Part 1: Emboldened Nazis in America

You saw it at Donald Trump’s second inauguration: Elon Musk gave his heart. Was it a Sieg Heil or wasn’t it? The gesture was a conversation starter, a social media firestorm, and a fixation in the “legacy” media. Some argue it was Musk making an awkward gesture. Others contest it was more than that – because he did it twice. Some coupled it with posts Musk had made on X, which could be viewed as anti-Semitic to enhance their claims.

Regardless of your interpretation, there’s an undeniable darkness nearby.

While it may not be Trump or Musk directly, people who believe in the Nazi cause have been emboldened by the ascension of Trump and latch onto his inflammatory, nationalist rhetoric. They feel his words affirm their beliefs. But please, don’t be naïve enough to think Nazis haven’t been in America since the 1930s. They’ve always been here – they just weren’t as loud and their emblems and flags weren’t seen as often or flown as high. Donald Trump didn’t create neo-Nazis but his candidacy and presidency has evoked a response from them. Whether Trump desires or intends to evoke that response is irrelevant because it exists. The media will press him on the issue – and as Trump has demonstrated, he’ll need to be pushed hard to disavow.

During Donald Trump’s first term, Nazis, Klansmen, and far-right militia members marched through Charlottesville, Virginia in the “Unite the Right” rally on August 12, 2017. Tiki torches, hoods, Sieg Heils, and Swastikas in hand, the “Right” protested the removal of a statue honoring Robert E. Lee, a prominent Confederate general in the American Civil War. When a car drove into the counter-protesters, dozens were injured and 32-year-old Heather Heyer was killed.

A stream of widespread condemnation came – from Democratic and Republican lawmakers, including US House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senator Mitch McConnell – from first lady Melania Trump – then from Donald Trump, who shared the condemnation of the violence initially. Three days later, he famously declared there were “very fine people on both sides,” a move many saw as his nod of approval.

But, to those of you who are outraged – why are you surprised?

Part 2: Dear Progressives: It’s Past Time You Listen

Donald Trump’s rhetoric isn’t new – his anti-immigrant sentiment isn’t new – and the emboldening of intolerance and violence isn’t new. Neither was the complacency that delivered him two elections. This is where the “progressives” and I need to have a chat.

In June 2016, Trump’s rival, Hillary Clinton declared: “Making Donald Trump our commander in chief would be a historic mistake… and it would fuel an ugly narrative about who we are, that we’re fearful, not confident, that we want to let others determine our future for us instead of shaping our own destiny. That’s not the America I know and love.”

The warning was there – it was one of many Clinton shared from the campaign trail – but “progressives” decided to take issue with the democratic primary being “rigged” against Bernie Sanders, who was still in the primary he couldn’t win. “Progressives” took issue with the Democratic Party aligning with Clinton – despite Sanders not being a Democrat (why was this surprising?) and Hillary being the party leader. The mainstream media decided her emails were the paramount story. These elements, coupled with Republican hatred of Hillary, created a perfect storm of protest votes – of people who voted for third-party candidates, or who didn’t vote at all.

It was “Bernie or Bust” and we busted.

Post-Bernie, Clinton spoke repeatedly about the winner of that election having a consequential impact on the Supreme Court. She warned of the progress that stood to be lost – from civil rights to abortion rights – if she wasn’t elected. She was right – and in the end, Donald Trump named three justices to the Supreme Court. Emboldened by this, his term saw an attempt to repeal the Affordable Care Act, an immigration policy marked by family separations and lost children, the coronavirus pandemic that bred anti-Asian sentiment and violent acts, and it set the groundwork for the long-sought repeal of Roe v. Wade.

The election of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris in 2020 should have been a course-correct – but moderate politics wasn’t accepted by “progressives.” Some wasn’t enough. Progressives demanded more – not pragmatic leadership. It became less about codifying anything through compromise, or even collaboration between parties (the infrastructure bill being the exception). It became less about “going high” and working for the good of the American people.

It became about symbolic victories in pronoun use, expanding concepts of gender and sexuality, policing language, bathroom access, and the fight for transgender athletes to compete in sports. It became about mandating electric vehicles and throwing money at the climate crisis. Basically, it became about the signal of virtue.

