Terminate the Colonel? Part II
Apocalypse Now perfectly parallels "The Reign of Trump". Here's how.
Last week, we outlined what you all have been wondering about - how do Trump and Kurtz line up to each other? What was Willard really searching for? How can morality be twisted by reality and circumstances? Charlie really don’t surf?
If you missed it, check it out below. After nearly a decade of Trump and his haters, what the hell has it wrought upon society? Will anti-trumpers and never-trumpers and trump-haters ever shut the hell up? How can we make sense of this?
I can, and do. Apocalypse Now provides a literary foil to compare reality to. The Reign of Trump has now been multiplied and mandated. The Bad Orange has never been more popular and potent. The resistance never so futile and feckless. So this is the new-now-normal people kept longing for. We are here, and about half the country pines for a past that never happened. Let’s explore the jungle.
Drawing parallels between the characters of Apocalypse Now and real-life figures associated with Donald Trump’s rise and presidency offers a way to explore how the film’s themes of human duality, moral conflict, and societal chaos resonate in contemporary politics. Here’s an analysis mapping key characters from the film to their counterparts in the Trump era:
Captain Willard – The Reluctant Navigator
Film Role: Willard is tasked with assassinating Colonel Kurtz, a mission that forces him to confront the darkness within himself and question the morality of his orders. His journey reflects internal conflict and reluctant complicity in a broken system.
Trump Counterpart: Swing Voters or Reluctant Supporters
Like Willard, these voters or figures supported Trump out of dissatisfaction with the establishment rather than unwavering loyalty. They sought change but were often uneasy with Trump’s rhetoric or actions, grappling with whether their support was justified.
Examples:
Moderate Republicans like Senator Susan Collins often expressed concern about Trump’s behavior but supported key policies or votes, reflecting Willard’s reluctant progression toward his goal.
Colonel Kurtz – The Charismatic Outsider
Film Role: Kurtz is a once-respected military leader who becomes a rogue figure, creating a personal fiefdom in the jungle and embodying the collapse of order. He is revered and feared for his unorthodox, brutal leadership.
Trump Counterpart: Donald Trump
Trump, like Kurtz, broke from political norms to establish his own “kingdom” of influence, characterized by an intense personal following and a rejection of traditional authority structures.
Parallels:
Both men attract loyalty through charisma and a promise of liberation from perceived hypocrisy.
Trump’s polarizing rhetoric and leadership style echo Kurtz’s descent into chaos, where morality is bent to justify their actions.
Lieutenant Colonel Kilgore – The Bombastic Showman
Film Role: Kilgore is a flamboyant, thrill-seeking officer obsessed with his image and glory, as epitomized by his famous "I love the smell of napalm in the morning" line. He is larger than life and disconnected from the gravity of the war.
Trump Counterpart: Media Personalities or Figures Like Rudy Giuliani
Kilgore’s over-the-top persona mirrors individuals like Rudy Giuliani or other Trump allies who often leaned into theatrics and bombast.
Parallels:
Giuliani’s public antics (e.g., the Four Seasons Total Landscaping press conference) reflect Kilgore’s eccentric and attention-seeking behavior, where seriousness is often overshadowed by spectacle.
Both Kilgore and such Trump-era figures thrive in creating memorable moments, even if they distract from underlying issues.
The Crew – Diverse Voices Navigating Chaos
Film Role: Willard’s boat crew represents a microcosm of humanity, with individuals from different backgrounds reacting differently to the moral and physical challenges of their journey.
Trump Counterpart: The American Electorate
The crew’s dynamic mirrors the varying responses of Trump supporters and opponents—ranging from loyalists to skeptics, each grappling with their roles in the unfolding chaos.
Examples:
Loyalists like Steve Bannon or Michael Flynn echo crew members who follow orders regardless of personal reservations.
Skeptics among moderate Republicans or disillusioned Democrats reflect those in the crew questioning the mission’s morality.
The Photojournalist – The Blind Devotee
Film Role: The unnamed photojournalist idolizes Kurtz, excusing his actions with a near-fanatical loyalty. He thrives in Kurtz’s chaos and interprets it as genius.
