Connect with us

I Refuse to Tolerate Donald Trump and His Supporters

Published

on

We’ve Worked Too Hard to Allow Trump’s Racism, Xenophobia, and Bigotry Rule the Day

On Thursday night, Donald Trump gave his nomination acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention. It was incredibly dark and scary, and it freaked the hell out of me. It should scare the crap out of you, too.

In response, I posted this on Facebook:

I’ve been really reluctant to jump on the Trump/Hitler comparison bandwagon because I’m a firm believer that certain historical events and people are simply incomparable. Listening to Trump’s speech tonight is making me strongly – very strongly – reconsider that position.

Let me be as clear as possible: If you plan on voting for Trump, there is no place for you in my life. You are shameful and represent the worst of humanity. Trump is the absolute worst of what we have to offer, and if you endorse his ideas and behavior you will be complicit in the darkness that is to come.

We have the power to stop this, but it’s going to take every single one of us. How will you feel when your grandkids ask you why no one stood up to the evil?

I’m still reluctant to go full-out with the Trump/Hitler comparison. There are, without a doubt, echoes of Hitler in Trump – it doesn’t take more than a minute or two of paying attention to figure out – but I hope and pray we never get to the point where the comparison becomes wholly accurate.

What I find most surprising, though, wasn’t that I was being hyperbolic (I was, because a little bit of drama makes a point get across a little bit faster), but that I was accused of being intolerant and “judgmental of folks whose political opinion differs from” mine. 

You know what? Yes. I am, and I was. I am absolutely intolerant of Trump and his supporters. 

Maybe a few months ago I wouldn’t have said this, but after everything that’s happened with his speeches and the disguting Republican platform, I’m done. I’m proud to be intolerant. 

I’m proud to be intolerant of racism.

I’m proud to be intolerant of anti-Semitism.

I’m proud to be intolerant of misogyny.

I’m proud to be intolerant of Islamaphobia.

I’m proud to be intolerant of homophobia.

I’m proud to be intolerant of transphobia.

I’m proud to be intolerant of xenophobia.

In any other situation I would agree with one commenter who said that a vote for a certain canddiate doesn’t mean an endorsement of their entire platform. There are certainly candidates I’m not 100% in line with but whom I proudly support anyway. I still have yet to find The Perfect Candidate. That’s how it works most of the time, and I know it’s the best we can do, all things considered.

With Trump, however, his offensive qualities so outweigh anything reasonable he may have said at one point by such a large margin I felt like a fool just trying to write this paragraph at all. At this point it’s absolutely impossible to separate out the candidacy from the candidate – or from the party. There is simply no argument to be made for voting for Trump that doesn’t make you a terrible person.

I understand that a polite society requires us all to live and interact with people who often hold views that directly contrast with ours. Most of the time, I can handle tolerance. Tolerance, at its most basic level, simply requires that we don’t get in someone else’s way, even if we absolutely hate them and everything they stand for. Tolerance doesn’t mean approval, it just means I’m not going to try to get you arrested or harm you. It’s the absolutely lowest level of human decency.

Being forced to confront our own biases and learn from others is what usually makes our society so great – but it doesn’t apply here. Tolerance doesn’t apply here. The kind of hate that Trump spews affects us all. It creates a world of fear and disgust and I refuse to allow our country to go down that road. 

I refuse to allow bigotry to rule the day. I refuse to allow the ideals of inequality, xenophobia, and outright fear to become our country’s guiding principals. We’re so much better than that. We’ve worked far too hard for that to happen. 

And if that means that certain people take themselves out of my life because they cannot abandon their bigotry? Well, then good riddance, because they were never really welcome in my life in the first place.

 

Image by Gage Skidmore via Flickr and a CC license

 

Robbie Medwed is an Atlanta-based LGBTQ activist and educator. His column appears here weekly. Follow him on Twitter: @rjmedwed

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Trump Envoy Invites Kids in Greenland to Come to America for Chocolate Chip Cookies

Published

on

President Donald Trump’s Special Envoy to Greenland, Louisiana Republican Governor Jeff Landry, touched down in Nuuk on Sunday, saying he arrived “simply to build relationships,” and to “see if there are opportunities” to expand them.

The U.S. Ambassador to Denmark, Ken Howery, arrived on Monday to take part in this week’s Future Greenland 2026 conference. Landry is also expected to attend.

President Donald Trump has suggested the U.S. should take over Greenland. The New York Times reports that negotiators from the U.S., Greenland, and Denmark, have been in talks about Greenland’s future. Greenland and Denmark have been adamant that the U.S. cannot acquire Greenland.

The vast majority of Greenlanders, who are part of the Kingdom of Denmark, have said they do not want to be acquired by the United States. Denmark has also stated Greenland’s future is not up for negotiation, and several European leaders have stressed that the United States cannot interfere with Greenland — with at least one, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, warning that if Trump were to engage in a military incursion it would mean the end of NATO.

