The Russian Collusion Investigation as Therapy

Now that Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller has indicted the Russians for meddling in "our election," let us think about what it all means.

The answer is obvious.  This is neo-McCarthyism, straight up.  After all, when was the last time that the nation was all in a tizzy about underhanded Russian meddling in U.S. politics?  It was back in the immediate post-WWII era, when Richard Nixon and Joe McCarthy and other Republican worthies made their bones with accusations that the Russians were Up to Something.

But why?  Why McCarthyism then, and why the neo-McCarthyite Russia collusion narrative now?

It really is pretty simple.  Back in 1948, the Republicans lost a presidential election they had expected to win, as in the famous picture of President Truman displaying the headline "Dewey Defeats Truman."  The Truman win meant that the Republicans had lost five presidential elections in a row.  We humans have a thoughtful way of processing such an event, which suddenly and catastrophically destroys all our hopes and expectations.  We yell, at the top of our voices: "We was robbed!  It's a conspiracy!"

The same is true about the supporters of Hillary Clinton on the fateful day of November 9, 2016.  It could not be – it was impossible that the American people had elected an orange-haired ape from Queens.  All the right people, all the intelligent people had agreed that Clinton had it in the bag, and that the queen's vulgarian didn't have a hope of winning.  Besides, First Female President!

So it had to be a conspiracy.

Now, if the United States were still a rough, tough, manly democracy, we would have tied the Russian internet up in knots to teach Putin a lesson and told the loser Democrats to go put it where the sun don't shine.  But that was then; this is now.  Millions of voters were in tears after the Trump win.  Social science professionals were reporting another outbreak of Post-Election Stress Disorder, similar in virulence to the outbreak of November 2000.  Well born women from all over the United States cashed in their airline miles and rallied to protest the inauguration of the vulgar Trump.  It was obvious; the Hillary loss had to be handled more gently than in olden times.  Because women.

Years ago, I read German sociologist Georg Simmel and his prediction, a century ago, about the consequence of women coming into the public square.  I wrote:

Obviously, Simmel wrote, the public sphere, the world outside the home, in the short term would still be defined by men for men, but in the long term women would transform the public square to suit "a more feminine sensibility."

Now, I don't know what your experience may be, but my experience is that you do not tell a woman to "suck it up" after a setback.  That is not what a feminine sensibility expects when something has gone wrong.  Instead, the proper thing to do is to endlessly rehearse and "share" her feelings about the traumatic event, and soften its sharp edges with a spot of chardonnay until the tears fade away.

And so now we have the Russian indictments.  Oh, no!  I can't believe it!  The Russians were trying to disrupt "our democracy" and were backing the comb-over guy right through the election cycle!  We must expose these toxic abusers and bring them to justice!

Okay, I get it.  The way we resolve political disputes from here on out in the United States is to "share" the distress of the helpless victims of the Trumpocracy using a nice, kind special prosecutor therapist who will kindly ruin the lives of half a dozen second-tier political operatives but will help us all get to closure.

Of course, in this brave new world, only the liberal mean-girls clique get the special snowflake treatment.  If you are outside the liberal bubble – a man, a Christian, a pro-life woman, a gun-owner, an alt-right white supremacist – or if you are a former "little darling" of the liberals now cast aside like the white working class -- if you are one of those, then suck it up, pal.

But don't forget, liberals, that there is no such thing as justice – only injustice.

You see, liberals, when you spend your lives giving you and yours special privileges and free special prosecutor therapy to ease the pain of post-election stress disorder, it may all seem like the right and sensitive thing to do.  But other folks may think that all this special therapy for liberals spells I-N-J-U-S-T-I-C-E.  And there is nothing like injustice to get people out to the polls.

Anyway, shouldn't the proper response to nefarious Russian election interference be to sic the fabled FBI Counterintelligence Division on the Russkies?

Maybe after we all get to closure.

Christopher Chantrill @chrischantrill runs the go-to site on U.S. government finances, usgovernmentspending.com.  Also get his American Manifesto and his Road to the Middle Class.

