Anyway, manichaeism was one of many dualistic religions so closely associated with dualistic cosmology that the name itself has become shorthand for dualism. A belief system that everything reduces to good and evil and the struggle between the two is a manichean belief system. Even without the manichaeism. Kind of like how a "latte" now refers to the coffee beverage, even though the word just translates to "milk." If you believe that the world is a struggle between good and evil, your view of the world is manichean, even if your religion is not manichaeism.
Wow, I jury-rigged that one together with enough duct-tape to hold the Millennium Falcon together on the Kessel run.
Anyway, tempting as manichean world views are, they are usually bullshit. Occasionally, you'll find people who are just plain evil. Good? Well, I'm a misanthrope, and therein lies the problem of generalized manichean thought for me. But a lot of people find the simplicity appealing, and that's a problem.
OK, now. Consider the following two statements. Don't assess their veracity yet.
1. Donald Trump is a racist who belongs in a category with David Duke, who has done more damage to race relations in America than any politician since Orville Faubus. (Look him up, kids.)
2. Ilhan Omar is an anti-semite who traffics in anti-semitic conspiracy theories.
OK, now before we assess the veracity of either Statement 1 or Statement 2 individually, consider the following as a strictly logical proposition. True or false: Statements 1 and 2 are mutually exclusive? In other words, true or false: only one of these statements can be true?
Look, people, this shouldn't be hard. The answer is false. Without addressing either statement individually, it is possible that they are both true. I actually consider it quite obvious that they are both true. Donald Trump's racism is so over-the-top that the only way to not be shocked is to have lost your capacity to be shocked by racism. I'm at that point. I exhibit zero shock when Donald Trump says over-the-top racist things, and zero shock when his party cowers to avoid admitting what just happened because this is our world. Overt racism is just part of daily life in the Trump administration. I have not lost my capacity for nausea, but I have lost my capacity for shock.
I consider it equally obvious, though, that Ilhan Omar is an anti-semite. Her statements about dual loyalty, intimations about jews controlling the world with money, which were no different from Walt & Mearsheimer and equally anti-semitic... these are not Ilhan Omar-originals. They are old, old tropes, and they are anti-semitic. They are the basis of the most common anti-semitic conspiracy theories. This is not debatable. You say anti-semitic stuff, repeatedly, and this isn't an "Uncle Leo" situation. You're just an anti-semite. She is.
Whether or not Donald Trump is a racist has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not Ilhan Omar is an anti-semite. That means Statement 1 and 2 can both be true. (Or, in theory, they could both be false, but... no. They're both true.)
One of the questions I regularly pose as a head-check is this: can you recognize the problem people who tend to be on your own ideological side? This is really, really important. When you lose this ability, you're gone. You start doing unhealthy things, intellectually. Maintaining political sanity requires maintaining the ability to recognize the cranks, con-artists, idiots, assholes, bigots and other assorted deplorables who tend to be on your side more often than your opponents' side.
You know what undercuts that?
Millennium Falcism. I mean... Manicheism. Ship up. I mean, shut up.
Moving on, the basic problem with a manichean view of the world is that you presume that that which opposes evil must be good. The enemy of my enemy, and all that.
Consider Statements 1 and 2 again.
Donald Trump is racist. There can be no real debate on this point. Once you accept the premise that racism is not only evil, but among the greater evils, then Donald Trump is among the greater evils in the world, given the leadership role that he plays in the promotion of racism. Moreover, Donald Trump is an authoritarian who does not accept the premise that there is such a thing as legitimate opposition to him, on anything. So, whenever criticized, in any way, he attacks in the most petty and vile way possible. This does not give him the legitimate defense of saying that he is "only" a "counter-puncher" if the criticisms he faces are legitimate critiques of his public actions, and his responses are racist bile, but it suffices to say, for now, that he does not accept the premise that anyone, anywhere, has a legitimate right to criticize him, on anything. Anyone who challenges this statement needs to produce a case in which Donald Trump has faced criticism with honor, dignity and, to make up a word, mensch-itude. Hi, Ilhan!
Donald Trump is the antimensch.
The specific form that Trump's bile takes, though, will depend on whom he is attacking. With Joe Biden, his attacks are neither racist nor sexist because Joe Biden is a white man. So instead, we get age stuff. Unless Biden gets the nomination, in which case his crack team of lie-manufacturers over at Fox will get to work on something more creative. After all, Giuliani cancelled his collusion-trip to Ukraine, so I guess it's back to the drawing board!
When attacking someone who is non-white, his attack will usually be racist, because Trump is racist to his core.
