Donald Trump’s Son or the spawn of Trump as I like to say, used his daughter’s Halloween candy as an analogy for ‘socialism’. In true Trump fashion, it showed that 140 character is just enough to say a whole lot of wrong information. We decided to expand this analogy into the real world.

It has to be said that it is a little sad that Trump Jr’s daughter face will always be synonymous with her father’s politicisation of Halloween. However, people on twitter directed their clapbacks at Trump Jr rather than his obviously bemused daughter.

There were a number of notable twitter clapbacks for trump:

Here’s Antoine Allen’s candy based Halloween reply

First of all Mr. Trump Jr, take your child to a poor/working class neighborhood. Then have her knock on the same amount of doors she knocked on in your affluent community. Whilst knocking on doors, get her to count how many doors do not open, how many doors open but can only give a minimum amount of candy and how many doors can only give tricks instead of candy. Thereby, limiting her opportunities to obtain candy, despite her effort of trying to obtain candy. This is without even mentioning that the candy factory in that area probably went out of business, thus meaning those children had no prospect of collecting enough candy to fill their bucket.

On the other hand, Trump Jr can explain the context of the candy she was able to obtain in her own neighborhood. Explain how her father’s connection enabled him to take her to the best houses with the most candy. Then explain how this ‘connection and networking’ is not a reflection on her effort, but simply her ‘privilege’ of being born into the right household. Explain how her father’s inherited wealth has enabled them to afford a car, that can drive them to multiple equal affluent neighborhoods, thus increasing her chances of gaining even more candy. And finally, explain that even if she is unsuccessful at collecting candy, there is plenty of candy at home generating from generations of Trump tax evasion.

Finally, explain that regardless of potential illness she can carry on collecting sweets with the knowledge that her father’s inheritance is covering her medical expenses if she becomes ‘poorly’. Whereas, other children whose parents do not have enough money to have health insurance, have to go trick or treating whilst fearing their efforts of collecting candy may be curtailed by illness and a subsequent lack of medical coverage.

Now, you can explain how socialism attempts to create equal opportunities and outcomes for those people who are not born in areas where everyone has spare candy or multiple opportunities to gain candy. For instance, the areas where there are limited opportunities to gain sweets no matter how willing or hard you work. The kind of areas where whilst working at obtaining sweets, there is also a higher degree of people trying to give you tricks instead. Thus, making it harder to escape the poverty and criminality traps that drive people to make decisions that are rooted in the need to survive or to catch up with those lucky people in the areas where people have plenty of opportunities to gain sweets!

In short, two children in different communities could knock on the same amount of doors- However, there is a likelihood that the child in the upper/middle-class area will gain more sweets than the child in the area below the poverty line. This is not always because that child worked harder; but simply because they were born in the right area and with the right parents. Socialism seeks to lessen the gap between the two areas to limit the privilege or share the privilege of the first child for the betterment of the whole community/society and country.

With that said, if Trump’s daughter would rather the rest of the little children starve whilst her cupboards are full of candy then she can follow her father’s weak reasoning.

This video on privilege sums it up nicely


Antoine Allen: Tweet me @Antoinespeaker

What are your thoughts?