Let me be frank

The point is that on either side of the reflective glass, we are not having disagreements about differing interpretations of reality – we are having disagreements about who is in reality and who is in a simulation.

Naomi Klein

Read more: Mirror World

A great quote from the 2023 book Doppelganger: A Trip into the Mirror World, written by climate justice activist and author Naomi Klein. This is not only an accurate observation of the bizarre, and frankly exhausting, political and cultural era we’re in, but a very astute summation of the apparent gridlock our society finds itself – and its shameful ineptitude to come to grips with the inherent nature of truth. Like Klein infers, we are not having vigorous and respectful conversations about interpretations of reality – thoughtful examinations and debates about our lived experience, acquired knowledge, and learned lessons that shape our unique perspectives and lead to a well-informed and supported, but hopefully malleable and open-to-compromise, worldview. We are not even really having good faith arguments about classically liberal ideas in a democratic republic – issues like taxes, public education, the role of the state in the lives of its people. The things that are now discussed may have the sheen of historical precedent we expect from a long-held tradition of communal debate, but what has been inevitably and irreparably lost, however, is the common, shared framework of trust and reality. 

Trust, because we are now in an era of radical mistrust and paranoia where the current American president and his administration have labeled the opposing political party as the “the party of hate, evil, and Satan” and its protestors as “terrorists” and “violent criminals”. And reality, because as Naomi Klein so brilliantly discusses in her book, we are living in an unprecedented time where our conception of reality is so thwarted and shaped by not only our lived experiences, but by the rampant network of media (social, news, and otherwise) we consume on a daily basis which invariably alters our perception of what is real and what is true. We are slaves to a social algorithm concocted by amoral tech billionaires who are increasingly capitulating to the right-wing oligarchy for tax breaks and multibillion dollar merger approvals. These individuals are pushing the kinds of content we consume to further exacerbate our heated outrage and political divisiveness. We are not simply having conversations on how to improve our democracy and make it accessible for all ; we are having conversations if Donald Trump can ignore the United States constitution and run for a third term. Christian leaders who purportedly preach the Gospel and bear the fruits of Christ’s love are now asking if empathy is a sin. Elected congresspeople are actually calling for trans people to be institutionalized. Should child labor laws be upheld? Arkansas doesn’t seem to think so. Do women really have the right to vote? Some in the Trump cabinet are endorsing the idea that the 19th Amendment should be repealed in the year of 2025. We are at the point where the landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965, that prohibited discrimination in voting, is more than likely to be repealed by Trump’s handpicked Supreme Court. When your public discourse moves so far to the right, the idea of an acceptable center becomes even more unreachable.

We find ourselves in an existential conundrum where the idea of compromise or bipartisanship becomes an untenable pipe dream since our friendly opponent operates in an entirely different reality than ours. How do you participate in good faith with the Mirror World when its adherents are so faithful, so vocal, and so convinced of their own concocted versions of reality – especially since our everyday lives are incessantly inundated with propaganda and disinformation that we consume on our phones and screens second-by-second, reaffirming our prejudices and fears and enveloping us deeper and deeper into our alternate reality? It’s in these times of high emotion and extreme polarization that I replay the Radiohead lyrics “just cause you feel it, doesn’t mean it’s there” from There, There over and over in my head. Our public discourse seems to be thriving off of “vibes” rather than policy and proper human events you can see with your own fucking eyes. We are in the terribly ironic situation where large swaths of people will forcibly invent the most absurdly contrived “reality” for themselves while ignoring the actual truth staring them in the face. 

There is a much longer – and frankly, much better – article by another writer who could succinctly explain the historical record that has led us up to this point. Sadly you are left with me. But coming back to Naomi Klein’s book Doppelganger, she offers a compelling overview of diagonalism, or diagonalist thinking, that has bubbled up in our political discourse and offers some kind of analysis, or clue, to the seemingly arbitrary and contradictory mirror world we now find ourselves in. 

