Memory Loss

Soon I’ll be turning 34, still well short of what’s considered “middle-age” in our time. And despite this, I have to say that I’m starting to notice my memory slipping a bit. I’m not talking about memory loss that you associate with old age; most of what I forget or mix up are just trivial details. It still feels weird though. Five to ten years ago I could remember things going back to early childhood as vividly as a movie. Now those details start to blur and fade.

Of course I suspect this is entirely natural. If there’s anything unusual about my case it’s probably related to the radically different lives I’ve led over the years, moving from state to state, pre-army versus post-army, and leaving the US to spend the bulk of my adult life abroad. Taking all that into account, it’s not a huge deal if I can’t remember any but one of the teachers I had in 2nd or 3rd grade, for example. But suppose it was worse. Suppose I’d stayed in the US all my life, and at the age of 33 I’d somehow forgotten who was president of the US prior to Obama, who controlled the congress during most of that administration, and everything that administration had done during its tenure. I suspect I’d have more reason to be alarmed in that case.

I’m writing about memory today because while my interactions with Trump supporters have been mercifully few, those that have occurred are positively fascinating, if not mindboggling. To be sure, what I am experiencing seems to apply to many conservative types, regardless of whether or not they support Trump, but with the Trump supporters the memory disorder seems to be most acute. But whatever the case, I am simply astonished by the inability of these people to recall events in what is the relatively recent past. I could understand it if they were elderly, or even pushing 60, but we’re talking about people around my age and slightly younger.

The perfect example of this can be seen in the attacks on Hillary’s war record. Trump supporters have been crowing about Hillary Clinton’s support for the Iraq invasion, as well as her support for military intervention during her tenure as secretary of state. She is a “hawk,” they say. The problem with this is that the people calling her a hawk now, with a few notable exceptions, were themselves hawks or supporters of hawks, and their own candidate also speaks like a hawk.

Hillary’s enthusiastic support for the Iraq War is one of her worst deeds as a politician. This is why many leftists such as myself can’t stand her- she puts her finger in the wind and goes along with the status quo. The problem with these Trump supporters, however, is that they seem to forget that Hillary was going along with their party’s war. Republicans controlled the White House and the house at the time. They would later control both until 2007.


Trump supporters: Do you know who this man is and what he did?

During the run-up to the Iraq War nearly to the end of Bush’s administration, if you opposed the war on any grounds most of these rabid conservatives would call you a traitor. “You don’t like war? Love it or leave it, hippie! Move to Russia with all the other commies!”  That was the basic tenor, but if you think I’m exaggerating, conservative pundit Bill O’Reilly once said he’d deem critics of the war to be “enemies of the state.” During the Bush years America could do no wrong, nor could its military which became an object of public worship thanks in part to a massive taxpayer-funded PR campaign, and Uncle Sam would do whatever it wanted, wherever it wanted, because FREEDOM GODDAMMIT! In fact, America was kind of acting like this other country has been acting in recent years, but that’s another dozen blog posts.

Now the same people who would call you a traitor, commie, or pussy for opposing the war have suddenly become peace-loving doves, publicly calling how Hawkish Hillary. In my interactions with them it appears as though they literally do not remember the entire Bush administration. They seem to believe that the Middle East’s problems began with the Obama administration. That’s the moment when Fox News and the rest of the conservative media machine officially authorized them to criticize US foreign policy again.

Still I can’t get my head around this memory loss. How do you go through life not knowing what happened about 15 years ago? The Iraq War was one of the biggest media circuses of the first decade of the 21st century. It dominated the news for years. It became a part of our popular culture in TV, film, and video games. These are not the little details from grade school that I can’t remember. We’re talking major historical events.