Trump Counterpart: Trump’s Most Devoted Supporters
The photojournalist parallels Trump’s unwavering base, who view him as a transformative figure regardless of controversies or criticisms.
Examples:
Figures like MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell or social media influencers who fervently champion Trump’s narrative align with this archetype, portraying him as a misunderstood savior and downplaying his flaws.
The General and Command – The System That Enables Chaos
Film Role: The generals who send Willard on his mission represent the system that created Kurtz and now seeks to erase him to maintain order, avoiding accountability for their role in his downfall.
Trump Counterpart: The Republican Establishment
Like the generals, the Republican establishment initially supported Trump’s rise, seeing him as a means to achieve policy goals (e.g., tax cuts, conservative judges). Over time, they distanced themselves from his actions while benefiting from his influence.
Examples:
Figures like Senator Mitch McConnell exemplify this duality, enabling Trump’s presidency for strategic gains but often deflecting responsibility for its divisive consequences.
The Jungle – A Setting That Consumes
Film Role: The jungle in Apocalypse Now is not just a backdrop but a symbol of chaos, moral ambiguity, and the thin veneer of civilization.
Trump Counterpart: The Political and Media Landscape
The political and media environment during Trump’s presidency mirrors the jungle’s overwhelming and chaotic nature, where narratives are distorted, and truth becomes elusive.
Parallels:
The explosion of "fake news" claims, partisan media outlets, and social media echo the jungle’s disorienting effect, forcing participants to question reality and morality.
Conclusion: A Reflective Allegory
The characters of Apocalypse Now offer an allegorical lens to understand the Trump era. The film’s themes of power, loyalty, and moral compromise resonate in the actions of Trump, his allies, and his voters, forcing everyone involved to confront their own duality. Whether they emerged from this "jungle" vindicated, changed, or haunted remains an open question, as it does in the film’s haunting finale.
Delving deeper into the issues raised in the parallels between Apocalypse Now and the Trump era provides a richer understanding of the dynamics at play. Let’s expand on key characters and themes, exploring their real-world implications and deeper connections to societal and political trends.
Captain Willard and Swing Voters/Reluctant Supporters
Internal Conflict:
Willard begins his mission reluctantly, unsure if Kurtz deserves execution but willing to follow orders. Similarly, swing voters and reluctant Trump supporters faced a moral dilemma: could supporting Trump bring the systemic change they sought, despite his controversial persona?
Real-World Example:
Suburban White Women: Many in this group supported Trump in 2016 due to dissatisfaction with the Democratic Party’s direction but expressed regret or discomfort with his rhetoric, particularly after events like the Charlottesville "Unite the Right" rally or the Access Hollywood tape.
Moral Reckoning: Over time, they had to reconcile the benefits of Trump’s policies (e.g., tax cuts, economic growth) with the societal costs, such as increased polarization and perceived erosion of civility.
Outcome:
By the end of the film, Willard kills Kurtz, but his expression suggests he is unsure if the act was justified. Similarly, swing voters in 2020 faced a moment of reckoning, as some turned against Trump, while others doubled down, believing his leadership was necessary despite its flaws.
Colonel Kurtz and Donald Trump
The Charismatic Outsider:
Kurtz is revered by his followers for rejecting traditional military authority and creating his own order in chaos. His allure lies in his unapologetic embrace of power and rejection of societal hypocrisy.
Trump’s Parallel:
Trump’s appeal stemmed from his status as a disruptor of political norms. He cultivated an image of strength, promising to “drain the swamp” and champion the “forgotten American.”
Both figures thrive in environments of chaos, bending moral and institutional rules to their advantage.
Moral Ambiguity:
Kurtz justifies his extreme methods with a utilitarian view of morality: the ends justify the means. Trump’s tenure reflected similar logic, where controversial policies (e.g., immigration crackdowns, trade wars) were framed as necessary for national revival.
