Donald Trump has been elected President of America. At this point, we can't know for sure what this means. On the evidence of his campaign, it means social and ethnic division in America, the tearing up of postwar Western norms, a rapid reversal of the nascent global response to climate change, and international security, including in Europe, under grave threat. Yes, I'm pessimistic.
Analysis will be in abundance. Before it starts in earnest, I want to point out something quite simple. The rapid return to certainty following Brexit amongst those who are paid to research, write about and analyse politics in advance of this event has been foolhardy. The failure of US political elites to heed clear messages that have been sent for some time was negligent. That foolhardiness and negligence has left us ignoring what has been staring us in the face. Next stop, France 2017.
History is not on the side of the progressive worldview. The quarter century complacency that has accompanied progressive thought and action now has to end. Now. If you believe in a world of equality, continual human development, the ability to come together and solve even the biggest challenges we face and create unimagined prospects for the entirety of this species, then, frankly, the fight is on. Those values are not going to be swept forward by 'history'; they need to cultivated, articulated and persuasive.
History sends few messages that are clear. One that is crystal clear is that it is easier to turn us against one another than to unite us and sustain that unity. Sometimes a wave of hope can come together. But the minute we just surf the wave and forget what created it, then it crashes in fear and division. Hence we have moved from a movement of change in 2008 to a swarm of anxiety and fear in 2016.
So uncertainty is good. It can be powerful. The RSA exists to help people engage with ideas, to mobilise in ways that can lift us all. We retain the optimistic outlook that ideas and change associated with them are not the preserve of elites; they only come to life, make a difference when they become the property of us all. We must have to humility to embrace uncertainty but not let it debilitate us. The experts call it operating in conditions of volatility, uncertainly, complexity and ambiguity (VUCA). We are just one organisation amongst many but we want to play our part.
There has to be a better way than this. It will require heavy lifting. In the US, in Europe and the UK civil society is weakening. The ability to resist authoritarianism is declining. We can pass moral judgement or we can imagine and build. That sounds incongruous today. But it is ultimately the only way. And it starts with uncertainty.
Related articles
-
Technology plus loss of belonging equals Trump
Anthony Painter
Anthony Painter argues that the roots of the new populism are explicable but instead of reacting to it reflexively, there needs to be greater collective effort to create a convincing alternative worldview.
Join the discussion
Comments
Please login to post a comment or reply
Don't have an account? Click here to register.
Tammy Duckworth (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tammy_Duckworth) summed it up nicely. Her family ended up on food stamps after her father (Captain in the US Marines who then worked for the UN in refugee, housing, and development programs) became unemployed in the 80's.
There is a lot of middle America that is hurting, and Trump like Brexit connected with that hurt.
Fossil fuels will run out, and the substitution process is well under way. The costs of running an electric car are much lower than a fossil fuel powered car, and now the investment has been made I expect the transition to continue. This could be part of the reason that some of the oil producers have turned on the taps to use the fuel up whilst there is still demand.
Trump might be good for international security.
Russia has been clear that any serious attacks will result a nuclear war. Since the Georgian war Russia has responded with new Tanks, Aircraft, Air Defence systems, Intercontinental ballistic missiles (Sea and Air), cruise missiles, super and hyper sonic missiles along with a complete overhaul of the armed forces, a reduction in defence procurement corruption, and large scale emergency exercises involving 40 - 60 million people each year.
All the above has been achieved on a budget that was smaller than the UK or France pre 2008, and slightly larger than UK or France post 2008. Russia has now dropped back its spending to below the UK (down to the level of France). By contrast the US has stayed at roughly the same level since 1991 with minor changes in the entire period. The US spends over 9x more than Russia, and the ratio is much higher when NATO budgets are compared to Russian.
The post Ukraine sanctions have made it easier for Russia to carry out the import substitutions required to remove its vulnerability to strategic overseas suppliers.
It seems obvious that Russia post 2008 in a global recession was provoked and galvanised into a national response, as a result of the previously unthinkable, an attack by Georgia, followed by a propaganda battle as to who attacked who. It was also personal to the senior leadership of Russia since Putin was with Bush at the Beijing Olympics when the attack took place and President Medvedev was on holiday when they had to respond to the emergency.
By coincidence, Ukraine exploded in the middle of the Sochi Olympics, wreaking Russia's $ 50 billion showcase to the world and resulting in the current situation.
If Trump can rebuild the relationship with Russia, that would be a benefit in terms of reducing the likelihood of serious conflict, and the possibility of catastrophic conflict.
Trump has a large ego, clearly he will want to do a good job. He has achieved the presidency without support from the lobby groups, so he can be independent and do the best for his country. The worry is his behaviour when thwarted.
