the fancy suits and the general appearance of wealth, the Republicans seem ready to put those unused tools to work.
After the 2020 election, Josh Hawley said the Republican Party is a "working class party." And in his speech— in which he sounded like he could be a sitcom dad— he declared "We [the GOP] are not the past, we're the future," and that they must establish a "new nationalism ... and give America back to the people."
Ted Cruz, with his silly and always-guilty smile, and also despite the loose nature of his attempt at a comedy routine, ironically (as is so often the case for that wannabe cowboy) endorsed that sentiment:
"The Republican Party is not the party of just country clubs, the Republican Party is the party of steel workers, and construction workers, and pipeline workers, and taxi cab drivers, and cops, and firefighters, waiters and waitresses, and men and women with callouses on their hands who are working for this country. This is our party!"
Again, that populism is an act. This Republican Party is not for the working class or for a populist movement, as is obvious when the claim comes from a guy like Cruz... it's all about Trump. "We're not starting new parties," said the former president on Sunday. "We have the Republican Party."
Trumpism is a contrarian and reactionary form of politics that succeeds in a reactionary environment. It's not steady, but even with it's loose definition, it brings voters out. It's whatever Trump and Republicans need it to mean at any given time. It gained surprising traction when America refused to crown Hilary Clinton president of the United States. It was then, due to its erratic tendencies, subsequently ousted by the Biden campaign— by the opposite kind of administration. But that reactionary campaign is in office now, painting the walls a very mediocre white and seeming to disregard a large portion of the population. There's this pattern of mediocrity being treated with shape-shifting Trumpism. And though it lacks any definition and meaningful structure at all, it succeeds by pointing a finger.
Ron DeSantis ended his opening night speech with a great encapsulation of this:
"Anyone can spout conservative rhetoric. We can sit around and have academic debates about conservative policy— and I'm not saying you don't do any of that, but the question is: When the klieg lights get hot, when the left comes after you, will you stay strong or will you fold?"
This is our political reality: fueled by visceral distortions stemming from ideas of culture wars and the polarization of Trump, it is in a space of unoriginality... a space that lacks vision and leadership... a political space where the only case to be made is the case against your opponents... a space of endless circles.
It's a rancid mentality of hopeless pessimism. And the Republicans at CPAC saw that, and they were invigorated with pompous self-worth and confidence that they look good to many voters by comparison...
I don't discount their confidence— in fact, I can hear the rumble of their callous and cocky charge, and I can envision the gruesome future that lies ahead with this broken system.
While The Huxleyan intends to remain free to the public, there are paid subscription offers (which would be more of a donation than receiving access to anything in particular) at $5/month, or $45/year. As always, donations are welcome and appreciated via Venmo (@john-pongratz). Again, as those are just options, everything remains free. Thank you for reading and be sure to subscribe, comment, and share!