This is the second part (part one here) that came from a conversation with my son and a discussion I had with my colleagues. Again, I see why someone wouldn’t support a crazy person and even why they would support an enemy, but it still doesn’t make it rational…
What I see is that a lot of people want stability and to be left alone. This is probably the rationale – however irrational it is – behind the appeasements of the 1930’s and the 2020’s. I’ll equate those because if you study them, you’ll see an amazing similarity between the appeasements to Hitler and Mussolini’s rules and the current to Putin and Xi Jinping.
I’ve repeated this a ton of times but appeasing bullies and tyrants only encourage them to escalate. Therefore it is irrational to try; only demonstrating the will to retaliate will keep the peace.
For years before Russia’s escalation of its war against the West I warned that it had become our enemy and that we weren’t taking it seriously. Then, in 2022, they tried to freeze us to death, something everyone else seems to have forgotten, so I think I have at least a bit of credibility here.
So, when you have one rich guy that is often behaving quite irrationally but demonstrates again and again that he supports democracy and progress on one side, and literal enemies that are trying to destroy our nations – Russia, China, Iran, and more – on the other, I don’t think the choice is hard.
No, I don’t own a Tesla. I am not ever going to Mars. But I’d never support a literal enemy of democracy.
Henning's blog 