The democratic party, knowing it didn’t have clear majorities under Biden didn’t seek common ground – didn’t forge alliances – didn’t do the hard work to expand their margins of victory in future elections. The party became content with a game of checkers during a chess match. Bernie’s candidacy carried the party further left – and left little room for the grey area of life. Issues were presented as black or white – and if you’re with us, great! If you’re not – you’re a racist, misogynist, xenophobic, homophobic, transphobic, Nazi. These became common critiques against people who disagreed with singular solutions to complex issues (ex. trans athletes in athletics).

The average American refused to accept this and rebelled against the “woke” concept.

When it came time to deny Donald Trump a second term, democrats had very little to leverage with inflation and the increasing intolerance of “woke ideology.” Sure, statistics claimed a booming economy and record job creation (some of which was merely COVID recovery) – but people, like me, weren’t seeing that return because their pay raises were buried in an increased cost of living. People, like me, ventured into their communities to see small businesses closing regularly. The economy seemed to be booming on Wall Street, but not down on Main Street – and certainly not for the average American.

Then came the infamous Biden-Trump debate, which was a shit show that ultimately forced Biden, who should have been clear in 2020 he was seeking one term, out of the election. Biden tagged Kamala Harris into the fight – leaving her with just over 100 days to mount a presidential campaign with the idea of impropriety looming overhead (“There was no primary,” “She wasn’t elected to be the nominee,” “Her nomination is not democratic.”). Then came the most infamous moment of the campaign: the assassination attempt.

In that moment, I knew – as you probably did, too – that’s it, he’s won. It was an iconic image. Blood ran down the side of Donald Trump’s face as he pumped his fist in the air, like Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) who ultimately ran out of the capitol on January 6. That was the moment I knew. The historic fundraising – $1 billion – by Kamala Harris’ campaign wasn’t going to overcome the criticism of anointment or that image without serious investment and enthusiasm.

Harris attempted a coalition of voters and appealed to progressives, democrats, independents, and moderate republicans. She debated Donald Trump, who refused to debate her again – and the decision about who won the debate fell mostly along party lines. I believe it was clear she won – from the moment she invaded his space to look him in the eye – to the various times she baited him throughout (and he always bit).

But “progressives” brought their underwhelming “enthusiasm” to the race. Despite saying they didn’t want Donald Trump, there was little effort to prop up Kamala Harris. In fact, “progressives” pulled out their 2016 playbook – except this time, it wasn’t Bernie Sanders – it was the fact that Kamala campaigned with Liz Cheney. It wasn’t emails – it was Biden’s presidency. Kamala Harris, who wasn’t the president, suddenly had the responsibility of assuming accountability for Biden. She wasn’t doing enough in Gaza, for the people of Palestine; she wasn’t critical enough of Israel, a country she was allegedly supplying with American weapons to commit genocide.

Enter the protests of voting for third-party candidates or not voting at all. And Donald Trump was delivered a second term. Commence the sudden outrage about Trump’s removal of DEI initiatives at the federal level; mass deportations, closed borders, and the refusal of asylum; federal definition of sex and gender as binary (male/female), the assault on transgender athletes and the environment, the erasure of indigenous names and The Gulf of Mexico, and more.

Dear “progressives” – are you done? Because from where I’m sitting, you’ve been Donald Trump’s greatest ally.

Part 3: My Final Thoughts

You know, the irony in all of this – the discussion of Elon Musk’s Nazi salute (is that what it was?), the emboldening of white supremacists – of emboldened neo-Nazis – and the second term of Donald Trump and what it means – is that it was avoidable. It was avoidable three times – but it managed to happen, not because Donald Trump was a popular choice (he lost popularly all three times), but because of the effort “progressives” made – or didn’t make – and they overplayed their hand.

Again, progressives played checkers, while republicans played chess.

I distinctly recall a phone call I received a few years ago, with J.K. Rowling at the center. It was during the height of her alleged transphobia. I disagreed with the notion – and I certainly disagreed with “progressives” burning her books (like I said – ironic). I said I saw the essential point of what Rowling was trying to say – about men abusing a system to prey on women. I said her intention was right, but that perhaps her word choice was wrong. I considered her position from her known past, as a survivor of domestic violence and sexual assault.

The friend, who had become increasingly distant on their personal journey, found the time to call me. The call wasn’t a normal conversation. It was a scolding – about how I was wrong – about how J.K. Rowling is transphobic, and how if I couldn’t see that, then I was transphobic, too. This was the sole purpose of their call – and then they were gone with, “You’re wrong my dude.”