I guess the phenomenon can only be explained by Trump’s particular style of lying, which incidentally resembles the Kremlin method. This is not the normal lie where you’re accused of something you know you did, ergo you try to concoct a plausible story so your accuser or the gallery will believe you. Such a lie is not really crafted at all. Basically the way it works is that your opponent says something about you, and you need to say something in order to “win,” typically the opposite of what they’re saying. It does not matter if your audience can easily check and see that this is not true. All that matters is that you have a response that opposes their claim. Imagine someone walks up to you wearing a thong and covered in sunflower oil, and when you point this out they say, “What? Nonsense. I’m wearing a very expensive tailored suit!” That you can see they are clearly not wearing anything close to that does not matter in the slightest. The point is you said they were one thing so they said they were another and that’s that.

If you support, follow, or sympathize with such people, eventually you’ll have to shape your own memories and reality itself in order to hold onto your worldview without creating too much cognitive dissonance. Trump actually supported the Iraq War, but in his campaign he said he was against it so now memories must change and it’s “the dishonest media’s” fault for bringing up the past. Bush and his White House team enthusiastically fought for, and got their invasion of Iraq, but Trump says all the fallout from that is Obama and Hillary’s fault, so now people who most likely voted for Bush can’t remember his entire administration or what it did. It’s another form of “they don’t believe these things because they’re stupid; they become stupid because they believe these things.”

What must that feel like, I wonder. How does an individual who enthusiastically cheered for war on Iraq feel when they attack Hillary supporters (or just Trump opponents like me) for being “hawkish” and supporting the invasion? How do people who attacked Obama in 2012 for telling Dmitry Medvedev he could be “more flexible” after the election reconcile their outrage then with their current candidate’s submissiveness toward Putin? I have to know if there are times when they are conscious of these contradictions, i.e. “I used to believe this but now I believe this other thing.”

It’s normal for beliefs to change and evolve- I’m living proof. But the difference with real evolution or change is that you consciously, often publicly reject your previous views and you have some kind of explanation as to why you did so. I just don’t see this with most of the Trump supporters. The military’s still awesome and Obama was a bastard when he “apologized for America,” yet Trump can call America a loser that doesn’t win anymore and attack Hillary for being a “hawk” and supporting the Iraq War. And hell, their own candidate exudes hawkishness as well, yet he gets a free pass.

Assuming the United States survives the next decade as a developed country, I hope scientists will devote a lot of time to figuring out this riddle. The future of democracy depends on it.





17 thoughts on “Memory Loss

      1. gbd_crwx

        So, since it’s the states who chose president, will your vote be registred in the last US state where you lived?

      2. Jim Kovpak Post author

        In my case yes, but people abroad can vote in any state where they happen to hold residency. US military personal can still change their residency I believe.

  1. AndyT

    Maybe I’m wrong, but I feel such shameless turncoats are just the tip of the iceberg, so to speak – after all, Bush hasn’t endorsed Trump, and the latter’s disdain for the “regular” Republican establishment is quite evident, IMHO.

    I think part of Trump’s supportes might be thinking “yes, we used to want war back in 2001-2003, but when Obama and Hillary took charge everything went downhill, so we’d better leave this mess before it gets worse”.

    Also, there has been an isolationist tendency throughout American History – with ups and downs, but it’s still there, isn’t it?

  2. Asehpe

    Jim, some time ago you were talking about those who had been “abandoned by the liberal elites”, those who had been “overtaken by globalization”. You criticized the EU for Brexit, saying that something was wrong with the current “neoliberal consensus” and that those people who felt betrayed or left out were taking their revenge with Farage, Le Pen, and now Trump.

    Well, you may be right — there may be an objective way of telling that, if these people had gotten “something” out of globalization, they wouldn’t be so angry, so hawkish, and so oblivious of their recent past. That they would pursue their own interests in a more rational way.

    But I, and on-and-off pessimist, tend to think that the problem is really psychological. I think people complain and feel frustrated even when, by rational standards, they shouldn’t. They complain not because they are really in dire straits, in a horrible situation, but because they “could have been better off”. Typically, they try to find someone to blame, and once they and their echo chambers zero in on some target, they won’t let go.