Tammy Duckworth (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tammy_Duckworth) summed it up nicely. Her family ended up on food stamps after her father (Captain in the US Marines who then worked for the UN in refugee, housing, and development programs) became unemployed in the 80's.
There is a lot of middle America that is hurting, and Trump like Brexit connected with that hurt.
Fossil fuels will run out, and the substitution process is well under way. The costs of running an electric car are much lower than a fossil fuel powered car, and now the investment has been made I expect the transition to continue. This could be part of the reason that some of the oil producers have turned on the taps to use the fuel up whilst there is still demand.
Trump might be good for international security.
Russia has been clear that any serious attacks will result a nuclear war. Since the Georgian war Russia has responded with new Tanks, Aircraft, Air Defence systems, Intercontinental ballistic missiles (Sea and Air), cruise missiles, super and hyper sonic missiles along with a complete overhaul of the armed forces, a reduction in defence procurement corruption, and large scale emergency exercises involving 40 - 60 million people each year.
All the above has been achieved on a budget that was smaller than the UK or France pre 2008, and slightly larger than UK or France post 2008. Russia has now dropped back its spending to below the UK (down to the level of France). By contrast the US has stayed at roughly the same level since 1991 with minor changes in the entire period. The US spends over 9x more than Russia, and the ratio is much higher when NATO budgets are compared to Russian.
The post Ukraine sanctions have made it easier for Russia to carry out the import substitutions required to remove its vulnerability to strategic overseas suppliers.
It seems obvious that Russia post 2008 in a global recession was provoked and galvanised into a national response, as a result of the previously unthinkable, an attack by Georgia, followed by a propaganda battle as to who attacked who. It was also personal to the senior leadership of Russia since Putin was with Bush at the Beijing Olympics when the attack took place and President Medvedev was on holiday when they had to respond to the emergency.
By coincidence, Ukraine exploded in the middle of the Sochi Olympics, wreaking Russia's $ 50 billion showcase to the world and resulting in the current situation.
If Trump can rebuild the relationship with Russia, that would be a benefit in terms of reducing the likelihood of serious conflict, and the possibility of catastrophic conflict.
Trump has a large ego, clearly he will want to do a good job. He has achieved the presidency without support from the lobby groups, so he can be independent and do the best for his country. The worry is his behaviour when thwarted.
Excellent article.
The parallels between now and the 30s are alarming.
No doubt our forebears who witnessed the rise of the right in those days thought they were living in civilised times.
No doubt they assumed the checks and balances of their political infrastructure would prevent anything unseemly.
And no doubt there were plenty who thought it was none of their business. Apathy is not an artefact of the colour TV age alone.
As a historian, I can see those parallels all too well.
This all needs to play itself out, and it's really just starting. Before France in 2017 we have the Italian referendum and the re-run of the Austrian Presidential election, both on 4th December. And history teaches us that we who are living these events are the people least qualified to understand their import. After all, the educated establishment was terrified by the popular movements of the early 19th century but those changes after 1848 led to social and economic reform that we all now esteem.
And you are absolutely correct in fearing the decline in our ability to resist authoritarianism; of greatest concern is the nature of the demographic cohorts least committed to democracy. Research by Roberto Stefan Foa and Yascha Mounk suggests that more than 50% of Europeans born from the 1960s onwards don't think it absolutely essential to live under democratic governance; this cohort rises over time, so those just coming to voting age are the least committed to a defence of democracy. Authoritarianism in this century need not mean the charismatic dictators of the last century, but may include a dictatorship of unelected technocrats or even an illiberal elite imposing its own views on a subject people.
Until this plays out, we must be stalwart in our defence of the foundation of our democracy as safeguarded by Article 21 of the 1948 UDHR that enshrines the principles of universal adult suffrage and the secret ballot.
And even the 2016 US election can teach us one thing. Once the results were in both the President elect and the incumbent office holder made powerful public declarations of continuity, democratic transition and inclusion. The office is often greater than the man, and it now behoves us all to defend the exercise of democracy wherever it occurs, whether we like it or not.
Very well put Michael.
It is terrifying how the terror of living in the shadow or under authoritarianism can be forgotten in just two to three short generations.
Dear all,
Thank you for these comments - very encouraging, challenging (in a positive way), and useful. We see an important role for all the RSA does in facing the reality of the moment we are in. Democratic methods as well as democratic values have to be at the heart of our work- participation matters.
The Citizen's Economic Council is a case in point- we want to understand how people can relate to economic analysis, ideas and, most importantly, how they seek to shape economic policy to meet their needs (needs which have clearly be too long neglected). Sitting alongside this is the Inclusive Growth Commission (the Peter references). The next stage of this work is asking similar questions about ensuring civil participation in economic futures - by and with the people not just 'for' them. And, of course, our Fellowship - a network of 28,000 people who want to change the future - are very much part of that.
A very rich conversation.
Anthony