A decade before this friend made their personal discovery and revelation, I had sat in a theater with seven other people to support the queer cinema event Brokeback Mountain. I had given voice to equity. I had donated to the Human Rights Campaign. I supported queer-owned businesses, publications, and artists. I had seen the first-hand effects of intolerance – having had a cousin who was disowned for being a lesbian and having a classmate kicked out of their home in high school. I had coffee thrown at me on a date at a Starbucks in 2008 (at Loughborough Ave. and Highway 55 in South St. Louis). I wrote my undergraduate thesis on queer representation in film – and furthered that work in graduate school. I wrote a screenplay for a graduate project and was told, “If you want your diploma, you won’t make that short film.”

My short film, The Main Street Murders, was designed to play with the conventions of a typical film noir. My lead detective would be a man, undone by another man. In place of the femme fatale, I wanted to create the homme fatale. I didn’t make the movie. I made Backdurbreeze instead – an informercial parody for an anti-flatulence pill. I told my instructor, “Here’s Backdurbreeze, because if it’s shit this university wants, it’s literal shit they’ll get.”

When I became a communications professor, I made it a point to create a classroom that was safe for personal expression, but also discourse. I respect students’ pronouns, use preferred names, and I “call-in” (never “call-out”) students who need it because they don’t. I famously say, “I don’t care what you believe outside of this room – but in this room, you will be respectful.”

When I teach acting, I press to ensure at least one of the final scenes our students work with tells a queer story. I build the stories of Bobby Griffith and Matthew Shepard into my lesson plans in communication, alongside the struggles of friends who are transgender – in order to inspire tolerance and thought. In other classes, I work in an analysis of an episode of Captain Planet that confronts the HIV/AIDS crisis and associated discrimination (“A Recipe for Hate”). In my film classes, I make sure to show a film that promotes the acceptance of characters who may be gay, lesbian, transgender, or who may simply enjoy drag. I’ve even been called “Bernie Fucking Sanders” in class before.

But there I was – a person who’s always done the work- being written off and reduced merely to someone who’s transphobic by someone who’s “progressive.”

That friend and I haven’t spoken since, though we’ve remained connected across social platforms. And here is where I’ll make an observation. This person – who went from rejecting who they were (because of republican intolerance at home), embraced who they are very openly. They participate in expressive activities from the safety of a solidly democratic space. But the person who once called to admonish me, overtly did nothing to promote an alternative to Donald Trump – at any time, in any election.

My “progressive” friend operated comfortably within their safe space – and did nothing.

The worst part of this? They’re not alone. Since Donald Trump’s second inauguration, my feeds have been flooded with complaints from people outraged about the things Trump has said, the orders he has signed, and the way he has acted. So I ask again: why are you surprised?

In the game “progressive” liberals played, reproductive freedom was sought, though it should have never been lost. The Supreme Court tilted conservative, though it should have been kept in balance. Rights won through decades were traded in for the argument of semantics – for the idea that “men can give birth” and in Congress, it became about the celebration of Jasmine Crockett telling Marjorie Taylor Greene she had a butch body. Protections for the equity of all people were sacrificed because it was “Bernie or Bust” – because Kamala Harris didn’t do enough in Gaza and campaigned with Liz Cheney.

The records of people be damned.

Never mind that Hillary Clinton passed the first U.N. Resolution on LGBT Human Rights, launched the Global Equity Fund, and ended State Department regulations that denied same-sex couples equal rights. She had a plan to push for equality – for all people who are migrant through LGBT+. She sought to codify protections and hoped to deliver an AIDS-free generation. Clinton had a plan to overhaul the immigration crisis. She had a plan to further solidify women’s rights, which she had long championed.

Kamala Harris’ work was historic as well – from her work against predatory lenders in the housing crisis, to criminal justice reform, and even officiating the San Francisco wedding of the plaintiffs who opposed California’s Proposition 8 (same-sex marriage ban). She had plans to invest in America’s small businesses, to confront price gouging at the grocery store, and to enshrine reproductive freedom as the law of the land.

Despite the odds, one became the first woman nominated by a major political party for president. The other became the first female vice president. Both were denied a presidency because to progressives they weren’t ideal. The standard was higher – and the known risks of Donald Trump weren’t motivation or deterrent enough. That was evident in Lucas Kunce’s failed “progressive” US Senate race: he wouldn’t even endorse or align himself with Kamala Harris.

