Showing posts with label Trump voters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Trump voters. Show all posts

Saturday, July 5, 2025

‘The damage is terrifying’: Barbara Kingsolver on Trump, rural America and the recovery home funded by her hit novel; The Guardian, July 5, 2025

Hannah Marriott, The Guardian ; ‘The damage is terrifying’: Barbara Kingsolver on Trump, rural America and the recovery home funded by her hit novel

"Rural life and the opioid crisis have not been sufficiently represented in fiction, she says. “Appalachian life in general has not been sufficiently represented. People don’t know the complexity and the nuance.” Appalachians represent “ecosystems of people, the people in need and the people who give; the Memaws (grandmothers) who take care of all the kids.” She dismisses one infamous account – vice president JD Vance’s 2016 memoir Hillbilly Elegy – as a book that was “really all about himself, how he got out and made good, and the people that stay behind, well, are just lazy”. Appalachian culture, she says, is about modesty and self-reliance. “If he were a real Appalachian, he wouldn’t tell that story.”...

“Charity is a very loaded concept. It involves a power imbalance. It is a person standing in a position of privilege saying: I will give this gift to you, and implicit is: ‘to help you become more like me’. Everything about that is odious to me.”...

Pride, denial and shame are longstanding Kingsolver fascinations. She says that the archetypal American story of the lone hero pulling themselves up by their bootstraps “is just bullshit. We have classes in this country. We have class barriers. There are places you can be born that you’re never going to get out of.” Still, she says, that myth is powerful: it “brainwashes” people; it can lead to self-blame...

She lives in Trump country, and says she understands how he “hooked” so many people, but she never demonises Trump voters herself, describing her neighbours as “some of the most generous, kindhearted people you will ever meet”. She has no kind words for the man himself. His presidency is, she says, “a circus. That’s too kind a word for it. Circuses make you laugh. This one makes you cry. It’s stunning how much damage one ignorant man can do.”

She points out that Trump’s “so-called Big Beautiful Bill” could be devastating for the region, with its cuts to the National Park Service, the Weather Service and disaster preparedness – just last year the area was hit by the devastating Hurricane Helene – and cuts to Medicaid, which could cause havoc in an already under-served area. “The damage will be unimaginable. Lots of people will die, lots of wild lands will be destroyed. The damage is terrifying.” Does she think her Trump-voting neighbours will change their allegiance if such terrors come to pass? “Will they connect the dots when our hospital closes? I don’t even know the answer to that,” she says, shaking her head, fearing that the TV and radio stations that told them to vote for Trump in the first place will “come up with some other reason why your hospital closed. For those of us who are in the information business, that’s a depressing subject.”...

In the long term, she says she believes in the Martin Luther King Jr quote that “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice”."

Monday, November 11, 2024

Are Trump voters morally responsible for the harms that will follow from his policies?; Australian Broadcasting Corporation, November 10, 2024

Jessica Wolfendale , Australian Broadcasting Corporation; Are Trump voters morally responsible for the harms that will follow from his policies?

"The nearly 73 million Americans who voted for Donald Trump cannot claim ignorance of Trump’s racismmisogyny and his endorsement of white supremacy and white supremacist terrorism. In the lead up to the 2024 US election, Trump falsely claimed that large numbers of unlawful immigrants were being allowed to entered the country to vote, repeating the ideas of the “white replacement” theory, which claims that “legacy [white] Americans” are being replaced “more obedient people from faraway countries," in the words of right-wing commentator Tucker Carlson. 

Trump has also made no secret of his views about women and about LGBTQ+ people. Indeed, the Trump campaign made anti-trans ads the biggest focal point of its spending. As laid out in Project 2025 — the policy blueprint created by former Trump officials — there is little doubt that Trump’s presidency will seriously erode the basic rights of LGBTQ+ peoplewomen and immigrants, in addition to seriously threatening progress on climate change.

So, are Trump voters racist and misogynist because they voted for a candidate who espouses racist and misogynist views? And do they bear some responsibility for the outcomes of a Trump presidency?

Individual moral responsibility for collective actions

Voting is a collective act. This means that, in most elections, a single person’s vote makes little difference to the outcome. For example, the likelihood that one person’s vote will be “decisive in a presidential election” is about one is 60 million. So, each Trump voter could say, correctly, that their vote made no difference the outcome of the election, and hence they are not responsible for the policies that Trump enacts and the serious harm that those policies are likely to cause thousands, perhaps millions, of people.

The problem with this view is that a person’s moral responsibility is not just based on the causal relationship between their actions and a bad outcome. In my work on war crimes and responsibility, I argue that sometimes a person can be blamed for participating in a harmful collective act even if their participation didn’t make a difference to the outcome. Other scholars agree: the idea of complicity is one way of capturing this intuition. Sometimes a person is blameworthy for simply being part of a wrongful plan, even if it doesn’t go ahead, because they were willing for it to go ahead.

Similarly, it makes intuitive sense to say that all members of the KKK bear some responsibility for the terrorism and violence inflicted by that organisation, even if not every member participated directly in the violence. Put another way, the victims of KKK violence would be justified in blaming all members of the KKK, and not only directly involved in an attack, because all members were willing to allow Black people and their supporters to be harmed and killed. By joining the KKK, these members communicated morally abhorrent attitudes towards the potential victims of KKK actions that make it appropriate for the victims to blame them.

This doesn’t mean that everyone involved in a harmful collective action is equally responsible — those who contribute more bear greater responsibility for that outcome. But that doesn’t mean that a person can simply evade responsibility for the harms caused by a collective act they are part of by claiming that their participation didn’t make any difference to the outcome. Participation is moral communication, and it makes a moral difference to our responsibility. 

What does this mean for the question of voting and moral responsibility?"