Let’s be very clear there are pockets of Latinos, Iranians, Arabs and other first and second-generation immigrant populations in the U.S. that voted for Donald Trump in 2020. Trump carried Florida by appealing to these pockets of immigrants. Marco Rubio, the Cuban American Senator from Florida just voted to acquit Donald Trump – and carried on in the long-held tradition of Cubans (in the U.S.) voting for Republicans.
In places such as South Florida and South Texas, Trump did much better, but across the country Trump won a greater share of the Latino vote than he did four years ago. He made marked improvements in Democratic cities such as Houston, Las Vegas, and Philadelphia, and even in Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York.
At a church in Miami, Trump said, “America was not built by religion-hating socialists” but, rather, “by churchgoing, God-worshiping, freedom-loving patriots.” His Latino campaign was able to articulate the core characteristics of Latino conservatism: family values, work ethic, patriotism, and anti-Communism. This rhetoric coming from a three-time divorced, whore mongering Republican politician who benefited from Russian hacking of Hilary Clinton’s emails; and who can’t even recite one verse in the bible. But the campaign was effective. Obviously, because Latino-Americans are not that sophisticated politically.
Most first-generation immigrants lack political sophistication.
It’s been a long-standing fact that Iranian Royalists vote for Republican candidates. The Shah after all was re-installed by a CIA led coup under President Eisenhower (whose vice-President was Richard Nixon). And Richard Nixon was a good friend of the late Shah.
After almost every ‘democratic’ uprising in Latin America, there’s a flood of immigrants into the US of key officials from those previous military dictatorships. Columbians, Venezuelans, Brazilians, Central Americans … all landing in the U.S. supporting Republicans.
Not for a second – not even for a milli-second – do these (Republican) immigrant communities sit back and ask themselves are they responsible for leading their ‘former’ countries into the condition they are in.
Whether or not the Islamic Republic, or Fidel Castro, or Maduro are ‘good’ – you do need to ask – how did Iran, or Cuba, or Venezuela got to where they are at?
One thing we now know for sure, the Republican party not only tried to undermine Democracy in the U.S. on January 6th but, also dramatically polarized America. This is precisely the problem. And supporting the Republican Party is to support policies and behavior that created the ‘problems’ in your former countries and even here in the U.S. This isn’t a way to manage the affairs of a nation.
This is NOT about Capitalism versus Socialism. This is about functioning political processes, open debate and the market for ideas, i.e. democratic processes and systems. Don’t be fooled by Republicans attack on Socialism or Socialists. It’s their precise behavior that will amplify and expand socialism as a reaction to their political abuse. They are ‘causing’ a socialist reaction. They are provoking ‘socialism’. Why don’t you think about that? If you are against Socialism, it is precisely Trump’s actions and behavior that will energize, amplify, and lead to the rise of socialism in America (and elsewhere). If you are ‘anti-communist’ supporting people like Donald Trump is precisely what you should not do.
And this is precisely what happened in Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, etc.
Not to be overlooked, is the simple fact that prior to Fidel Castro, Cuba had become a US puppet state and a haven for the mob, prostitution, gambling, controlled substances like drugs, cigars and alcohol. And these same Cuban Americans that promoted all this vice, now support the party of evangelical Christians! They conveniently blame the Kennedy family for their demise, but miserably fail to appreciate the conditions that were created in the country that brought about the forces that led to Castro usurping power.
And not to be forgotten is the Shah’s secret police, the 25 years of dictatorship prior to the 1979 revolution, and massive economic disparities that existed in the country. The rise of the mullahs and the new Islamic ‘constitution’ is a function of the fact that prior Iranian constitutions and democratic institutions were completely abandoned by the Shah and his cohorts. And, that the Shah had so polarized relations with the U.S. by essentially giving Nixon a blank check, that when the Democrats came to power, they felt compelled to undermine him and his regime.
Iranians should note that in countries like the UK, generally speaking, the Conservative Party cozy up with the Republicans in the U.S. and the Labor Party cozies up with the Democrats in the U.S. – its never a unilateral one-sided bromance. There are always multi-fronts of engagement. And it was this ‘stupidity’ that created the crisis in Iran. The Shah was too close to Nixon. And he was too much of a dictator for not just the U.S. but all Western Europe (especially the UK’s Labor party) to support him. So, they toppled him.
The term Banana Republic refers to the military governments in many Latin American countries that were backed by the U.S. – installed and armed by generally Republican Administrations in Washington. These military governments literally pushed all their opponents into armed ‘communist’ rebellion. If you weren’t with the government, you must surely be a socialist! No?
To every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Repression, oppression, merciless killings, rule of the mob … (a military mob) … surely leads to some reaction. And if you force your opponents into a socialist corner, that is precisely where they will huddle.
Please don’t get me started on MBS! He’s a butcher, criminal who contributed to Trump’s campaign and rhetoric. I think his days are numbered. The issue, of course, is who will replace him? Will radical Islamists (ISIS style) replace MBS? What will be the reaction?
I could go on and on, but, my simple point is that polarization leads to reactions that the ‘polarizer’ may not be want. You don’t go around calling people losers and hope that they will sit still and continue to be losers. You are not going to be able to muzzle opponents. You are not going to be able to suck all the air out of a room. If you choke your opponents, and they survive, they will come back and haunt you.
There is value in moderation. There is value in humility. There is value in compromise.
However emotionally appealing Trump’s messaging was, lets be clear, polarization only leads to destruction. If you vote for a ‘polarizer’ – you are part of the problem. I am not being supportive of the Mullahs, Castro, or Socialism or Islamism … in fact quite the opposite, if you oppose Castro, the Mullahs, Socialism, Islamism – stop supporting or voting for people like Trump.
If the pendulum returns quickly it will rise quickly to the other extreme. We ALL need to be radical centrist, radical moderators, radical ‘evolutionaries’, peace makers … Labeling and cornering those you oppose only makes them stronger. There should be no place for politicians that polarize to win, because in the end we will all lose.
You must respect those you disagree with and allow them room to be an opposition. Injustice, lies, oppression, polarization and war will not lead anyone anywhere.