The subject of the much-discussed New York Times article, “The Man Who Knew Too Little,” Erik Hagerman, emailed me the night before last. He wanted to talk to me about his situation because he felt that, though I disagreed with his blockade of Trump’s America, I did so “without shouting.” He wanted me to hear his side of the story about the story about him. He, a former Nike executive who’s now living on his investments, wrote, “I think it’s likely we’ll continue to disagree—but hey man that’s democracy.”
But what more was to be said about this? For a year, he has blocked Trump’s America from his life. He decided to do this on the day the pussy grabber was elected. He has imposed his “Blockade,” as he calls it, on friends, family members, and baristas at a cafe. True, the article does mention his privilege, but it didn’t qualify this privilege. I contended that it was not just money but also his sex and race that made the Blockade possible. I have black African relatives who, despite living in the US legally, very well understand that the rules can change at any moment. No one knows why, for example, Chad is listed on the Muslim Ban. But it’s there. And it’s making the lives of many people miserable. I and other immigrants need to know if Trump has changed rules again. Yesterday, he was in San Diego viewing “border wall prototypes.” Where is he today? What is he saying or doing? I’m condemned to keep an eye on the pussy grabber.
The NYT article did not get into the race and gender factor once, and was in some ways sympathetic to Hagerman, and with good reason. Trump is definitely toxic, and one has to find moments of psychic relief from his constant pollution of reason, common sense, and sound thinking. There is a reason Trump is attacking the EPA. What the coal and oil corporations want to do to our atmosphere and rivers is exactly what he does to our minds. But disengagement, in my opinion, will do, in the long run, more psychic damage than disconnection.
I never got around to how Hagerman found my article, and though he did want to talk on the phone, he later changed his mind and stated that he was done with the whole business. And so our brief correspondence focused on the NYT‘s coverage of him and his lifestyle. Here’s what he wrote:
1. This whole thing is utterly surreal. All I wanted to do is move to the countryside where I grew up, make art & restore a former coal mine. Now all this.
2. Blockade is of national & international news—not local. I keep pretty closely up to date on local news: fracking in state parks, how assist local farmer’s market, etc.
3. There’s a big question to ask re: value of reading & talking about things vs. doing things.
4. I’ve been active locally. I’ve volunteered for local public children’s services. I’ve been making series of art work in honor veterans of Iraq & Afghanistan which I’m going offer to all local vfw chapters. I’m donating everything I have to a project that I believe is something positive to leave to the future.
5: Finally & most importantly: This has nothing to do with politics. The only thing it has to do with is Trump as a person. I can’t tolerate to be around him & there’s one reason: He’s not an honorable man. Everything our parents and grandparents and families want us to be when we become adults—humble, kind, honest, respectful, truthful, generous, grateful, not a bully—he isn’t. If I had grown up to be the kind of person Trump is my family and friends would be ashamed. Especially the 2 people who’ve been my most important role models, both now passed away: my father & his father my grandfather.
As for Bush, Cheney, and McCain? He deeply disagreed with them, but they were bearable because they were at least honorable. He writes:
But I never ran from the room from any of them (admittedly, sometimes from Sarah P). Because I believe both Bush and Cheney are honorable men. And I believe John McCain is one of the most honorable men I’ve ever come across. I disagreed with all of them vehemently but I believe they were acting in what they thought was the best interests of the country as they saw it.
They had moral compass. We often talk about a moral compass. Everyone has one—whats right & wrong. I think like a lot of people i got mine from my family—in particular my father and grandfather. I often fall short of it. I don’t believe trump has one.
This is his final point:
The whole thing is temporary: as soon as T leaves I’m back in. Until then I will vote but—I’m sure to the dismay of a lot of your readers—i’m going to vote straight D. Hopefully this whole nutty thing ends in 2 1/2 years. Given all the dust kicked up by this story I’ll — regrettably—probably have to lift the blockade entirely sometime soon.
Though I have something to say about Bush and Cheney and McCain being honorable, I will leave that out of this post. All I want to point out is that, as he suspected, there’s nothing he had to say about himself that changed my position or thinking about his Blockade. It is still wrong. Why? For one, it is political. Disconnection is as political an act as connection. Why? Because there’s nothing in this world that can separate the two. There is no abstracting the non-presence of the political. Its absence does come with the absence of the other, unless the former presents no political benefits for someone or some party that’s aligned with either the bosses or the workers, the Church or science, racism or diversity.
Silence or disconnection is a form of submission. The constant noise that Trump makes has this as its goal. It wants to break the will of thinking people. To make them surrender, precisely, the political. Those who thought Hillary Clinton was the same as Trump missed this fact completely and unwisely. We are now fighting just to keep our heads clear and our thoughts straight. We are so preoccupied with soul/psychic maintenance that socialism has now become as realistic as that farm Hagerman lives and makes art on.