But what is diagonalism? It’s a term coined by American political scientist William Callison and Canadian historian Quinn Slobodian, initiating from the German movement “Querdenken”, with the more recognizable German idea “Querfront”. It broadly applies to “out-of-the-box thinking”:

Born in part from transformations in technology and communication, diagonalists tend to contest conventional monikers of left and right (while generally arcing toward far-right beliefs), to express ambivalence if not cynicism toward parliamentary politics, and to blend convictions about holism and even spirituality with a dogged discourse of individual liberties. – William Callison & Quinn Slobodian

Individual liberties is the key issue here, I believe, as it seemingly triumphs over any collective group movement for social change or progress and instead prioritizes the individual, hence its eventual right-wing shift. The overlaps of historically disparate groups and movements like anti-vaxers and holistic wellness advocates, coupled with state rights activists and even neo-Nazis, is a sound example of the lengths diagonalism has spread throughout our culture. It’s why you see a long-time friend who voted for Joe Biden in the 2020 election all of a sudden throw their full-throated support behind Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and seemingly temper their outrage towards Donald Trump. All in the name of “personal choice”, “fuck the jab”, or fabricated stories of strokes resulting from the COVID-19 vaccine that were simply right-wing lies, even though over one million in the United States alone died from COVID-19. It’s why you’re left scratching your head at friends and social media figures who purportedly were “apolitical” or didn’t follow politics or current events, suddenly come out of the woodwork as huge Charlie Kirk devoteés in the wake of his murder. What seems like simple contrarianism, hypocrisy, or an oil-and-water discongruency is really an example of the unclassifiable tenets of diagonalist thinking that leaves many of us perplexed as we attempt to piece together a cogent picture out of these wildly chaotic images.  We see that the crux of diagonalism zeroes in on criticism of the elite and the traditional government structure of power, culminating in a far-right belief system where all power is illegitimate. 

Unlike particular left/right binaries, however, diagonalism cannot survive solely on the leadership of far-right provocateurs like the late Charlie Kirk, Steve Bannon, or Benny Johnson. It needs voices from prominent figures of the “other side” (or individuals seen as ‘liberal’ or ‘leftist’ or at the very least not historically tied with far-right ideology). In this capacity, Naomi Klein’s book extensively focuses on Naomi Wolf – her public “doppelganger” – a former liberal political advisor to such figures as Bill Clinton and Al Gore, as well as a noted feminist activist and author of The Beauty Myth. After a devastating BBC radio interview in 2019, where the accuracy of her scholarly research from her book Outrages was called into question, Wolf’s public reputation took a noted hit, particularly amongst the liberal circles she had circulated for the past two decades. At the outset of the COVID-19 global pandemic that erupted a year later, Wolf noticeably took a sharp dive into the “mirror world”, seemingly embracing far-right conspiracy theories about the pandemic, including posting widely debunked conspiracy theories about the COVID vaccine that ultimately led to her ban from Twitter. Wolf’s seemingly out-of-nowhere descent into far-right rabbit holes should be familiar to those of us who have seen similar events in our lives as those we assumed to be fair and level-headed suddenly start proclaiming that Robert F. Kennedy Jr was a great candidate for president and decorated scientists and medical professionals like Dr. Anthony Fauci were arrogant hacks who were intentionally trying to deceive us.

Naomi Klein’s book compellingly explores both the tangible and psychical effects of a doppelganger – how would you react when you are not only mistaken for someone else, but that someone else completely demolishes and denigrates all you hold dear? In this case, Klein highlights the very public spats and controversies that folded over the past two years as she was continuously mistaken for Wolf in the public and social media ecosphere. What started out as seemingly innocuous mix-ups and misquotes slowly but unmistakably turned into an existential mindfuck where Wolf’s repeatedly dangerous and destructive disinformation was attributed by many to Naomi Klein herself. While in the past both authors may have shared similarly adjacent left-leaning political views and predilections, Naomi Wolf had now taken a deep descent into the Mirror World and morphed into a reckless cyclone of diagonalist thinking. Wolf was the diametric “other” to Naomi Klein – the provocative argument being that not only was she mistaken for her, but both of them were interchangeable, body, mind and all. The experience offered the author a glimpse into two diametrically opposed selves, for what happens when two people share similar political concerns, and even notice the same symptoms, but come up with radically different diagnoses and conclusions that threaten to worsen and exacerbate the situation at hand, rather than alleviate it? That’s the situation Klein found herself in.  

Wolf became another prominent example of a formerly “liberal” or “left-leaning” public figure ostensibly aligning themselves with right-wing talking points and giving legitimacy to diagonalist thinking. Along with Wolf, other examples include the current CIA Director Tulsi Gabbard (a former democratic congresswoman from Hawaii, turned Trump sycophant) and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (a prominent vaccine skeptic who is now Secretary of Health and Human Services and continues to decimate the United States health system and inhibit vaccine development), both now MAGA and high ranking officials in the Trump administration. This type of cross-aligning of public individuals from apparently divergent political backgrounds and affiliations have led to an unholy bastard of diagonalist thinking, deeply rooted in conspiracy and rampant mistrust of elite institutions. According to Callison and Slobodian: 

Diagonal movements trade in both familiar and novel fantasies about elite control. They attack allegedly ‘totalitarian’ authorities, including the State, Big Tech, Big Pharma, big banks, climate science, mainstream media, and political correctness.

