TUCKER: What did I just watch?!

It was one of those moments when you feel like you are watching history — or at least a pivotal point in history — happening right before your eyes. And, frankly, it was one of those moments that, if you're like me, you felt, “I shouldn't be seeing this.”It was like the clickbait we see online: “Watch the moment this car flips over, killing two.” It was too much. Set up to get clicks. Sensational. Even Trump said, “This will make for great television,” just like Chris Rock after being slapped by Will Smith: “That was, uh, the greatest night in the history of television.”The Trump/Zelensky chat was also reality TV, and like reality TV many of us probably tended to get sucked in to asking the wrong questions: Who is being authentic here? Who is the good guy and who is the bad guy? While also, of course, assuming that we know how to make these judgments, like we have the common sense, the discernment; that we're “a good judge of character” and have a “sixth sense about these things.”If you're looking at the clip of the big meeting in the oval office looking for facts; if you're viewing the video sure that you'll be able to uncover the truth the whole truth of it all, so that you can harness a firm and educated opinion... well, good luck. You're trusting yourself way too much.But something about this just felt weird. It felt like this should be happening behind closed doors; I shouldn't be witnessing this. Just too much. Such is the age we're in. When Baudrillard talks about 'the ecstacy of communication' he uses the analogy of a striptease, suggesting that there are no longer any layers to get through in our communication. It's all right there in front of us. And it's too much.As if we needed to be reminded, “Politicians create hyper-real identities, not tied to any representation of reality,” wrote French philosopher and commentator Jean Baudrillard. “The real person does exist, but their online identity is forged according to other images and style.”He also reminds us that, “Images are not representations but sites of the disappearance of meaning (and representation.)” Like Main Street USA at Disneyworld, these images rely on our sentimentality and sense of real meaning, while also creating something new and fake. And real meaning took a kick in the pants today.So let's tread lightly when we come face to face with spectacle like this. We're not in Kansas anymore. There is no Kansas. In fact, if you buy into the knee-jerk reaction that you're expected to from this, like I do, it might be worth asking a few questions. Here are ten:What am I supposed to feel after this? What you're feeling is probably it. And that's not accidental.With that, am I supposed to think, reflect, or am I supposed to have a strong reaction?Who stands to gain from this? Ruling elites? The CBC? Is there a bill coming up? What symbols and values are present? Things like bravery, respect, millions of lives, World War III. Symbolic gestures too fall into this, including body language and clothing.How is this being framed? Guaranteed over the next few days there's going to be tonnes pinned on the edges of this clip, scaffolded on, sometimes the relations even stretched to the extreme.What's the larger context, and am I really taking it into account?Does the narrative seem to flow naturally with starts and stops like we normally experience in probing our way through a conversation, or does it seem scripted? Just too smooth (see Trudeau's Epic Pause online for a great example of faked spontaneity).What issues is this moment amplifying?Who are the good guys and bad guys and how are these roles being redefined?Bookended with #1, Am I being tested here, pushed onto a side? Again, Baudrillard: “all the messages in the media function in a similar fashion: neither information nor communication, but referendum, perpetual test, circular response, verification of the code.”All is representation. All is a test.How do we begin to make sense out of any of this? What's frustrating these days is that none of all this up-close-and-personal has the result of getting us anywhere but into more extreme positions. So when President Trump says, “It's good for the American people to see,” we don't actually know what we're seeing! Because there is such little real meaning, and tonnes of spectacle, if you're supportive of Trump you can cheer him on, and if you're against him, well your position is totally justified too. We all see it clear as day and it literally gets us nowhere. It's a glut of information without any real meaning.But something here was actually more disturbing: these are supposed to be the best of the best.OK, let's assume for a moment that this was a real scenario, that somehow there had not been pre-made plans on how this should go, that there was not a whole series of nudge-nudge-wink-winks embedded on how this would play out. It was all fresh. Tabula rasa. Big global powers sitting down to sort out peace. Human lives are in the balance. Very serious stuff. Well, would you want your kids to behave this way sorting out a disagreement in the school-yard? Of course not.Nobody asked any questions, at least not the kind that sought answers. The first question came from Zelensky. “What kind of diplomacy, JD, are you talking about?” And then, “Have you ever been to the Ukraine?”JD Vance countered a minute later with, “Do you think its respectful to come to the Oval Office of the United States of America and attack the administration that is trying to prevent the destruction of your country?”No one actually sought knowledge. No one asked, “How do you come to that conclusion? Where did you get that information? Why are you using this word for that? Is there a better way that we can communicate about this than....? No one tried to see where the other was coming from.Nothing. And unfortunately in this It was a verbal bar-room brawl. You know you are on opposite sides. Ok, you can either shout each other down or try to come to some middle ground. That is, if you truly want discussion. And maybe that's our answer. Is it possible that Zelenskyy just went too far, was disrespectful, didn't say thank you, and offended Trump in front of the cameras? It's possible. But surely, if anyone here is truly vying for peace that discussion should have looked a whole lot different.

TUCKER: What did I just watch?!

Related Stories