tr(i)ump(hal)ism

Triumph (noun): achievement or attainment of an established aim, success or conquest as in a victory in a battle or contest.

Triumphalism (noun): an attitude or belief that an ideology or policy, principle or practice, system of discernment or action, whether personal and individual or communal, is superior to all others. Generally, the term bears a pejorative connation, for descriptions of triumphalist behaviors tend to fall in categories of schadenfreude (taking excessive delight in another’s error or failure) or xenophobia (considering one’s culture or society, people or nation greater, better than [up to and including deriding] all others).

Trumpism (noun): a statement made by one whose attitudinal self-perception is triumphalist, characterized by (1) a depreciated capability to connect one’s personal intent in word and deed and the perceptions of others, thus, being unable to appreciate and acknowledge the inherent variance between the two, (2) a diminished capacity to discern the ethical (moral impact) and political (communal effect) content and context of one’s words and deeds, and (3) an atrophied ability to admit to error or to confess a need or desire for forgiveness from persons or parties aggrieved by one’s words and deeds.

Yesterday

at a Wilmington, NC, assembly

(yep, he’s at it again!

would that he refrain!)

Donald Trump ignited a new controversy;

remarking, I perceive, ambiguously

tho’, too, presumably sincerely

(thus, not facetiously)

about the right to bear arms

that some interpreted as advocating harm.

To wit: “Hillary (Clinton) wants to abolish…essentially abolish the Second Amendment. By the way, if she gets to pick, if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know.”

Trump’s words (as all words, I aver, even when a speaker exercises greatest care in the service of definition and description) are equivocal. Did he mean to advocate violence against his chief rival for presidential office or to rally all staunch right to bear arms Second Amendment supporters to vote against Clinton? Trump’s response to the charge of the former: “Give me a break!”

Donald Trump’s repeated demonstrations of his lack of ability to acknowledge with generous honesty and gracious humility that his language, particularly his public-speak, can be perceived other than he intended and, when that happens (as it does for all of us) to admit his error and to ask for pardon, for me, make many (most?) his words tr(i)ump(hal)isms.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “tr(i)ump(hal)ism

  1. Talk about DANGEROUS! Hillary’s Hits just keep on coming. If she acts like she can get away with murder, maybe its because she already has, NUMEROUS TIMES!
    Shawn Lucas is the latest figure associated with the DNC leaks and election fraud case to die in mysterious circumstances.He served Clinton with voter fraud papers that lead to Wasserman’s resignation.
    Seth Rich, a DNC Data Director, was beaten, shot and killed in the morning of July 8 while he was walking home and talking on the phone to his girlfriend. Police have said they haven’t determined if his murder was a botched robbery – however this is unlikely as the killer or killers appear to have taken nothing from their victim, leaving behind his wallet, watch and phone.Smith would have known about voter fraud if it existed.
    Julian Assange’s lawyer, John Jones, QC, died this week after being hit by a train at a London station. Details of his demise are non-existant on the internet, but Assange has said he will release more of HILLARY’S emails.
    Victor Thorn, prominent Clinton researcher and author, was also found unexpectedly dead this week.
    Thorn was due to testify against the Clintons about the Clinton Foundation.

    Like

    • Dear Christ Centered Teaching,

      I thank you for your commentary, some with which I am familiar, most of which I am not (though that is and would not be the point of my reply to you).

      Where I sit, that is, my perspective, is that our two primary American political parties, the Republicans and the Democrats, have produced two deeply flawed candidates for our highest office concerning, each, among many things, questionable temperament and trustworthiness, respectively, and, on both counts, with more than due and prudent cause.

      That said, speaking always and only for myself, Mr. Trump, via his nearly daily openly public pronouncements, deepens my concern for the balance (or rather my sense of the imbalance) of his disposition. Mrs. Clinton (and I grant you, I think that there is much clandestine of her affairs to be disclosed AND I pray that they are revealed!), so far, has much that is less known.

      Peace be unto you,
      Paul

      Liked by 1 person

      • Paul,
        Trump is not a politician who’s speech is careful and polished. He talks more like an average guy. All these years we have elected those who act and sound best, but don’t do much-needed. Trump is a man of action. A doer. Image is like good intentions , they don’t count for anything without action. I like him, and based on how much all the media outlets and elites hate him, I’d say that pretty much confirms it.
        God bless.

        Like

      • Dear CCT,

        Thanks for sharing your perspective. I take, that is, I understand and appreciate your point about Mr. Trump as a candidate who speaks not as a “politician,”meaning, I think, one who promises much on the campaign stump, yet, when in office, more oft than not does not deliver. (Would that we, the American people, had had a generally agreed corporate memory of more politicians who, whatever their party-principles and platforms, served with the integrity of transparent consistency, in other words, their actions matching their stump-speak. Alas, methinks that we do not have such a recollection of our political history.)

        I also think that we, America, in the last generation of some 20 years or so, have watched our national legislature in Washington become more “political theater,” the senators and representatives having lost some capacity and desire to compromise across party lines. In that I also believe our system of democracy functions best when the opportunity for compromise exists, this is a great and not a good loss.

        As we go forward toward November 8, we shall see. There are more revelations to come on both sides, I think (and sometimes I fear).

        Thanks again. Again and always, peace,
        Paul

        Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s