Everyone from Bill Gates to the WHO to CNN to JP Morgan Chase is under the scrutiny of diagonalist thinking. All elite institutions are a mechanism to control the common man and destroy any individual freedoms or rights one may have. And according to Callison and Slobodian, their beef is not entirely unwarranted. They offer a compelling argument on why diagonalist thinking is so prevalent and so appealing, particularly in our post-pandemic era.

During the pandemic, many individuals watched as big governments yet again bailed out large corporations, who already had “access to credit from both private and public sources”, and then mostly recovered from the dire economic straits of the pandemic while many small business owners and self-employed entrepreneurs watched their capital and livelihoods crumble. Many saw white-collar employees of large conglomerates swiftly adjust to a work-at-home lifestyle while small business owners were forced to close their only source of income due to quarantine restrictions. The belief that only some high-value individuals and corporations are prioritized while the rest fall and suffer is a valid, substantive critique. The wealthy and well-connected are always protected in a capitalist and consumerist society where individuals are reduced to a dollar amount and productivity rate. Everyone else is left to defend for themselves and collect whatever scraps remain. 

But what puzzles me is why these people would then gravitate to manipulative, privileged billionaires like Donald Trump? Why would you put your trust into a man who lies as much as he breathes and has no history whatsoever of helping those who are in need? Someone, who in my opinion, is the definition of “elite”? But what Trump and other populists do, according to independent Senator Bernie Sanders, is classic demagogic grandstanding. Trump proclaims, “the system is broken, and I alone can fix the system”, while in effect making the system far worse for the average citizen. Trump recognizes people are hurting and admits the system is broken, but like a true demagogue exploits people’s suffering, desperation, paranoia, and deep-seated prejudices and insecurities while rigging the system for himself. His predilection for racist, xenophobic, and transphobic rhetoric and blame shifting are unsurprisingly appealing to the far-right contingent of diagonalist practitioners (for lack of a better word), but it apparently is not a deal-breaker for the seemingly apolitical or historically left-leaning individuals of diagonalism. Clearly, their anti-establishment and individualist sentiments outweigh whatever previous allegiances they may have had to human rights or democratic norms. But this personal and political shift is undeniably jarring, making it difficult for everyone from political analysts to close family and friends to piece together and trace the seemingly disparate and contradictory viewpoints of diagonalist thinking.  

With this in mind, diagonalism helps explain the strange alliances amongst wellness influencers and podcast hosts who spout medical misinformation. It puts into focus the seemingly incongruous alliance of edgy comedians with white, Christian nationalists as they ostensibly retaliate against what they perceive as an attack against free speech and political correctness. It’s why you see a random mix of anti-vaxers, old hippies, and skinheads mingling together at a 2020 Robert F. Kennedy Jr rally in Berlin. What all of this unavoidably leads to in the United States, however, is a sharp turn toward authoritarian fascism under Donald Trump. 

The advent of diagonalism is just a small piece of the seismic puzzle that encapsulates the rise of MAGA and the noticeable contingents of far-right power that have arisen in the wake of Donald Trump. It’s been a decade of increasingly hostile anger, gaslighting, victimization, violence, and anti-intellectualism that will invariably take decades to correct, pending on the very real possibility that this inevitably turns into the norm for America and she will no longer function as a democratic republic. 

And although diagonalism may shed light on the differing levels of contrarianism we have seen spread in our society, it is still just a theoretical framework and does not mitigate the visceral feeling of grief we feel during these uncertain times. I say grief, not to be glib or hyperbolic but to stress the very real repercussions many of us have felt in our personal lives during this unnerving time of gaslighting and rampant disinformation. Many of us – myself included – have watched as decades-long friendships have slowly crumbled and withered under the cloud of this right-wing usurpation. Some will say – and have said – to not let “politics ruin friendships”. Or they offer the tritely obnoxious maxim to “simply agree to disagree”. But I frankly cannot accept that in order to maintain some sense of neutrality or some sense of peace in my friendships or relationships that I must ignore that their perceived reality is based upon a lie. I cannot accept that somehow RFK Jr. makes more sense linking circumcision to autism rather than actual scientists and epidemiologists who spend their education, careers, and lives studying autism and other neurological disorders. I cannot just nod my head politely and change the subject and pretend that our pretext of reality is on the same wavelength; because we are not even in the same fucking stratosphere. We are not having basic disagreements on marginal tax rates- we are having fundamental disagreements on the validity and efficacy of science and medical research, the dignity of human rights, and the irreplaceable tenets of a pluralistic democracy. At some point it starts to feel more like complicity, rather than friendship, when you ignore the elephant in the room and continue to enable a relationship that begins to feel more like a difference in values rather than politics. Therefore the element of grief seeps in as you realize you must let go – not out of spite or hatred, but out of a sense of moral clarity.  

