The Left believes itself to be historically inevitable. The Left vehemently execrates anyone who denies its fundamental premise that it is historically inevitable. To the Left, people who think otherwise than that the Left is historically inevitable are not thinking at all: Such people are ignorant, boorish, and very likely incapable of thinking – or, as the Left has long called it, “critical thinking.” (I note in passing that the phrase “critical thinking,” like the phrase “social justice,” conforms to the Leftist linguistic pattern of taking an ordinary and perfectly well-understood noun and obliterating its standard meaning by the prefixation to it of a modifier which is actually a negation.) Leftist “critical thinking” forecast the outcome of the 2016 presidential election many months in advance. The election would go “inevitably” to That Woman. The fix was in and the fix was cosmic or perhaps ontological. Nothing could un-fix it, right? However, the “inevitable” outcome failed to manifest itself. For the Left, this constituted a cognitive, but more importantly an emotional, catastrophe, the equivalent of Krakatoa suddenly erupting in San Francisco Bay and spoiling everyone’s fun at the Gay Pride Parade. The Left has always lived in a second reality, but now events had shaken that second reality to its phantasmal foundation, and the whole illusory structure began to collapse.
What to do? Leftist “critical thinking,” much like the Marxism from which it directly stems, is “scientific.” As did those who committed themselves to the Ptolemaic cosmology when it came under criticism because increasingly its model of planetary cycles could not be squared with observation, Leftists decided to save the appearances, not by altering the model’s basic principles so that they might conform to observable reality, but by doubling those basic principles – by adding to the model’s cycle of inevitability a new layer of epicycles of inevitability. That Woman could not have lost the election because the American voters rejected her – and by implication the socialist programs and the political party for which she stood – so some other explanation had to be found. At first, the other explanation was that That Woman really had won the election, in the popular vote. For various reasons, this explanation failed to shore up the crumbling worldview of its advocates. Not only did the recounts, in which a so-called third party candidate was That Woman’s stalking horse, fail to disestablish the Trump victory, but they produced a public-relations backlash. A recount in California, which Trump might have requested, would undoubtedly have shown that hundreds of thousands of non-citizens had voted. California’s electoral votes might have been declared null and void.
What now? The Left moved to its other other explanation: Someone must have interfered in the election so as to steal it for the victor. (“We was robbed!”) Who was the thief? Obviously it was the Russians – or more particularly Vladimir Putin. Why is Putin such a convenient culprit from the Leftist point of view? The ruler of an ex-communist state who rejects globalism in favor of nationalism and who has taken steps to reinstitute Orthodox Christianity as the national religion and moral basis of his country embodies every virtue that Leftists hate. Thus, “Putin hacked the election.” (Never mind the details – they only get in the way of a clear vision. That is how the second reality works.) The Putin argument also conveniently made Trump the mere puppet of the Russian marionette master, diminishing the man who beat That Woman even further within the boundaries of the second reality even while, outside the second reality’s boundaries, his public stature steadily increased. And when that failed to save the appearances, the Left invented the story of Trump’s romp with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel suite once occupied by Barack Hussein Obama, with the demonized President Elect ordering the prostitutes to urinate on the bed in which BHO had slept.
The story bears the marks of magical thinking; it is the sexually skewed version of sticking pins in a voodoo doll, as though the humiliation ex post facto could be retroactively effective. Trump is a practical man whose achievements signify his practicality and absolve him of magical thinking. In the lurid scene, therefore, we see the Left projecting, as it habitually does, from its own inward character outward, externalizing itself, in order to taint and condemn.
That the Left expected this desperate ploy to work tells us how deeply its commitment to the second reality runs. The story also tells us both how pornographic the Leftist imagination is and how little impulse control the Left has. The video of Trump’s put-down of CNN reporter Jim Acosta at his recent press conference shows a shocked Leftist, the reporter, staggering out of the electoral Krakatoa eruption, and trying to reassert his “inevitable” control over the situation. Previously, the MSM rapportoriate was a constituency of collaborating stooges of BHO and the Democrat agenda; before that, in the preceding GOP administrations, they were hecklers and harassers whose de facto control of the situation weak Republican chief executives tacitly conceded. The CNN reporter’s chagrin at being told more or less to shut up by Mr. Trump, and at the fact of his actually having been shut up, was heartening. Trump was saying, very clearly, that the press is not elected, is not part of the federal government, and will not be in control during his term or terms. I never thought that I would see anything like it, but I have, and it gladdens me enormously.
Trump took command like the Tuxedo-wearing animal trainer in the classic circus-act, cracking his whip authoritatively, and cuing the trained bears to ride their unicycles — or, as it might be, their epicycles — around the center ring for the amusement of the crowd.