When attacking anyone who isn't white, the attack tends to be some variation of calling that person a foreigner, and not really American, because Trump's racist brain cannot conceive of a non-white person being a US-born, real, actual American. Like I said, hardcore racist. Hence, his embrace of birtherism, his description of the US-born Judge Curiel as "a Mexican" who couldn't adjudicate a case involving him impartially because he is "Mexican," and now, telling a bunch of Democratic Representatives to go back to their home countries, when all are US citizens, and all but one were born in the US. This is what we, in the social sciences, call, "a pattern." And that pattern says that Donald Trump is a racist.
The manichean response is to decide that those attacked in this racist manner must be good. They are the other side of a fight against evil. Defend Ilhan Omar. I'll focus on Ilhan Omar here for a very specific reason. She is the most difficult to defend of "the squad." Ocasio-Cortez is a vapid moron in addition to being an ideological extremist, but she is not a bigot, that I have seen. I'll leave open the possibility, but mostly, what I've seen is idiocy. Omar? Nope. Bigot.
However, if you must reduce everything to a manichean struggle, there is no need to analyze her. Once you see that there is a conflict between Trump and Omar, and that Trump is racist, making racist attacks, then Omar is not only to be defended against those specific racist attacks, but to be defended period. Full stop. She can't be a bigot! Trump is a racist, so Omar must not be!
Does that follow, logically? No, it follows in manichean terms. And that's the problem.
You see, it is just as clear that Omar is an anti-semite as it is that Trump is a racist. She spouts conspiracy theories about jews controlling the world with money, speaks of dual loyalty, and if this kind of stuff came out of the mouth of a blond-haired, blue-eyed white guy, particularly one with a, let's say Germanic name and background, the Democrats would never stand for it. Add a southern accent, and especially an R after the name? Firestorm from the left.
Remember that Trump ad with a picture of Clinton, a pile of money, and a star of David? It's my job to remember this stuff, and then to not look the other way when the Democrats try to give a pass to one of their own for the same damned thing.
You may not remember the firestorm that ensued from the publication of Walt & Mearsheimer's book, but I do. The left, though, really wants to give Omar a pass. Even when she does it repeatedly.
But, when a Republican says something racist about her? E.g., Trump telling her to "go back home?" Or getting his
The thing to understand, if you are a Trump opponent is this: the bafflement you feel at Republicans' refusal to see Trump's racism for what it is? That's the same bafflement that many Republicans get at Democrats' unwillingness to see Omar's anti-semitism for what it so clearly is. And it's because with respect to Omar, Democrats are the ones with the blinders on, adopted based on manichean necessity-- the same necessity that forces the non-racist Republicans to deny Trump's racism. Yes, there are non-racist Republicans. They just have to engage in mental contortions. The same ones Democrats play if they are trying to deny Omar's anti-semitism, although to a greater degree given that Trump's displays of racism are more extensive and have a longer history.
There are two problems with equating Ilhan Omar with Donald Trump. First, Omar is a backbencher, and Trump is President. That puts them in different positions with respect to their parties. Second, their hostilities are directed differently. Omar doesn't like jews, but Trump pretty much hates everyone who isn't white. Also, women. And... anyone who doesn't worship Donald Trump as their personal, living god. Trump has problems with pretty much everyone except those who have committed to a lifetime in the Trump Personality Cult. That creates a lot of oppositional situations.
It is worth noting, though, that if you want to read up on E. Jean Carroll-- the latest woman to claim publicly, and probably truthfully, that Donald Trump raped her-- do so with a full understanding that she is a complex person, and not necessarily a good one. Vox did an interview with her, available here, and basically, she's a misandrist. Straight-up, she dislikes men. Not rapists, but men. Here's another one in which the author of the article claims that Carroll is only half joking about saying that all men should be sent to re-education camps. Misandry is bigotry, and it is a form of bigotry that the left at least tolerates. Manicheism strikes again. If it opposes misogyny, it must at least be tolerated, right?
Only if you are incapable of moral reasoning.
The focus of this post, though, has been on race and how that fits in with polarization because... well, figure it out. Manichean world views are deeply problematic. As I have reminded you, repeatedly, one of the most important head-checks is whether or not you can make a reasoned assessment of the people who are, more often than not, on your side. When you lose that ability, you're gone. When both parties lose that ability because they have decided to treat everything as a manichean struggle, there is no longer a check on the crackpots. The worst of them is now President, and the Democrats are struggling with their own. Currently, their worst are backbenchers, but the activists are rallying reflexively, and that's a problem because it means the activists can't tell that they're crackpots, and in the case of Omar... a bigot. And if the party leadership can't signal to the base that her bigotry is unacceptable because of the dynamics of the party, that doesn't bode well.