Cognitive dissonance is a real thing. Here’s an example. If you are in the camp of dozens of millions of Americans that will vote for Trump. And vote for him because he stands for blockading this country from Muslim migrants or even visitors. And vote for him because he stands for preemptive rooting out Radical Islam in this country to prevent mass murders like we’ve seen inspired by it. What are the logical conclusions of voting for that? What does that reasoning mean?
In the cases of our very recent Radical Islam-inspired mass murders, it would entail at the very least imprisoning those non-criminal citizens deemed to be such a threat *prior* to any criminal activity. Because any Religious Radical can buy military grade weaponry in just about any scale.
So what is the political track to preemptively imprison people in quantity enough to have the Trump-desired effect? Somewhere in the mix it logically follows that we’d have to codify (i.e., pass laws) that are clearly unconstitutional, legalizing the rollout of some sort of “domestic Guantanamo”. How would these laws stand up to judicial scrutiny? It would obviously require an accelerated stacking of the Supreme Court with like minded justices. Our court is currently ripe for rapid turn over in the next eight years. The Senate is primed with Republicans to approve the “proper” turn over. Senators are running en masse to get behind the Trump candidacy.
So, stack the court, pass the laws. What else? Well, it would require a legitimate democratic buy in, greater than we currently have. Getting that mass appeal would require the demonization, currently unprecedented to date, of the sorts of people who are deemed so potentially treasonous to require a sea change in what legal rights to personhood mean in this country.
Think this country wouldn’t preemptively imprison based on national heritage alone? Did it in the 1940s. Think we won’t imprison people indefinitely without charge or trial? Bush and Obama have already laid that legal work in stone. Think a Western power wouldn’t ostracize, then imprison millions based solely on their religious heritage? Then you have missed every history lesson ever.
It’s all happened before. And the blueprint to do it all again written. It just takes enough steps in the beginning of the process to snowball the intermediate and final steps.
So if you think a few baby Trump steps in the direction of xenophobia make prudent sense to get behind and you will not get behind the whole subsequent bargain because everything else feels like doing nothing, you are being what is dis-affectionately referred to as a useful idiot. Supporting a trajectory and then choosing to not see it, is your cognitive dissonance.