Real-World Example:
Family Separation Policy: Trump’s “Zero Tolerance” immigration policy was criticized for its humanitarian impact, but many supporters rationalized it as necessary for border security.
Capitol Riot: Like Kurtz’s breakdown, Trump’s handling of the January 6 Capitol riot raised questions about his influence and whether his rhetoric crossed a line, leading to fractures even among his supporters.
Loyalty and Dissent:
Kurtz’s followers view him as a near-mythical figure. Similarly, Trump commands unwavering devotion from a significant base, but his actions also alienated traditional conservatives who struggled with his approach to leadership.
Lieutenant Colonel Kilgore and Media Personalities
Theatrical Leadership:
Kilgore embodies flamboyance and bravado, focusing more on spectacle than substance. His obsession with glory (“I love the smell of napalm in the morning”) mirrors the bombast of certain Trump-era figures.
Real-World Example:
Rudy Giuliani: His actions, such as the infamous Four Seasons Total Landscaping press conference, often prioritized attention-grabbing moments over coherent strategy.
Media Personalities: Figures like Sean Hannity or Tucker Carlson amplified Trump’s messaging with a flair for controversy, often steering the conversation toward cultural grievances.
Distraction from Consequences:
Kilgore’s bravado distracts his troops from the grim realities of war. Similarly, media theatrics often overshadowed the real-world consequences of Trump’s policies, keeping supporters focused on culture wars rather than substantive policy outcomes.
The Crew and The Electorate
A Microcosm of Division:
Willard’s crew represents a spectrum of human responses to chaos: some embrace the mission unquestioningly, others question its morality, and some disengage altogether. This reflects the American electorate during Trump’s presidency:
Unwavering Supporters: Like Chief or Clean, some voters followed Trump with blind loyalty, prioritizing his promises over his controversies.
Skeptics: Others, like swing voters, questioned the journey but remained involved, hoping to steer outcomes toward their interests.
Disillusioned Opponents: Some disengaged entirely, viewing the Trump era as a betrayal of democratic values and stepping away from political participation.
Breaking Points:
The crew’s journey ends in death and disarray, symbolizing the toll of prolonged exposure to moral ambiguity. Similarly, Trump’s presidency left America deeply polarized, with fractures among family, friends, and communities.
The Photojournalist and Trump’s Base
Blind Devotion:
The photojournalist idolizes Kurtz, rationalizing his brutality as genius. He embodies the phenomenon of unquestioning loyalty, where criticism is dismissed as misunderstanding.
Real-World Example:
Figures like Mike Lindell or other fervent Trump supporters exemplify this archetype, viewing Trump’s actions as necessary for saving America and interpreting his controversies as media bias or political sabotage.
Reality Distortion:
Just as the photojournalist reinterprets Kurtz’s chaos as brilliance, some Trump supporters reframe his actions in a positive light, disregarding evidence of harm or ethical concerns.
The Generals and The Republican Establishment
Enabling Chaos:
The generals in Apocalypse Now created the conditions for Kurtz’s rise but sought to distance themselves from his excesses. Similarly, the Republican establishment enabled Trump’s ascent, seeing him as a vehicle for achieving their goals (e.g., tax reform, judicial appointments) but often sought to deflect blame for his controversies.
Real-World Example:
Senator Mitch McConnell: He supported Trump’s policies and judicial nominations but later condemned his role in the Capitol riot, reflecting the duality of enabling and denouncing Trump’s leadership.
The Jungle and the Media Landscape
Disorientation and Chaos:
The jungle in Apocalypse Now creates a setting where truth and morality are obscured, and survival becomes paramount. Similarly, the Trump era’s media landscape amplified disinformation, creating an environment where competing narratives overwhelmed objective reality.
Real-World Example:
The proliferation of conspiracy theories (e.g., QAnon, Russia, the Laptop) mirrors the disorienting effect of the jungle, forcing voters to navigate conflicting realities.
Conclusion: An American Reckoning
The parallels between Apocalypse Now and the Trump era highlight the timeless nature of human duality: the tension between ideals and instincts, order and chaos, loyalty and dissent. Like Willard’s journey, the American electorate’s experience during Trump’s presidency involved confronting moral and societal contradictions, leaving lasting scars on individuals and institutions alike.
