Yeah, disastrous. Trump is just trying to gain power of a narrative, and passing the blame of him mishandling the pandemic onto the WHO.
Yeah, then there is that. You might think that these inane contradictions are a bug, but no. They are a feature. This is (unironically) post-modernism. It’s the implicit rejection of objective truths and facts or the rejection that these things can be ascertained through objective means.
Many tend to think that these people must be lying, but a liar is (by the common definition) aware what the truth is and they are knowingly being dishonest. After many years of this insanity, I am not convinced that this applies Trump and his most loyal followers (hopefully a minority among people who voted for him). I am not saying that they honestly believe the claptrap they spout either. The distinction of ‘truth’ and ‘falsehood’ as we understand it just doesn’t cross their minds. They may use these words, but merely signifies confidence to get a narrative going, but only when it’s most convenient for them at the moment, which can be dropped and replaced by another just like that. You can even juggle multiple narratives at the same time. It doesn’t matter if they contradict one another. In fact, you can use this to your advantage in multiple ways. You can confuse any potential opponent with multiple positions. They don’t know where to start. Whenever your opponent starts to respond and refute one narrative with solid arguments, you can undermine the progress of discourse by pivoting to a different narrative. And even if your opponent points out the contradictions, just say that the former narrative was a misrepresentation. “Trump did not mean that. He speaks in hyperbole. Don’t take things too seriously or literally”. Basically, gaslight your opponent to make them believe they were the ones who were claiming the now defunct narrative. And you can switch narratives every time you respond. That way, no argument from your opponent will stick and your are the one who is in the lead. The one who appears to be in control. Debate is not a means to come to an agreement, not even to convince your opponents. It’s a display of power. But also make sure you don’t state that you are the one who is in power. Claim victim status every single opportunity you can get, that you are fighting against the “global elite”… but ignore the fact that the elites are squarely on your side.
Article by Matt McManus: Professor of Politics and International Relations at TEC De Monterrey. Author of the book ‘What Is Post-Modern Conservatism: Essays On Our Hugely Tremendous Times’
A very blatant self-admitted instance of post-modern conservatism in action on live TV is vice president JD Vance when he was pushed on the fact that he and Trump were spreading the false claim of ‘Haitian immigrants eating pets’
If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then that’s what I’m gonna do…
Also remember the time when Kellyane Conway’s infamously used the phrase “alternative facts” to defend Trump’s lies about the size of the crowd at his inauguration.
Lastly, here is a 6 year old video that explains this better than I did here: