Oregon Republican Collaborators Still Stick With Trump. WHY?

For several years I have periodically asked elected Republicans in our state to tell me if they think Donald Trump is fit to be president of the United States of America. They always, unanimously, indicate yes. There is no longer a need to ask them. They are confirmed collaborators and will remain so.

Trump was right when he bragged that he could shoot someone on 5th Ave. in New York and not lose the support of a single Republican including all registered Republicans in Oregon.

Anne Applebaum has written a brilliant, insightful and deeply disturbing examination and explanation of why Republican leaders have abandoned their principles in support of an immoral and dangerous president. Every Oregonian, indeed every American, would benefit from her historical analysis and persuasive arguments. An epiphany awaits the reader of her compelling story.

This message is addressed to every elected Oregon official - city councilors, county commissioners, school board members et. al. Democracy in our Oregon and our America is under an existential threat from elected Republicans, their donors and their registered Republican base. As elected officials it is essential that you recognize those who are a threat to our constitution and its values and publicly speak out against them.

We are way past sitting in the bleachers yelling at the players. You must get on the field and defend our democracy. History will judge the complicit. If you want to stay out of that rogues gallery then you must act now.

For those of you who have the intellectual stamina and curiosity to better understand the political circumstances which have enveloped our Oregon and our America please read on.

History Will Judge the Complicit

Why have Republican leaders abandoned their principles in support of an immoral and dangerous president?

By Anne Applebaum July/August 2020

https://www.theatlantic.com/ma...

Here are a few excerpts

In english, the word collaborator has a double meaning. A colleague can be described as a collaborator in a neutral or positive sense. But the other definition of collaborator, relevant here, is different: someone who works with the enemy, with the occupying power, with the dictatorial regime. In this negative sense, collaborator is closely related to another set of words: collusion, complicity, connivance. This negative meaning gained currency during the Second World War, when it was widely used to describe Europeans who cooperated with Nazi occupiers. At base, the ugly meaning of collaborator carries an implication of treason: betrayal of one’s nation, of one’s ideology, of one’s morality, of one’s values.

Since the Second World War, historians and political scientists have tried to explain why some people in extreme circumstances become collaborators and others do not.

To the american reader, references to Vichy France, East Germany, fascists, and Communists may seem over-the-top, even ludicrous. But dig a little deeper, and the analogy makes sense. The point is not to compare Trump to Hitler or Stalin; the point is to compare the experiences of high-ranking members of the American Republican Party, especially those who work most closely with the White House, to the experiences of Frenchmen in 1940, or of East Germans in 1945, or of Czesław Miłosz in 1947. These are experiences of people who are forced to accept an alien ideology or a set of values that are in sharp conflict with their own.

Not even Trump’s supporters can contest this analogy, because the imposition of an alien ideology is precisely what he was calling for all along. Trump’s first statement as president, his inaugural address, was an unprecedented assault on American democracy and American values. Remember: He described America’s capital city, America’s government, America’s congressmen and senators—all democratically elected and chosen by Americans, according to America’s 227-year-old Constitution—as an “establishment” that had profited at the expense of “the people.” “Their victories have not been your victories,” he said. “Their triumphs have not been your triumphs.” Trump was stating, as clearly as he possibly could, that a new set of values was now replacing the old, though of course the nature of those new values was not yet clear.

Almost as soon as he stopped speaking, Trump launched his first assault on fact-based reality, a long-undervalued component of the American political system. We are not a theocracy or a monarchy that accepts the word of the leader or the priesthood as law. We are a democracy that debates facts, seeks to understand problems, and then legislates solutions, all in accordance with a set of rules.

The true nature of the ideology that Trump brought to Washington was not “America First,” but rather “Trump First.”

Richard Ellmyer

Author of The Ellmyer Report, a newsletter that informs, educates and influences on public policy. Occasionally distributed to more than a quarter of million readers in Oregon and beyond. Facebook, Portland Politics Plus . Opinion contributor to Patch.com news.