Hillary was an “establishment” “corporate shill,” and Kamala “is a cop.” Both faced criticism for not taking “big money” out of politics, while opposing a billionaire propped up by billionaires. Again – the irony.

That same irony turned Riley Gaines, a 12-time NCAA All-American swimmer, into a villain for advocating for women’s athletics to be contested amongst biological women only. It’s one of the most dominant social issues of our time – and it’s a complex issue that deserves honest consideration and the hard work to establish a complex solution. But if you side with Gaines, you’re transphobic; if you side with athletes who are trans, you’re anti-woman. It’s a no-win situation because this one grey area demands grey solutions. It’s not black and white – it’s not one-size-fits-all. But it’s one of many issues that “woke ideology” is uncompromising on.

And it’s that lack of compromise – that lack of ability to acknowledge complexity – that has delivered a potential Sieg Heil on inauguration day. It’s that lack of willingness to engage that delivered a second Trump presidency. It’s that which the average American has pushed back against because it’s “gone too far.”

It’s resulted in anger and fear – and is hallmarked by a refusal to engage.

Perhaps you have “blocked,” “unfriended,” or “unfollowed” people who you feel are against you. Perhaps you have told people to “fuck off,” and vowed to never speak to them again. Perhaps you have written off people who don’t totally agree with you. My guess is you have – and my guess is that you’re a republican, a democrat, a moderate, or even a progressive.

I did this once. I don’t anymore – for one simple reason: You have no effect on change if you remove yourself from the table and the conversation. If you put your head down and avoid the politics that determine your life – or if you protest vote – or if you “hold your nose” to vote – you’re not being helpful or effective. You don’t have the luxury of being avoidant because it’s uncomfortable, or because it requires too much effort.

You have to do the hard work – and the hard work isn’t always easy – and it’s many times less than ideal and perfect. Trust me, it’s not easy being in a classroom where a student who’s transgender confronts a former classmate who deadnames and purposefully misgenders them. But it does you no good to write them off when you can engage them and seek to understand why they have the perspective they have. But when you’ve engaged them and haven’t harshly reprimanded, “called them out,” or “kicked them out,” you get labeled a racist or transphobic.

And if I have been labeled these things during a presentation on implicit bias, microaggressions, sex/gender, and race/ethnicity, then you could be, too.

Engage in conversation – not bumper sticker, semantically driven politics that are relegated to social media comments sections. Sure, outwardly you look “progressive” and like the ally you purport to be. But when you do nothing in the face of a real danger to what you claim to represent? You’re as bad as – or dare I say – worse than Donald Trump could ever hope to be.

You’re either going to be the reason rights are won, tolerance regrows, and neo-Nazis go back into hiding – or you’re going to be the reason that kids go back into cages, migrants die in rivers, people who are transgender commit suicide in oppression, racism runs rampant, and swastikas fly higher than they have in nearly 90 years. And your response will be your social media outrage? Get a life.

That choice is yours – and that choice begins by sitting at the chess table like many have done for decades. Put away your need for instant gratification – your need for pacification and simple slogans. It’s time you recognize that life is complex – that many issues present grey area. Stop being lazy and do the damn work, which is more than a poster board at a march. The work is in your everyday interactions – in your relationships. Sit at the table – and treat people like people – not from a position of “you are my enemy” up front.

Listen to understand instead of listening to respond.

Deny the Sieg Heils – deny the swastikas – deny the hate, the intolerance, the bigotry – but don’t paint everyone with broad brush strokes and toss around “racist,” “transphobic,” and “Nazi” with ease when someone disagrees with you.

In closing, I’d ask you to recall the Aesop’s fable about The Boy Who Cried Wolf. When you make enough false claims, the true ones get lost. So when everyone who disagrees with you is sexist, racist, heterosexist, ablest, a Nazi, or the second coming of Hitler, nobody is listening to you when there really is one. In the event that Musk’s intention was to signal Nazis, and not some misguided gesture, the disregard of the claim is already present.

And when someone has shown you who they are – believe them the first time. Donald Trump showed us who he was in 2015. Many of us believed him the first time. At least twice, enough of you did not. So here we are – debating over whether or not Elon Musk is a Nazi – and being outraged by what we saw and surely knew would happen. It was all preventable – we didn’t need to be having this conversation because neither man should have had the platform, but here we are.

Why are you surprised? The better question is perhaps: Why did you allow it? But better still: What are you going to do about it? Choose wisely.