Paraphrasing Jean Claire, this epoch testifies to the paucity of works, which is masked by the enormous amount of commentaries. The fate of art, as we can see, is skillfully shared by politics: it turns into - daily event intended for one-time use - followed by countless comments.
Since, therefore, Donald tramp appearing in a vest worn by roadside workers and urban cleaning workers, it is a performance of politics, one - dealing with the figure of the president, so that if we once had 'mannequins in politics' (Baudrillard), now we have - a president who is a physicist, a president who is an illegal worker or a president who is a utility worker.
In order for the project to succeed, it is necessary to work on it - a marketing mage, a team that knows the mood of the market, experts for the persecution of the existence in which they lay the spectacle; it is understood that a reality show succeeds if it is excessively raw, that is to say, more realistic than reality. However, the splendor of business/wealth must be able to embody something at the same time superior and happy, often one gets the impression that the content 'familiarize themselves', intended for an audience that is one big family. (When he had already put on the vest, which is the overalls of workers exploited beyond all measure, and also disenfranchised, Trump could appear from the shaft, and thus counter mistake around which everything on the stage shines powerfully and effectively, democratically expressing one potency and strength, one, therefore, the America of tomorrow.)
The strategy to cover up/hide the scarcity we are affected by brings many things into play, first of all we belong to a postmodern directed reality in which the capitalist dance is performed with its dematerialization; reality simulation gives much more "reality” than, say, conventional reality could. All the more, from politics to modern art, the model we have in the architecture of the screen square and/or Times Square is rewritten: gigantic visuals, artificial audio, a bucolic temptation to the senses that constantly affects the subject who is on the hunt for the current product of consumption, and he seeks to discover it everywhere. - There is no truth to reality because there is no reality in "truth",
Capitalism flirts with our stripped superficiality... And it does so, indeed, in one, one could say almost perfect way, since this era needs strength and dominance, new feudal lords, entertainers and multi-millionaires whose impudence is out of line. When we look at the show put on by Trump, and for whom such a script fits perfectly, aren't we tempted to think that it was designed by the genius that he was? Andy Kaufman, a character that Forman tried to bring closer to us in the film "Man on the moon.” (1999) - (Since this text is written the day before the elections in America, which will greatly affect the rest of the world, the signer of the lines wants to say that Trump should be written as - a symptom of the modern world. Judith Butler she didn't hide her dilemma, wondering if he was "a suicide or a genius?" However, one must always take into account the number of Americans for whom Trump is an example of a real US president. Does this perhaps mean that - the democrats are boring, that the left and liberals have no talent for performing politics as a show, too moralizing the discourse and making it part of mainstream thought? In addition to all that has been said, we should now add this twist: while very little was said about the assassination attempt on Trump, now too much is being said about him as a fascist, and if, therefore, the program is dominantly divided into - the economic growth of America and the recognition of fascists by the Democrats , then politics is really in short supply.)
Discovering America
The party that completely problematizes such a phenomenon as "Trumpism" goes so far as to openly call him a fascist. There are intellectual debates and discussions of a polemical-sharp character about this. What, however, represents a problem for the current state of democracy in America is the absence of the same debates when his assassination was attempted, because we are witnessing the official rhetoric that advocates the idea "that Trump should be stopped" (Jan-Werner Müller).
Far from talking here about how anyone from votes heard in America agrees that Trump must be stopped at all costs, on the contrary, Müller himself by no means agrees that Donald Trump is being declared a fascist, if we consider what it represents.
If, therefore, there are objections to Trump because of the way he mobilizes his electorate, then let's approach things from this side as well. Namely, let's just think for a moment to what extent it is dangerous to mobilize the democratic electorate to go to the polls with the story that it is a way to stop Trump - a fascist!
To what extent is it taken into account that such an approach could lead to an escalation of unrest within America itself tomorrow? When Andy Kaufman sets himself the task of provoking the audience - which is simply impossible today, the audience itself is the one who provokes - he pursues scandalous statements, he does not shy away from using words that directly invite conflict. Without further ado, Trump's political language calculatedly ``heats up'' the situation, not a single word in his speech is - neutral, and yet, the other side with the label of working with - fascists, is incomparably more dangerous in this case. (The demonization of the right in France is saved democracy, that is, to be precise Macron, who copied that recipe from Sarkozy. Okay, so the question is: what about all those French people who voted Marine Le Pen, or, who will vote for Trump because they already did that once, how do you call such a thing electorate? Maybe the number of such voters would be incomparably lower if something really wasn't too rotten in democracy!)
In the book "Sovereignty, power and crisis"(Essays on European Thought), Alpar Loshonc za Trasimaha - who, by the way, stands by on the battlefield Socrates - writes: "He could be the prototype of the idea that value and justice are actually masks that hide the manifestation of power." To be clear - the struggle for power often takes a democratic form! How would that same character speak about fascism, despite knowing what the word produces as a reaction in another. Hence, one should ask: why are there no analyzes of the methods used in politics by the same democracy? And, isn't she in crisis even before she repeatedly fails what she should and must be?
Let's assume that Trump is all that he is attributed to be, from being clown so that it is fascist, but even as such he, nevertheless, rediscovers America, all the more so that between him and Kamala Harris the so-called "dead race". If one goes so far as to say that his supporters are mainly those who come from the edge of the country or from huge provinces, then it is a pure gesture of discrimination, because the lack of political knowledge of the situation is a consequence of a very bad/neglected economy. On the trail of this, aren't passive areas most often those that do not even have the basic conditions for a dignified life, but despite that or precisely because they are not the concern of the political establishment, they are an invisible part of society. Isn't it logical then that it is closer to them in every way - a radical attitude than the pink democracy whose action they have never concretely felt?
Really, one should wish for an Andy Kaufman right now, since his is so sorely missed anti or Dada humor which did not leave only a few people completely indifferent. Perhaps Kaufman would be an ideal proposition if he found himself between Trump and Kamala Harris, opposites who mirror each other quite well.
Bonus video:
