In a democracy, the elected representatives are accountable to the voters. Beyond supplying a product in exchange for money, a corporation has no other responsibilities. So it would seem that government failed to protect the workers/voters.
The future is difficult to predict. But a large powerful democratic country is not entirely without control and influence so not everything about globalization is “inevitable”.
What if you only have limited choices? Are you going to turn down a job that you need when it is offered to you?
Maybe some degree of protectionism is necessary.
That’s were leadership and vision comes in … knowing what’s really important and valuable - don’t give up jobs in exchange for cheap crap.
Overall, the anger seems understandable and reasonable. If someone comes along and says that he can make it right again, then he’s going to get support. I don’t think that support can be dismissed as just irrational and emotional.
Of course there is some anger that is understandable and reasonable.
But of course, in no way is the anger “Understandable and reasonable” to to the point where it was reasonable and understandable to elect a three ring circus barker, a fake university con man, a huckster of cheap Chinese crap clothing, a blatant deranged angry narcissist, an utterly incompetent buffoon, who boasted about being the best at everything, as a reasonable and understandable means to sate anger for globalization. It is far beyond globalization that caused this, it is an anger of their own stupidity, of their own incompetence, of their own overly proud sentiment, anger rooted in propaganda that has polarized them. You have taken a couple little sentences, and compare it to a few little lines and denigrate only what you think should be denigrated, while forsaking the overall message.
The political system offered the voters a few choices. Hillary was the establishment candidate and a vote for her was a vote for for more of what came previously … IOW the same policies which had already caused jobs to go out of the country. So if ‘jobs’ was your big concern, then Trump was really the only way to vote. Whatever his other failings. Right?
I’m basically saying that one needs to look at this with a bit of compassion for the man and woman who are trying to put a roof over the head and food on the table. When you do that, you can move on from petty fighting … which is what republican versus democrat, conservative versus liberal have become.
Regardless, its not just the election of Trump, it is the continued support based on this type of emotionalism that we even see in this very thread, that continues, that isn’t justified because Trump is not some “establishment” candidate. A billionaire who doesn’t pay people what he owes them, who files bankruptcies while raking in millions on the bankrupt companies, is going to save the little guy. It’s a joke, a con and a result of their own emotionalism. It is a result of their incompetence, the same incompetence that makes them feel disenfranchised by not having a college degree, yet making more than the average person regardless.
Anger isn’t always unjustified. Some people have very good reason to be angry. And anger is a very important and useful emotion, as it enables one to muster the courage and willpower to destroy an enemy and survive.
The white people, “Nazis” you are speaking of, are watching their people get discriminated against and slowly genocided in a nation that is openly hostile to their interests and all of this is enforced at gunpoint of military and police.