A particular move, sometimes called a ritual, has been exposed largely by the media as explored in what has been termed as the “Trump era.”
Admittedly, few historians are better positioned to tell the story which have profited in the nation’s “rapidly changing capitalist economy,”than:Sophia Rosenfeld, a professor of intellectual history at the University of Pennsylvania, who has devoted her career to exploring theways that philosophical conversations during the Enlightenment and the age of revolutions shapedbasic modern political concepts and presuppositions.
That nomenclature called an assault on truth, has been identified generally as an “obsessive count of POTUS’ lies” since he took office in January 2017. The following year, distinctively in September, a noteworthy report came from the Washington Post: Trump had already gone beyond the 5,000 mark which included a most recent one-day record of 125 lies on September 7th.
The following sources, one, the Poynter Institute, started compiling a “running list.” So did The New York Times throughout 2017.
Already known by not just media establishments, Donald Trump’s reputation was one identified as: “He lies as easily as he breathes. He says whatever he thinks will get him what he wants, and whatever he thinks he can get away with.”
Yet, if there is nothing that would be categorized as “truly revelatory” concerning the number of Trump’s lies, it will stand as an advantage to serve a variety of symbolic purposes for commentators, news and otherwise, researchers, if you will. They come from the ranks of those who consider themselves as those who are obligated to repeat the steadily mounting figures with courage covered by the mantle called truth to benefit the American people in their quest for truth in government and the leaders they repose their trust in.
A rationale is brought forth: It is simply to underscore the length and extent to which this is not definitely a “normal presidency.”
Another fitting description, although it might be subject to debate: to hold up POTUS as a symptom and symbol of what has been invariably described as a member of the “post truth era.”
A recent publication, The Death of Truth, has cited a figure for the so-called Trump lies: 2,140 in his first year in office. The author, Michiko Kakutami mentions questionable attitudes toward truth: “emblematic of dynamics that have been churning beneath the surface of daily life for years.”
Some mainstream writers are prone to forget how strange and unconvincing it actually is to “deny an objective reality existing independently from human perception.”
Therefore, it has been deemed likely to refer to some proven and tested “brilliantly lucid works,” like Rosenfeld’s Democracy and Truth.
Rosenfeld, not only makes short work of the “postmodernism” argument but eminently provides the background necessary to comprehend what is considered current truth crisis.
Questions like this are put forth: Who has the authority, in a democracy, to determine what counts as truth..an elite of the supposedly best, most intellectually capable citizens, or the people as a whole?
A quick research on who Rosenfeld is in her field is helpful: Rosenfeld, has shown us, a fault line that is nothing novel. She says “how elitesand experts have long sought to impose their epistemological authority over a broader public, even at the risk of constraining democracy.”
One continuing impression is how “elites and experts have long sought to impose their epistemological authority over a broader public, evenat the risk of constraining democracy.
“Some of the most dynamic forces in our rapidly changing capitalist economy, which have profited directly from such developments as therise of social media and the flourishing of right-wing talk shows” have left their imprint on what is truth.
Similar to some researchers in her field, Rosenfeld cannot help, but resist having mentioned on many an occasion how the Trump lie counts.
Initially, she called the same lie a “shocking sign,” of the new “post-truth era.”
The same researcher has insisted how “different societies” exist under different “regimes of truth.”
A conclusion is easy to reach: “Not all truths are self-evident, and not all facts are easily verifiable, so societies need particular evidentiarystandards and forms of authority to determine where truth lies.”
Beyond the information industries, powerful business interests have been known to have exploited populist resentment by demonstratinggovernment regulations on everything from the environment to insider trading as “elitist” restraints on free enterprise and the wealth it generates.
There is a real crisis. Rosenfeld dashes off through worthwhile initiatives: working to preserve judicial independence and the integrity ofelections; fostering and protecting investigative journalism and higher education.
The author argues that, to counter the unruly economic forces that have “helped to generate the current crisis, the most important answer liesin political action and government regulation.
Will the nation wait when Donald Trump hits the 10,000th lie of his presidency?
How is the length going to be figured out in terms of time and the numbers mounting called “LIES?”