Trump Voter versus Trump Supporter
The shift of formerly Democratic voters to support Trump is a complex phenomenon rooted in cultural, economic, and emotional factors, which mirrors the themes of transformation and moral compromise explored in Apocalypse Now. These voters often felt alienated by the Democratic Party's perceived elitism and saw Trump as a disruptive force aligned with their frustrations and aspirations.
Alienation and the Journey Into the "Unknown"
Economic Disillusionment:
Many former Democratic voters, particularly in working-class communities, felt abandoned by a party they believed had once championed their economic interests. The offshoring of jobs, decline of manufacturing, and stagnation of wages eroded trust.
Trump's promise to "bring jobs back," renegotiate trade deals (e.g., NAFTA’s replacement with USMCA), and his rhetoric against globalization resonated deeply. Like Captain Willard at the start of his journey, these voters were drawn to Trump as a figure who could confront an entrenched system they no longer trusted.
Cultural Displacement:
For some, the Democratic Party’s focus on progressive social issues, such as racial justice, LGBTQ+ rights, and immigration reform, seemed disconnected from their own concerns. This created a sense of cultural alienation.
Trump’s focus on "traditional values" and nationalism tapped into fears of being left behind in a rapidly changing society, mirroring the film’s theme of individuals losing their identity within a larger, uncontrollable force.
Confronting Demons: Trump as Both Solution and Conflict
Breaking From the Past:
Voters who shifted to Trump often cited frustration with Democratic politicians who, despite promises, failed to deliver meaningful change. For example, regions affected by deindustrialization (e.g., the Rust Belt) saw little improvement under previous administrations.
Supporting Trump was an act of rebellion against a system they felt was rigged, reflecting a willingness to embrace drastic measures—similar to Willard’s eventual acceptance of Kurtz’s extreme logic.
Rationalizing Support:
Many voters justified their support for Trump by focusing on his economic and nationalist policies, even if they disagreed with his rhetoric or personal conduct. This parallels the moral compromises characters in Apocalypse Now make when faced with war’s chaos.
For example, while some former Democrats expressed discomfort with Trump’s handling of race or his divisive language, they supported him for perceived economic gains, such as lower unemployment rates or trade protections.
Transformational Events
The 2016 Election:
Trump flipped historically Democratic counties in states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. His messaging about "forgotten Americans" resonated, contrasting with Clinton’s focus on continuity with the Obama administration.
This shift reflects the duality of human nature: voters rejected traditional alliances for a candidate who represented disruption, even at the cost of embracing polarizing policies.
Trade and Industry:
Policies like tariffs on Chinese goods and renegotiated trade deals were tangible demonstrations of Trump’s commitment to prioritizing American industries. For former Democrats in manufacturing-dependent regions, these policies reinforced their decision to switch allegiance.
However, the mixed outcomes of these policies—such as retaliatory tariffs affecting farmers—forced some voters to question whether the ends justified the means, echoing Willard’s internal conflict during his mission.
The Long-Term Transformation
Cultural Polarization:
Trump’s tenure deepened cultural divides, forcing voters to pick sides in battles over identity, race, and values. Many former Democrats saw the party’s progressive turn as antithetical to their beliefs, reinforcing their alignment with Trump despite misgivings.
This cultural clash mirrors the film’s depiction of civilization versus savagery. Voters grappled with the idea of whether their support represented a necessary rejection of elite norms or an abandonment of their former ideals.
Normalization of Trump’s Style:
Over time, Trump’s bombastic rhetoric and unconventional approach became normalized for many voters. This adaptation mirrors Willard’s growing acceptance of the brutality around him, as voters reconciled Trump’s flaws with their broader dissatisfaction with the political system.
Reconciling the Duality
Moral Compromise:
Just as Willard must confront his own capacity for darkness, former Democratic voters who switched to Trump may grapple with whether their choice reflects a compromise of their values or an evolution in their priorities.
