One of the great highlights of the most recent
presidential debate in the US came when the Republican Nominee, Donald J Trump
went on a rant about Haitian Immigrants eating dogs and cats in Springfield,
Ohio. The former President got very upset because the moderators proceeded to
inform everyone that the Mayor of Springfield Ohio had confirmed that there was
not a shred of evidence to suggest that Haitian immigrants were eating dogs and
cats.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5llMaZ80ErY
Firstly, the former president has always had a
relationship with the truth that one can compare with his relationship with his
wives.
Then, there’s the fact that he has a proven genius for
brining out irrational fears in people and he’s not wrong in taking the view
that immigration will be a hot topic. Nothing scares people more than the idea
of being overwhelmed by people who don’t look or sound like them.
Unfortunately, this isn’t limited to the USA. Far
Right parties have found that having electoral success on an anti-immigration
platform. Even here in “multicultural” Singapore, it’s now impossible to escape
complaints about the “unhygienic” and “uncouth” Chinaman or the “snooty” Indian
expat.
Let’s face it, having an “influx” of people into any
given area is never going to be easy. Resources meant for a million are bound
to be stretched when you have an additional two million using them. In Singapore’s
coffeeshops there is a direct correlation between the complaints about new
arrivals and the complaint about the rise in prices of things like housing and
the decline in public services like our public transport. Now, this is in
Singapore, where things are heavily controlled (mainly very wealthy expats and
the movements of lower waged workers are highly controlled). One only needs to
multiply that many times over when you talk about places where things are not
so well controlled.
So, I don’t disagree that immigration can be a
problematic issue. However, is it acceptable for public figures to “target”
ethnic groups for their own gain? I mean for me; the answer should be no. I got
put off Trump when he started the “Mexicans are Rapist” thing. What’s shocking
is the number of people, specifically the young who defended it with things
like “Oh, he didn’t really mean it and didn’t say it very well.”
I also agree that free speech is often ugly but you
still need to defend a person’s right to say ugly things even if it offends you.
However, there has to be a line somewhere between
someone being an a***hole and someone targeting specific, vulnerable groups for
personal gain. In a way, this line comes from who you are. If I (and I am guilty
of it) make awful remarks, I’m just an a***hole. My irrelevance helps in this
case. However, if I was a famous person running for the most powerful office in
the land and started making derogatory remarks about a particular group, it
would be a different story. That should disqualify one in the mind “voters” and
the fact that it does not, should be worrying. Let’s put it this way, if you
accept that Mexicans are rapist, you should also be able to accept that Hitler wasn’t
wrong when he said that the Jews were economic criminals.
What makes the dogs and cats story even more
disturbing is the fact that the politicians are quite comfortable with making
things up as Republican Vice-Presidential Candidate, Mr. JD Vance was happy to
do:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/sep/15/jd-vance-lies-haitian-immigrants
However, there has to be a difference between “bs” and
“exaggeration” and a downright lie and making things up to suite a narrative
against a particular ethnic group. One only has to watch the interview where
Mr. Vance admitted that he was happy to “make up stories” in order suite his
need. He provided virtually no verification to any of his claims other than
what he claimed he was hearing from constituents.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djpTr5r0zMQ
Many of us, myself included, are guilty of believing
what we want to believe. We tend to use facts to confirm our preconceived notions
and prejudices. However, most of us are not running to become what is
effectively the understudy to the most powerful man in the world. Surely, our expectations
should be higher when it comes to judging public and powerful people. Yes, they’re
human to. They’re entitled to their prejudices in their private lives. However,
should those prejudices be the formation of policy? The answer should by all
accounts be no.
No comments
Post a Comment