    They think: Hillary is wrong by definition. Her becoming a president would be the worst thing ever. Don’t bother me with questions about specific details, about how exactly she would be so terrible — I just know she will. Plus, I watch media that tells me I’m right. You want details, you go talk to them. Me, I already know the truth: I’m being screwed over, and its their fault. Hillary’s. Obama’s. The “establishment’s”. The liberal media. The new world order. Lizard people from planet Mazumba. I don’t care; all I know is I can’t let Hillary win. Facts? How dare you talk about facts or the recent past, when the only important thing is “it’s payback time now baby, trump that bitch!”?

    Supposedly the Romans understood pretty early in the story of their own (imperfect) democracy that voters end up doing stupid things. Daniel Kahneman says people don’t act rationally in economics; why should they in politics? The future of democracy is always at risk, because democracy for some reason believes that letting the people decide is reasonable. But the people, like an individual, is susceptible to fits of anger. Have you ever reasoned with an angry person? One who gets angrier and angrier every time you ‘score a point’ by actually citing facts or correct interpretations? Who shouts more and more “I’m right” the more you show they’re wrong? Who’s happy to forget anything in the recent or distant past, just because they want to go on screaming that YOU are the problem, not they?

    Yes, we’re living in interesting times…

    1. AndyT

      Unfortunately, critics of Democracy – or, better, of democracies – have been given a lot of wonderful examples to sustain their case, recently.

      A democratic system is just as good as those who are involved in it…

  3. Mr. Hack

    I’m no supporter of Trump’s, however, I think that your example of Trump propagating a lie is not totally accurate. This issue came up during the first debate and it caught my attention. It’s true, that only once, several months before the invasion, Trump replied to a question regarding his approval of any invasion on a radio talk show, very tepidly:

    ‘ Stern asked Trump directly if he supported going to war with Iraq, and Trump hesitantly responded, “Yeah, I guess so.”

    On the other hand, he’s on record of opposing the war after it started several times. At worst, in this instance, he can be labeled as a flip-flopper, although even that would be perhaps too harsh of a criticism. I’m sure though, that your search for other Trump lies would not be done in vain. 🙂 .

    1. Jim Kovpak Post author

      A lot of people stopped supporting the war after it was in progress. The problem is that Trump is attacking Hillary for supporting the war while he never really opposed it at the time. More importantly, many of his fans actively supported it. Notice that one of Trump’s biggest friends in the media seems to be Sean Hannity, a man who was so supportive of the war he was claiming Iraq had WMDs at least six months after the official government report specifically said they found no WMDs or evidence that they were moved out of the country.

      But this is just one little example. Take the Muslims dancing on 9/11 claim, which he never took back. Or there’s his claim that he “ended” the Birther movement.

    1. Jim Kovpak Post author

      Sometimes though I wonder if you can really call them lies. I mean the statements are false, but is it really a lie if you just say the opposite of what someone else says as though this refutes something?

  4. Shalcker

    Perhaps what was held wasn’t really “belief”, but more of “tribal symbol”. Something external you hold as symbol of “belonging to this group” (similar to waving the flag), rather then something intrinsic that defines you as a person.

    “Today our tribe does war, so we’re for war! And it’s totally justified too!”

    “Tomorrow OTHER tribe does war (or other family within our tribe does), we’re totally against that! That tribe does war completely wrong, their methods are evil, their goals unjust, and they support all the wrong people! Perhaps our last war wasn’t our best war, but this war is even worse!”

    Then flip-flopping as “who we are” changes is completely natural.

  5. ramendik

    I’m no Trump supporter, but I do have to notice the memory loss is not all on one side. How about Islamist terrorists being the vile enemy in 2001 and for a long time after, but now, suddenly, Assad who is duly bombing them into oblivion is somehow worse?

    On the other hand, some things are consistent. The Western mainstream media ignored KLA violence and trumped up any JNA actions into alleged massacres back in 1999. It is blacking out – completely blacking out – all destruction of Aleppo by Islamist terrorists (so-called rebels) while trumping up all SAA/Russian strikes as massacrs.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s