For instance, policies like the family separation at the border or Trump’s response to Charlottesville forced voters to confront the tension between supporting Trump’s policies and disapproving of his behavior.
Validation or Regret:
Some former Democrats feel vindicated, pointing to Trump’s economic policies or his stance on foreign affairs as evidence of his success. Others, however, express regret, particularly in light of controversies such as his handling of COVID-19 or the Capitol riot, which tested their willingness to stand by him.
Conclusion: The Thin Line Between Salvation and Damnation
For former Democrats who voted for Trump, their journey reflects the duality of human nature explored in Apocalypse Now. They were drawn to Trump as a solution to systemic failures but found themselves navigating a landscape where the price of disruption was both personal and societal.
Like Willard’s journey into the jungle, their path has been one of self-discovery, forcing them to reconcile their initial hopes with the realities of Trump’s leadership.
Key Demographics
White Working-Class Voters:
Who They Are: Predominantly non-college-educated white voters in industrial and rural regions.
Motivations:
Disillusionment with Democratic support for globalization, which they blamed for job losses in manufacturing-heavy regions like the Rust Belt.
Trump’s focus on economic nationalism, including tariffs and promises to revive American industry, resonated with these voters.
Examples:
2016 Flip: Counties like Macomb County, Michigan, historically a Democratic stronghold, shifted to Trump, contributing to his narrow win in the state.
Outcome: Trump’s emphasis on "America First" policies, like withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), reinforced their belief that he was fighting for their economic interests.
Rural Voters in Traditionally Democratic States:
Who They Are: Farmers and rural communities that had supported Democrats due to New Deal-era policies and agricultural subsidies.
Motivations:
Frustration with Democratic focus on urban and coastal issues.
Trump’s promises of deregulation and his stance on immigration, which they viewed as threats to jobs and social order.
Examples:
Agricultural Policies: Although retaliatory tariffs during Trump’s trade wars hurt farmers, many appreciated the subsequent bailout programs and viewed him as prioritizing their concerns over global trade.
Black and Hispanic Voters:
Who They Are: A minority but significant subset of these groups, particularly in economically distressed areas.
Motivations:
Trump’s focus on criminal justice reform, including the First Step Act, appealed to some Black voters.
Among Hispanic voters, particularly in Florida and Texas, his anti-socialist rhetoric resonated with Cuban and Venezuelan immigrants with histories of fleeing oppressive regimes.
Examples:
2020 Election: Trump improved his support among Black men and Hispanic voters, flipping areas like Zapata County, Texas, which had long supported Democrats.
Geographic Shifts
Rust Belt States:
Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin: Trump’s focus on revitalizing manufacturing and his criticism of trade deals like NAFTA directly addressed the economic grievances of these states.
Examples:
Wisconsin: Trump flipped traditionally Democratic counties like Kenosha and Racine in 2016, leveraging concerns about economic decline and cultural shifts.
Impact: Despite mixed outcomes (e.g., Harley-Davidson moving production overseas due to retaliatory tariffs), many voters remained loyal due to Trump’s strong rhetoric on protecting American jobs.
Appalachian Region:
Who They Are: Former Democratic voters in areas like West Virginia, Kentucky, and parts of Ohio, who once supported candidates focused on coal and blue-collar jobs.
Motivations:
Trump’s promises to revive coal and his critique of environmental regulations that he claimed hurt energy jobs resonated deeply.
Examples:
West Virginia gave Trump one of his largest margins of victory, despite its prior Democratic lean under figures like Senator Robert Byrd.
Border and Oil States:
Texas and Arizona: Trump’s hardline immigration policies and opposition to environmental restrictions on oil production appealed to voters in these regions.
Examples:
Hispanic Voters in Texas: In counties along the Rio Grande Valley, Trump improved significantly, emphasizing a secure border, law and order and economic recovery.
Policy Impacts
Trade Policy:
Tariffs and Trade Wars:
Trump imposed tariffs on Chinese goods to protect American industries, particularly steel and aluminum, which benefited some domestic manufacturers.
