By RU Twisted

I think we all knew that no matter who won the Presidential election there would be some social media craziness afterward. Nobody is surprised by that.

What has taken me aback, however—as well as several others I’ve spoken with—is the level of, what’s the best word….outrage conveyed by Hillary Clinton supporters. It’s off the charts and highly educational, as odd as that sounds.

To be fair, before continuing, I think it’s only right to point out that there would unquestionably be Trump supporters talking about “heading for the hills” or “armed revolution” if Clinton had won. Of that I have no doubt.

And it’s also worth noting that responses such as those would be equally ridiculous to what is going on now. To lose one’s mind because a certain person took political office is, to be frank, nothing short of silly.

But back to Clinton supporters. There have been, from what I’ve seen, two main areas of interest in the responses to her loss.

First, the entire mischaracterization of why Trump won. Hey, guess what? I think the guy is a tool, and he’s pretty far down on the list of people who should be running the country—like way, way down, below that guy on the street corner who just tried to hand me a brochure about essential oils.

But I also know that not everyone who voted for him is racist! Or misogynistic! Or…any number of other terms you can throw at them!

Seriously, there are a whole shitload of people who voted for Trump due to no other reason than the fact that Hillary Clinton is a really, really, really bad person. Really.

This seems to be lost on a great many supporters of hers (or, ironically enough, those who were voting for her simply because they think Trump is a really, really, really bad person). They cannot come to grips with the fact that large swaths of people desperately wanted to avoid a Hillary Clinton presidency. Rational or not, that was the reasoning for millions of Trump voters, so just blaming it all on racism or “hate” is incredibly shortsighted, in addition to missing a great many factors leading to Trump’s campaign being successful in the first place.

Second, a very large shift in what is being talked about as important. For example, apparently a good number of people in California started suggesting that previously-taboo term—shhh—“secession” in response to Trump’s win. #Calexit was trending on Twitter, playing off of #Brexit in the United Kingdom.

Really? So suddenly limited government and breaking away from the leviathan is a legitimate course of action? Hey, don’t get me wrong—if you want to head down that path, I’m more than willing to discuss it with you. But that’s a pretty big shift away from, well, everything someone like Hillary Clinton stands for.

Not only is secession counter to the type of governance the Clintons are known for, but it would be absolutely anathema to their philosophy of government. Smaller governing bodies breaking away from bigger ones is antithetical to Hillary’s entire worldview. So to see her supporters advocating for that very thing raises numerous questions.

Another example would be the conciliatory “well, at least we got marijuana legalized in 4 states” by, again, the same people who desperately wanted Clinton to win. I even saw a headline on the uber-progressive Daily Kos stating that this is a model to “defeat authoritarians.”

Again, really? Hillary Clinton is authoritarian! Big government is, quite literally, the basis of her entire philosophy! Marijuana legalization is an idea rooted in individual liberty—the exact opposite of what Clinton has advocated for her entire political career.

Now, I can already hear the response, “yeah, but Trump is SUPER authoritarian!” Perhaps this is true (I believe it probably is); we won’t know for a while.

But that’s part of the problem, here. We know Clinton is authoritarian in her philosophy of governance, and yet her supporters are….looking for anti-authoritarian models? Talking about secession?

Politics makes people nuts. There’s just no other way to describe it. This, in and of itself, is actually a very substantial argument for libertarianism/classical liberalism. Because people lose their ever-loving minds when involved in the political process, it’s probably best for the political process to have the most minimal effect possible on the world around us.

We are witnessing the exact reason why government power is so dangerous. A huge portion of the population is utterly outraged by the fact that an egotistical, womanizing, unqualified millionaire won the White House—and understandably so. But this is exactly the reason for government powers being extremely limited.

As the popular memes going around indicate, if you’re scared of a guy like Trump having this much power, shouldn’t you be worried about anyone having that kind of power, lest it be used incorrectly? Again, this is why classical liberals argue for a stripping/restricting of that power—not just making sure “their candidate” gets elected.

Or we could just yell at each other and burn stuff down. That seems to be working well.

Comments

comments