Donald Trump speaking with supporters at a campaign rally at Fountain Park in Fountain Hills, Arizona. Gage Skidmore/Wikimedia Commons. All rights reserved.
“There is a crack in
everything.
That's how the light gets in.”
― Leonard Cohen,
Selected Poems, 1956-1968
As morning
unfolded on this side of the Atlantic on November 9, Donald Trump addressed his
supporters as the 45th president-elect of the United States. A
racist, misogynist and blatantly ignorant candidate will be seating in the Oval
Office at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. And he will bring along some of the most
conspicuous American champions of racism and divisiveness. Mr. Trump is set to draw
Americans further apart. Stopping him from doing so requires an exercise in
humility. When the values of our liberal democracies cease to be obvious to
many, it is our responsibility to remember voters why such values are so
important in the first place. We have to remember that, as it has happened in
the past, even seemingly all-powerful administrations can be held accountable.
Denormalizing Trump
This election
was supposed to end with Mr. Trump being defeated by the coalition of the
diverse and the cementing of Mr. Obama´s legacy. The opposite happened. The white
voters’ fear of their status being in danger turned out to be stronger than the
women and minorities’ fears of what Mr. Trump stands for. There is no return to
normal after this result. Once the elections are over, the political class and
society in general have a tendency to normalize
what the polls and the electoral system have produced. But Mr. Trump’s lack
of respect for the country’s political culture, his ignorance, and his
willingness to appoint white supremacists and far-right characters to key posts
in his administration is anything but normal. On the contrary, it warns us that
America is likely to be governed by its least
qualified and more unprincipled citizens-
and thus turn into a Kakistocracy.
Mr. Trump is, at
the same time, a media creation and a media creature. Journalists treated him
as a celebrity from day one, and he capitalized on it through social media. From
incendiary tweets to press conferences, everything the Republican candidate did
made the headlines and front pages of most newspapers. Mr. Trump’s narrative
successfully hijacked political debate, replacing political exchange with
high-handed attacks and impossible promises. Few seemed to notice that the debate
moved from ideas to identities. The
point was to get people so confused
that they would give up on the debate altogether.
Mr. Trump’s narrative successfully hijacked political debate, replacing political exchange with high-handed attacks and impossible promises.
Observers and political
commentators assured us that the Republican candidate would not win – that Mr.
Trump´s candidacy was a power play, a
marketing campaign to further his brand. The possibility of such an
unexperienced candidate to land the most important job in the world certainly
seemed like something of a joke. But they missed the big picture. Many
Americans did not trust Mr. Trump, but they did not trust Hillary Clinton either.
Her campaign
failed to present a clear narrative, close to the average voter’s feelings and
interests, and to put forward a captivating message. Both the media and the Democratic
Party realized too late that the joke was on them. When they did, the
damage had been done. Post-truth
politics had won.
Now, several politicians
– including Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama – are arguing that we should give
Mr. Trump a chance. But normalizing President Trump after bearing witness to how candidate
Trump targeted and harassed minorities would be a huge mistake. Politicians
cannot be measured by their victory speeches.
This was a not a
normal election, and there is no evidence that Mr. Trump could ever be a normal
politician. Not a single speech of his during the past campaign can lead us to expect
anything other than the worse in the forthcoming months. Trying to normalize him
is nothing more than an exercise in wishful thinking. Mr. Trump won by tapping
into America´s anxieties and underbelly drives. It would be hard to imagine him
running the country in any other way.
Reinventing the narrative
The conservative
campaign against mainstream “liberal” media is not new – and it is one of the
reasons why alt-right organizations like Breitbart
have established themselves as a credible alternative for many. The
Republican Party has been complaining for a long time about an existing media
bias against conservative and rightwing views. But Mr. Trump adopted a
different approach: he sought to undermine free press by linking it to the establishment. His claim that the election
was rigged was in fact an attack on
journalists for exposing Mr. Trump for what he really is, for objectively pointing
out his many shortcomings and unsuitability for the post, and for reasoning that
Mr. Trump as President would be a disgrace for American democracy and a major
security risk for the world. Mr. Trump attacked them for exercising their
responsibility to inform American citizens of the dangers ahead.
Mr. Trump adopted a different approach: he sought to undermine free press by linking it to the establishment.
By raising
doubts about most issues, Mr. Trump placed truth and lies on the same level. Irrespective
for legal provisions and democratic culture, he has done all he could to undermine
the press by refusing to condemn his supporters’ attacks against media
representatives, proposing to establish limits to the internet and press
freedom, advocating the opening up of libel laws, and denying press credentials
to several media outlets. He accused the media of campaigning for Clinton and
colluding with her to rig the election. And his message was surprisingly
successful: it drew voters and legitimacy further away from Clinton and the press.
Emotion trumped the truth.
Journalists should
deal with President Trump better than
they did with candidate Trump. First,
explaining to citizens that this is not about taking sides, but about being
aware of the dangers of entrusting so much power to someone who does not
respect democratic principles. Second, holding him accountable for his incompetence,
his conflicts of interest, his nepotism, his appointments. By asking the right questions and addressing the right issues the media can force Trump´s
narrative to make room for accountability. Third, debunking his assertions with
facts and data – an especially important task in a context where social media
and, notably, Facebook had a significant
role in deciding the outcome of the election, and many citizens appear to have
trouble distinguishing between reality and fiction. This is something alt-right
media outlets have understood all too well: readers approach the news in a
different way than in the past, they look for amusing narratives, distinct
story lines, drama and, inevitably, heroes and villains.
Journalists should deal with President Trump better than they did with candidate Trump.
Respect for facts
is not an issue in post-truth times. This is where social movements disguised
as media outlets like Breitbart
come in, and why it is so crucially important to close the media´s legitimacy
gap amongst conservatives – to explain to readers that despite all they have
been told, Clinton and Trump are not two sides
of the same coin, that democracy and political correctness are not empty
words, and that there is nothing worse than a misinformed public. Journalists must
focus on facts and remain vigilant. Stopping Mr. Trump from shattering the
values that hold Americans together depends on convincing citizens that honest
information, democratic principles and humanist values do matter.
Resisting Trump
The concept of democracy
is inseparable from freedom, the separation of power, a free press and minority
rights. These are the pillars of our democratic systems. Mr. Trump’s unexpected
victory should not distract us from the fact that the President-elect of the
United States is an ignorant,
narcissistic, and racist character who will crush democracy if he is given
the chance. Against that, citizens have every right to protest. Those in the
political ranks who try to portray civil resistance and peaceful protesting as
unconstitutional are the ones who have never respected democracy and the US Constitution
in the first place.
Protesting the
current situation is a right. And the exercise of this right is essential to
protect democracy in the United States.
Mr. Trump´s attacks on Latinos and women – both on and off camera – have told us enough about the agenda he
intends to pursue. And his appointment of the likes of Reince
Priebus, Steve Bannon, Mike Flynn and Jeff
Sessions tells us enough about the methods he is willing to use.
An America where
the respect for others is brushed
aside is not something most Americans would be willing to accept. Peacefully conceding
defeat is an obligation, independently of our
distaste for the result and the circumstances in which it has happened. But protesting
the racist, prejudiced and hateful legislation that is likely to follow is not
only a right, but a civic obligation.
Protesters outside Trump Hotel on Pennsylvania Ave, DC. November 10, 2016. Lorie Shaull/Wikimedia Commons. All rights reserved.
The Latino question
If there was
ever a time for Latinos to exercise their right to vote, November, 8, was the
one. