Is There Hope For Feminism After Trump?

I've got a large body of unfinished - well as unfinished as my writing usually gets - writing to post.  The problem with being forced to take a week off due to computer problems is that the world goes on.   Instead of that I'm going to post a conversation between Rebecca Traister and my beloved Harry Litman titled Is There Hope For Feminism After Trump because they bring up several things that I think are important innovations that I hadn't realized had been articulated as publicly.  

One is something I've thought was stunningly obvious but seemed to be entirely lost on most of the People I've heard babbling and read scribbling about these things THAT THE POST-CIVIL WAR RECONSTRUCTION IS REMARKABLY LIKE WHAT WE'RE LIVING THROUGH NOW.  I would go a lot farther than I think either of them would in that I think it's the absolute proof of the danger of the anti-democratic dangers built into the Constitution and the form of government in the United States.  The ease with which America's indigenous form of fascism, white supremacy, restored de facto slavery in many places and America's peculiar form of apartheid and the manipulation of racism as a means of oligarchic control through the Senate, through the Electoral College (the mechanism with which the slave-holders and their agents ended Reconstruction) and the media promoting racism as the tool of abolishing any move toward egalitarian democracy with the full and aggressive support of the Supreme Court, the third and most anti-democratic branch of the federal government.

Lots of what Traister and Litman say is a lot like what I've been writing since I started this only they don't go as far as I think is warranted by the facts and justified by the danger we are in.   They sound something like I probably did around 2002. 

I don't think we're ever going to be safe from what we've now seen overturn the major movements for egalitarian democracy in the United States SUCCEED TWICE.   And the mechanisms for doing that are the anti-democratic features of the Constitution and the license given for the mass media to promote and generate lies with impunity.  I doubt that is something that a professional journalist is going to have the courage to admit and write about, certainly not in the New York Times which, on the anniversary of the Sullivan Decision covered itself with kisses for having gotten the right with which, in the final weeks of the 2016 election, published even more lies about Hillary Clinton which probably got Trump over the line to lose the election in a way that would give him the presidency.  It was just part of the decades long lie campaign and campaign of mean girl vilification of her that the Great Gray Drab published about her with its Sullivan Decision "rights" to publish lies about Democratic politicians.  People are such suckers for that rag.