“I would like to make a deal,” Trump told reporters in January.

“You know, the easy way, but if we don’t do it the easy way we’re gonna do it the hard way,” the president said.

In March, Danish public broadcaster DR, via a Google translation, reported that Trump’s remarks, when he threatened that the U.S. could acquire Greenland the easy way or the hard way, had accelerated the governments’ plans.

Denmark had formed an alliance with France, Germany, Norway, and Sweden, flew heavily armed Danish F-35 fighter jets and troops to Greenland with bombs to blow up its own runways if necessary to prevent U.S. aircraft from landing, and prepared for casualties by flying bags of blood to the autonomous territory of roughly 56,000 residents.

On Monday, according to video posted by Orla Joelsen, a native Greenlander and a prison official in Nuuk, the GOP governor spoke with some local children.

“If you come to Louisiana,” Governor Landry says in the video, “and you come to the governor’s mansion — all the chocolate chip cookies you can eat.”

 

Image via Shutterstock

 

Continue Reading

News

Trump Obsessed With Self-Enrichment as ‘Little Man’ Pays the Price: Columnist

Published

on

President Donald Trump remains “obsessively focused” on “personal glory and enrichment” — ignoring the economic suffering of the working people he last week dismissed as the “little man,” Jeet Heer writes in The Nation.

“Donald Trump is annoyed that he can’t celebrate the massive profits oil companies are making due to the war he launched in the Middle East,” writes Heer, The Nation’s national affairs correspondent. Trump would be “exulting in the hundreds of billions of dollars produced by skyrocketing oil prices—if it weren’t for the pesky fact that it comes at the expense of ordinary Americans.”

Americans are paying roughly 40 percent more at the gas pump than they did before Trump started his war in Iran three months ago, Heer notes. But in an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity last week, Trump said, “I don’t want to say we’re making a fortune, you understand that? Because if I say that, they’re going to say ‘oh, he forgets about the little man with the $4 gasoline.’”

Meanwhile, Republicans’ response “to the harm caused by Trump’s policies” is not to change course “or even to appear sympathetic about their effects,” but rather, “to express their total indifference to the suffering of the American people.”

Heer looks at a Bloomberg report from last week that revealed Trump or his financial advisors made over 3,700 trades during the first quarter of this year, “a flurry totaling tens of millions of dollars and involving major companies that have dealings with his administration.”

Trump won the White House — twice — by promoting a message of economic populism, but that has gone by the wayside. Heer writes: “allowing Trump to steal the rhetoric of economic populism” was one of “the most catastrophic mistakes” Democrats have made in the last decade.

Now, Trump is making the same messaging error Biden did — an error that cost Democrats the White House in 2024. But that error opens the door for Democrats to “reclaim economic populism” as their own message.

Citing the “apocryphal words misattributed to the French Queen Marie Antoinette: ‘Let them eat cake,’” Heer writes that Trump said: “I don’t think about Americans’ financial situation. I don’t think about anybody. I think about one thing: We cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon. That’s all.”

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

Why Even the MAGA Far Right Has Turned on Neil Gorsuch: Political Scientist

Published

on

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch’s book tour was met with staunch criticism by the far-right, but underneath the anger, political scientist Daniel Ruggles writes, was a critical revelation: the conservative movement is split between hard-right MAGA nativists and mainstream constitutionalists.

Writing at The Bulwark, Ruggles notes that at his core, Justice Gorsuch — like all conservatives to varying degrees on the Roberts Supreme Court, is an originalist: he believes the constitution should be interpreted as it was understood when written.

But the MAGA hard right has not embraced originalism, and, Ruggles writes, “originalism’s slow seep into both conservative and mainstream constitutional law will not be easily undone.”

“Fundamentally, originalists accept the democratic constraints of the Constitution and believe them to be a core component of America’s political tradition,” Ruggles writes. “Postliberals and their nativist fellow travelers” — MAGA, for example — “have begun to reimagine the American state without any such constitutional guardrails.”

Gorsuch’s book tour enraged MAGA because he kept focusing on “creed.”

“The United States is a ‘creedal’ nation—that is, a nation unified by common belief in rights, liberties, and democratic institutions,” Ruggles writes.

Gorsuch explained that Americans share a “heritage,” but, Ruggles said, “it’s one of ideals, not ethnicity. Being an American requires not lineage, but belief.”

“It was a gentle rebuke of nationalism—and it drove the hard right nuts,” Ruggles wrote.

Ruggles added that the “clash over an American ‘creed’ portends something dark as well, to the degree it shows deep tensions between the extremist, illiberal right and its originalist predecessors.”

The MAGA hard right is rising, and has sought “key privileges in the Trump presidency,” Ruggles explains, while originalists have a “critical institutional advantage on the bench of the Supreme Court and other courts” that insulates them from MAGA’s populism.

“Who wins this battle,” Ruggles warns, “will fundamentally redefine America.”

 

Image via Reuters 

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2026 AlterNet Media.