Impact on Voters:
Rust Belt voters saw this as Trump delivering on promises, but retaliatory tariffs hurt farmers, creating a mixed legacy. Bailouts helped maintain support among rural voters.
Economic Gains and Setbacks:
Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (2017):
Delivered tax breaks across the board but also benefited corporations and the wealthy.
Impact on Voters:
Working-class voters saw short-term economic boosts, but the long-term perception of inequality forced some to question its benefits.
Pre-Pandemic Economy:
Record-low unemployment before COVID-19 solidified support among swing voters who prioritized job creation.
Immigration and Law Enforcement:
Zero Tolerance Policy:
While controversial, Trump’s hardline stance on immigration appealed to voters concerned about border security, especially inner-city blacks and rural Hispanics.
Impact on Voters:
Former Democrats in border states or rural areas embraced his rhetoric as necessary, though family separation policies caused moral dilemmas for some.
Emotional and Cultural Dimensions
Cultural Alienation:
Many former Democratic voters felt culturally abandoned by a party they associated with urban elites. Trump’s rhetoric about “forgotten Americans” tapped into a sense of grievance and loss of identity.
Examples:
His vocal opposition to NFL protests, trans issues, and illegal immigration, which some voters saw as disrespecting national symbols and customs, further galvanized cultural alignment with Trump.
Populist Appeal:
Trump’s rejection of political correctness and his "outsider" persona allowed former Democrats to see him as a disruptor who could upend entrenched political systems.
Identity and Loyalty:
Over time, voters began to identify with Trump’s movement as part of their cultural and political identity, making it harder to shift away even when faced with controversies.
Conclusion
The shift of former Democratic voters to Trump reflects a journey akin to the moral and existential reckoning in Apocalypse Now. These voters were drawn by the promise of economic revival, cultural preservation, and disruption of a political system they no longer trusted. However, this journey forced them to confront the duality of their decision, balancing perceived gains against moral and societal costs.
At what price moral superiority?
The duality of moral and societal costs to voters who supported Trump, particularly former Democrats, can be understood as a tension between the benefits they perceived in their decision and the ethical or societal compromises they may have made. This mirrors Apocalypse Now’s exploration of human duality, where choices driven by survival or pragmatism reveal the darker side of human nature.
1. Economic and Political Gains vs. Moral Compromise
Economic Revival:
Many voters, especially in the Rust Belt, saw tangible benefits from Trump’s policies, such as job growth in manufacturing and tax cuts. These gains validated their decision to shift support.
Moral Cost: For some, these benefits came at the expense of supporting policies or rhetoric they found troubling, such as Trump’s treatment of marginalized groups, inflammatory language, or actions perceived as undermining democratic norms.
Example: Voters in Michigan praised Trump’s renegotiation of NAFTA (into USMCA) but struggled with the ethics of his administration’s family separation policy.
Trade-offs:
Supporting Trump often required voters to prioritize personal or economic concerns over broader societal issues, leading to internal conflicts. This reflects Captain Willard’s acceptance of Kurtz’s brutality as a means to an end.
2. Cultural Preservation vs. Polarization
Cultural Alienation and Identification:
Many voters viewed Trump as a defender of traditional American values. His opposition to cultural shifts, such as NFL protests or progressive policies on immigration and trans issues, resonated with their sense of identity.
Societal Cost: The emphasis on "America First" nationalism often deepened racial and cultural divides, forcing voters to weigh their desire for cultural preservation against the cost of exacerbating societal polarization.
Example: Voters in rural areas may have celebrated Trump’s focus on patriotism but faced backlash from neighbors or family members who saw his policies as discriminatory.
Duality in Loyalty:
Supporting Trump often created a paradox: voters defended him as a champion of the "forgotten American," even as his rhetoric alienated other communities. This created a moral reckoning about whether preserving one’s identity necessitated diminishing others’.
3. Policy Success vs. Ethical Ambiguities
Immigration Policies:
Benefit: Voters concerned about illegal immigration supported Trump’s border wall and stricter enforcement, believing these policies protected jobs and national security.
