The Emperor's New Clothes, or that comb over isn't really working.

My daughter and I have been having a discussion about myths in our culture. This was occasioned by her reaction to seeing the movie Ready Player One. And while I haven’t seen it, I gather that it is about saving a VR realm from the evils of pop up ads. Evidently included is a heavy dose of iconic pop culture and movie references. Our discussion lead me to late night and early morning You Tube meanderings, mostly centered around Joseph Campbell. Although I didn’t include this fact in our discussion, I was also thinking about a recent Atlantic article that suggests that one of the reasons nationalist sentiment in America and elsewhere has taken such a strong hold on a considerable minority is that the movement supplants traditional foundational myths with new ones. This articled seemed to support a previous realization I had that what Mr. Trump has succeeded in doing (along with that part of the media that supports him) is to co-opt and transform part of the American mythos to fit his own needs. Otherwise a know nothing, he is masterful at this.

One of the reasons that we first imagined a theocratic takeover of America in On The Rocks is that a religious based regime would have to employ this very same tactic. And indeed we have seen the religious right do this very same tactic over the last few decades. When we hear statements like the Constitution is a divine document which is an increasingly common assertion, we see a part of the American mythos being co-opted . A good history will point out that the Constitution is a politically pragmatic attempt to right the deficiencies of the original Confederation. When we hear people claim that the founders were devout me, we again see the myth being co-opted to fit a world view devoid of any connection to the realities of late 18th century America. Yes, a few of the signers were devout men, but most were pragmatic politicians, most were Deists, intellectual products of the Enlightenment. People like Madison balanced the good and bad nature of men in a reasoned way in to create a more stable, just (in the sense of being reasonable) and effective government that was validated by the consent and participation of the governed. And not the divine right of the rulers.

So the fact that one of our heroes in On the Rocks is a historian seems to make sense. He is an enemy of the theocratic presidential dictator because he see’s through this mythic co-option, and knows that the dictator has no theological cloths.

The fact that we made our historian an action hero?

Well, that’s the beauty of fiction.