A large group of people were shocked by Trump’s success in the presidential election, and now in the aftermath, people are trying to explain what the process looked like from their standpoint. Interestingly to me, I noticed a couple examples from some outspoken people. I found the Nov. 14, 2016 edition of Bill Burr’s Monday Morning Podcast somewhat descriptive as were a couple interviews by political Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Žižek. The language they use is not integral, though what they are describing is so much more understandable and less frustrating when seen integrally.
Generally, the language people use is about the ‘Left’ and the ‘Right’ as the two sides to politics. The ‘Right’ being the conservative religious side, and the ‘Left’ being the liberal secular side. Traditionally these have been painted blue and red. Well, based upon the colour coding from Integral, I would like to talk about how to more clearly read the trends of politics.
Let’s start by redefining the voting groups with a little more clarity, there isn't simply a ‘left and ‘right’. Firstly, we can see a Blue religious conformist group of people looking to dictate law from their authority. Second, is the Orange achieving pragmatists looking for their best options forward; usually economically and numbers focused. As well as a third, Green multicultural pluralists policing cultural values and social interactions. (We could technically have a fourth, Red egoists, which we won’t look at simply because they will always vote whichever way they wish depending upon personal narratives.)
What I find interesting about Bill Burr's comments below is that he seems to be explaining the rational Orange view of the other two; Blue 'right' and Green 'left'.
(continued below the source videos)
I recommend the 10 minutes before Burr gets into his email responses
As was well pointed out by Bill Burr, the Green group just didn’t have a lot of influence in the early 2000’s though really started to pick up around the time of Obama’s presidency. The pluralistic wave of development was still approaching and was the smallest of the three groups back then. At that time, Green would have voted with the Orange group to elect Obama as they both wanted change they could believe in and during that presidency policies didn't change, though society did.
Within the 2016 election, the Green group was a more dominant force and certainly much more visible. Green was, however, the dominating value structure for a Hillary vote. Blue people are still Blue, meaning their vote is for traditional values; quite the opposition to the postmodern values of Green. Which then leaves Orange in the middle somewhat unimpressed by the two largest parties which both didn’t seem to offer a pragmatic option and to which both sides may be seen as somewhat crazy; the Blue with religion and the Green with political correctness. What’s interesting is that these three groups don’t see eye to eye, though with three groups in a two party system, the middle group will have the greatest freedom to choose. A vote for Hillary was not necessarily logical as she would be continuing the policies of Bush and Obama, which may not have been seen as a logical or pragmatic option for their vote. A Trump vote may not have been exactly logical either, though when it comes down to a ‘known’ bad choice and a potential for something better, a choice gets made and I suppose the people have spoken.
The last note is that Hillary’s campaign was trying to straddle two differing groups, while Trump's was singularly focused (probably on him). Hillary’s was a Green-Orange campaign and below is a great observation of why the campaign was somewhat counter to its own interests and potentially resulted in dividing its opposing set of voters.
She [Hillary] should not have played the role of the big unifier. Her coalition was absurd. Her coalition was Wall Street and Occupy Wall Street, Saudi Arabian money and LGBT and all those sexual liberation movements, and so on, and so on. It was a fake ideological formation. It was brutal global capitalism with a human face. - Slavoj Žižek
Not very clear on the different colours of this political wheel? Let's look at some examples of topics, in very generalizing colours, that voters could talk about from the three different camps Blue, Orange, and Green. The problems:
- Climate Change -
Blue - God will take care of it
Orange - Tech will save us
Green - We have to save Mother Gaia
- Military Stance -
Blue - War makes peace
Orange - Preemptive strikes and double taps
Green - Make love not war
If you enjoyed this, please "Like", share, follow, and/or comment. Thanks!