Moral Cost: The implementation of these policies, particularly the separation of families and detainment of children, sparked widespread condemnation. Supporters often justified these actions as unfortunate but necessary, reflecting a duality between their ethical discomfort and policy goals.
Example: Border-state voters, such as in Texas, supported Trump’s stance on immigration but expressed discomfort with the imagery of children in cages.
COVID-19 Response:
Benefit: Trump prioritized reopening the economy, appealing to voters who valued personal freedom and economic stability.
Societal Cost: His mixed messaging on masks and vaccines, as well as the high death toll, forced voters to confront whether prioritizing economic growth came at too high a human cost.
Example: Supporters in states like Florida praised Trump’s hands-off approach but struggled with the pandemic’s impact on vulnerable populations.
4. Political Disruption vs. Democratic Norms
Disruption of the Status Quo:
Many voters saw Trump as a necessary disruptor who challenged entrenched political elites and norms, delivering on promises like judicial appointments and regulatory rollbacks.
Moral Cost: This disruption often came at the expense of democratic norms, such as Trump’s challenges to election results and his handling of the January 6 Capitol riot.
Example: Some voters initially supported his claims of election fraud but later distanced themselves as the events of January 6 unfolded. The question remained: Did their initial loyalty enable these actions?
5. Personal Transformation and Community Division
Evolving Identity:
Over a decade, some Trump voters embraced their choice as central to their political identity, doubling down even as controversies arose. Others faced increasing doubts, creating internal struggles.
Example: In areas like Wisconsin, former Democrats who supported Trump expressed feeling torn between loyalty to his policies and unease with his divisive rhetoric.
Fractured Communities:
Supporting Trump often came at the cost of straining relationships with friends, family, or community members who opposed him. This mirrors Willard’s isolation as he moves further into the jungle, increasingly separated from the structure and moral certainty of the outside world.
Example: A voter in a traditionally Democratic area might have celebrated economic wins but faced social ostracism for their political choices.
Conclusion: Reconciling Duality
For many Trump voters, the moral and societal costs of their support reflect a profound internal duality:
On one hand, they sought tangible benefits—economic revival, cultural preservation, and political disruption.
On the other hand, they faced ethical and societal consequences—polarization, democratic erosion, and strained personal relationships.
Like Willard’s realization in Apocalypse Now, these voters are left to reconcile their decisions with the consequences, grappling with whether the ends justified the means or whether their journey reveals uncomfortable truths about the duality of human nature.
So here we are. Living in a moral quandary, it seems. For some, it’s a complete disaster, a total repudiation of their worldview. Interestingly, the lack of widespread protests like back in ‘16 lays bare their acceptance of defeat. All that’s left is the impudent thrashings of the few hardcores. For God’s sake, Joe and Mika kissed the ring already, and were roundly vilified as heretics and shunned. Yay!
We know how the Trump Supporter feels - vindicated, justified, and triumphant. Freed by social mores to display MAGA regalia more than ever before. Trump merch in souvenir kiosks at major airports is telling of where the market is.
But what of the Trump voter? The ones that crossed the line, that held their nose, that finally had had enough. Are they satisfied? Or just biding their time? Gen-Xrs of all colors, sexes, orientations, blue-collar professions, political stripes, religions, and regions just voted Trump into office. We are all of one class, this particular cohort of swing voter. We are the swingiest of this favored mythical political unicorn. Wait, is Gen-X about to be popular? Come to Papa, it’s about time.
Please watch the clips, as they highlight the themes and motifs at play in this essay. The horror speech above is so poignant, so loaded, it echoes through the current sea of malaise we’ve been navigating since forever, it feels like.
Judging how one survives moral ambiguity is the job of One. It’s not moral ambiguity to perform the sacred duty of a citizen of the United States of America. So this Thanksgiving, let us gather in gratitude for the family we have. For the ones that made it through the last ten years. You had your say. Now we’ve had ours.
Let’s break bread, pour wine, and let the good times roll.
Ric
Excellent!