 Some may say that my disagreement is unfair or a false equivalency, or say I should look at it from the other person’s point of view ; but that is where the shadow of diagonalism and the Mirror World rears its ugly head. How do I come to an understanding with someone who is not even standing in the same light of reality? Those who think that I am in “the simulation”, according to Naomi Klein? Diagonalism recognizes the problems inherent in elite industries and institutions like Big Pharma or Big Tech, but its solutions are so far rooted in quack conspiracy that it’s virtually impossible to compromise – for how do you compromise with a loud contingent whose very core is rooted in distrust of intellectual expertise and experience? Does RFK Jr. seem intent on compromise and actually making America healthy when he shuts down a panel of vaccine experts? How can we provide vital resources and support for our public school teachers and K-12 students when those in charge want to abolish the Department of Education? We need to act like adults. And we need to heed Maya Angelou’s famous advice that when people show you who they are the first time, believe them. And we need to guard our integrity and sense of justice closely, not succumbing to cynicism or capitulation. In times of rapid disinformation and a continual onslaught of political “content”, coupled with the malicious gaslighting from our public officials and media figures, it is more vital than ever to guard your sanity and protect your moral compass when you are bombarded incessantly with blatant falsehoods that preach whatever you have learned about empathy, history, freedom, and human dignity is a lie perpetrated by a global, malevolent elite.

I’ve struggled over the past year to deduce what has made me so angry and so intensely fearful for the ongoing chaos in American politics. Even in this essay, I feel like I’ve somehow failed to construct a compelling argument or clearly dissect  diagonalism in a fair and compassionate way that is still both direct and forceful. Part of the reason I wanted to write this essay is to come to some kind of understanding of why many individuals in my life have apparently shifted so far to the right, or at the very least seem lost-in-thought and sleepwalking into fascism. What am I exactly trying to say? Or maybe the more apt question is what am I trying to express?

 Enter the great James Baldwin and a seminal work that was written over sixty years ago, but is just as relevant now. In his essay Down at the Cross: Letter from a Region in My Mind, Baldwin writes of the eternal plight of Black Americans, the rampant Sisyphean effort men and women put into being seen as worthy, honorable, and human by the white man. He writes of the appeal of the Nation of Islam in the mid twentieth century and its radical concept to elevate the Black Man, why it was so enticing to many of his comrades. One of the many ways he frames this modern appeal is to compare it with his country’s abhorrent and dehumanizing treatment specifically of Black servicemen during and after the Second World War. Baldwin writes of the painful irony of being on the front lines of conflict while in the uniform of a country that calls you “nigger” by your “comrades-in-arms” and “officers” ; Black men who are assigned the most “menial” tasks and cannot sit at the same bars as his white soldiers, or drink from the same fountains. He watches German prisoners-of-war being treated “with more human dignity” than any Black man “has ever received” at home. Baldwin writes when Black men return home, they must then: 

search, in [their] shoes, for a job, for a place to live; ride, in [their] skin, on segregated buses; see, with [their] eyes, the signs saying ‘White’ and ‘Colored,’ and especially the signs that say ‘White Ladies’ and ‘Colored Women’…And all this is happening in the richest and freest country in the world, and in the middle of the twentieth century.

The Black man is forced to fight for “freedom” for his fellow countrymen when he is not afforded the same rights at home. The Black man is expected, nay required, to participate in the effort and bloodshed abroad but ultimately asked to “wait”, as Baldwin so eloquently puts it, for his freedom at home. The Black man is forced to fight in the abstract while the white man fights for himself and enjoys the fruit of his labor.

I think of this, and the nonsensical, but truly dangerous and selfish individualist motives of diagonalist persons in our time and realize that that is the crux of what makes me so upset now. Because what it ultimately boils down to is the sin of individualism and the refusal to commit, or even acknowledge, a collective front. Diagonalism is not a unified movement with specific policy and administrative goals – it’s an unholy bastardization of “me, me, me” grievances coupled with a broadly distrustful view of authority and a penchant for wild conspiracy. It’s a damning indictment of the self, for what you are ultimately proving with your support and with your silence is as long as it’s not me, I will be fine. I will let a grown-ass man rant about immigrants eating cats and dogs, as long as he lowers my tax bill. I will stomach the onslaught of reproductive rights, as long as egg prices are cheaper. 