Now that Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller has indicted the Russians for meddling in "our election," let us think about what it all means.

The answer is obvious.  This is neo-McCarthyism, straight up.  After all, when was the last time that the nation was all in a tizzy about underhanded Russian meddling in U.S. politics?  It was back in the immediate post-WWII era, when Richard Nixon and Joe McCarthy and other Republican worthies made their bones with accusations that the Russians were Up to Something.

But why?  Why McCarthyism then, and why the neo-McCarthyite Russia collusion narrative now?

It really is pretty simple.  Back in 1948, the Republicans lost a presidential election they had expected to win, as in the famous picture of President Truman displaying the headline "Dewey Defeats Truman."  The Truman win meant that the Republicans had lost five presidential elections in a row.  We humans have a thoughtful way of processing such an event, which suddenly and catastrophically destroys all our hopes and expectations.  We yell, at the top of our voices: "We was robbed!  It's a conspiracy!"

The same is true about the supporters of Hillary Clinton on the fateful day of November 9, 2016.  It could not be – it was impossible that the American people had elected an orange-haired ape from Queens.  All the right people, all the intelligent people had agreed that Clinton had it in the bag, and that the queen's vulgarian didn't have a hope of winning.  Besides, First Female President!

So it had to be a conspiracy.

Now, if the United States were still a rough, tough, manly democracy, we would have tied the Russian internet up in knots to teach Putin a lesson and told the loser Democrats to go put it where the sun don't shine.  But that was then; this is now.  Millions of voters were in tears after the Trump win.  Social science professionals were reporting another outbreak of Post-Election Stress Disorder, similar in virulence to the outbreak of November 2000.  Well born women from all over the United States cashed in their airline miles and rallied to protest the inauguration of the vulgar Trump.  It was obvious; the Hillary loss had to be handled more gently than in olden times.  Because women.

Years ago, I read German sociologist Georg Simmel and his prediction, a century ago, about the consequence of women coming into the public square.  I wrote:

Obviously, Simmel wrote, the public sphere, the world outside the home, in the short term would still be defined by men for men, but in the long term women would transform the public square to suit "a more feminine sensibility."

Now, I don't know what your experience may be, but my experience is that you do not tell a woman to "suck it up" after a setback.  That is not what a feminine sensibility expects when something has gone wrong.  Instead, the proper thing to do is to endlessly rehearse and "share" her feelings about the traumatic event, and soften its sharp edges with a spot of chardonnay until the tears fade away.

And so now we have the Russian indictments.  Oh, no!  I can't believe it!  The Russians were trying to disrupt "our democracy" and were backing the comb-over guy right through the election cycle!  We must expose these toxic abusers and bring them to justice!

Okay, I get it.  The way we resolve political disputes from here on out in the United States is to "share" the distress of the helpless victims of the Trumpocracy using a nice, kind special prosecutor therapist who will kindly ruin the lives of half a dozen second-tier political operatives but will help us all get to closure.

Of course, in this brave new world, only the liberal mean-girls clique get the special snowflake treatment.  If you are outside the liberal bubble – a man, a Christian, a pro-life woman, a gun-owner, an alt-right white supremacist – or if you are a former "little darling" of the liberals now cast aside like the white working class -- if you are one of those, then suck it up, pal.

But don't forget, liberals, that there is no such thing as justice – only injustice.

You see, liberals, when you spend your lives giving you and yours special privileges and free special prosecutor therapy to ease the pain of post-election stress disorder, it may all seem like the right and sensitive thing to do.  But other folks may think that all this special therapy for liberals spells I-N-J-U-S-T-I-C-E.  And there is nothing like injustice to get people out to the polls.

Anyway, shouldn't the proper response to nefarious Russian election interference be to sic the fabled FBI Counterintelligence Division on the Russkies?

Maybe after we all get to closure.

Christopher Chantrill @chrischantrill runs the go-to site on U.S. government finances, usgovernmentspending.com.  Also get his American Manifesto and his Road to the Middle Class.