 I am most certain Baldwin would not have been as perplexed by diagonalism as I am; he understood and saw with his own eyes and felt with his entire soul that regardless of the left/right binary, or the racist, white Southerner, or the nice but patronizing white liberal, that all of this tomfoolery stemmed from the stake of privilege. Those of us who are white have always had the luxury to choose our own battles and fight our own causes – rarely do we have to dig deep and fight for someone other than ourselves or our immediate family. Fuck, rarely do we ever have to step outside our own communities, or open a book, or get on the phone with someone we don’t know. We have always been centered in this country, at the expense of everyone else. We are ensconced inside our own little bubbles and saturated with our own personal problems that it is frankly no wonder why diagonalism leads to far-right thinking and authoritarian impulses. Because it always boils down to the utmost conservative principle: Me.

In the middle of Baldwin’s essay, he writes of a demoralizing, but unsurprising, racist encounter he and two other friends experienced at Chicago’s O’Hare Airport. Baldwin writes of being at an airport bar, where a white waiter refuses to serve them drinks, claiming they are minors, even though they are all clearly over thirty years old. They argue with the waiter, eventually calling the manager who finally lets Baldwin and his friends drink, even though he adamantly defends the discriminatory actions of his waiter. As they are leaving, a young white man comes up and asks Baldwin if they’re students. Angered, Baldwin dismisses him. Baldwin’s friend however, a Black war vet who served in Korea, tells the young white man “the fight we had been having at the bar had been his fight too”. The young man replies:

I lost my conscience a long time ago.

Fuck me. This stings.

We are still missing a collective conscience. Nothing has changed. We are still those white assholes in an airport bar in the 1960s, oblivious to other people’s pain and suffering and simply focused on ourselves. Selfish and complicit individuals who are more concerned by red food dye than young children being ripped from their homes and zip-tied in the middle of the night. Our priorities are fucked and our logic is whack when the rights and dignities of others are placed secondary to our own perceived grievances. 

Like Baldwin says:

…a civilization is not destroyed by wicked people ; it is not necessary that people be wicked but only that they be spineless.

And I think this perfectly sums up the anger I feel at this moment in time, where everything is discombobulated and nothing seems to make sense. 

I’m angered at the apathy. The spinelessness. The resignation. By the willingness people seem to have to cover their own asses, rather than unite and fight the oppressor who terrorizes all of us. 

Because we are seeing with our very eyes that our republic will not just be destroyed by wicked rulers who want to govern with an iron fist or squeeze all the money and resources up for themselves. It will be destroyed by people who do not give a fuck – people who are so enwrapped in their own lives that they are either wilfully ignorant or purposefully burying their heads in the sand as our democratic structures crumble to pieces around them. 

Can we show some chutzpah for once? This is not the time to be spineless or cowardly or to kowtow to a degenerate, obese fuckwad who thinks a cognitive test for Alzheimer’s is a legitimate intelligence test. This is the time – particularly for those of us who are not people of color – to put on our big boy pants and sharpen up our moral resolve and critical thinking skills and actually be an ally for once. Not a fucking patronizing, self-servicing poster child for white savior complex, but an actual living, breathing, empathetic being who understands to their core that we are all in this together. When the foundation of our democratic republic starts to crumble it affects us all, not just the ones we choose to shut our eyes to. When we do nothing, it is not just complicity; it is approval.

Maybe this feeling of dread is something new for those of us who happen to be white, to suddenly realize our government can turn on us in an instant. To realize they will eradicate our health system, judicial system, and education system in the blink of an eye. To enact vicious retribution on your “perceived enemies” out of grievance and pettiness and not facts. Perhaps we should accept this new feeling with a sense of grace and humility, and vow to continue fighting against oppression in all its ugly forms. Perhaps it’s time to put to bed this foolish falsehood of American exceptionalism and this masturbatory trend of diagonalism once and for all. We all have different backgrounds and diverse lived experiences that lead us to the person we choose to be. It’s a beautiful thing to have this freedom – nay, the luxury – to create our own lives and craft our own identity. The wonderful thing about a democratic republic is that it demands of us all to be our unique self and to form and nurture our own views and opinions to form a better union. What it should not be, however, is a hellish landscape where we create realities that are not tethered to the ground we stand on, and certainly not at the expense of someone else’s dignity or humanity. The enemy is the authoritarian regime who sows chaos, confusion, and distrust in our fellow humans, and that is the real truth we should all heed and challenge.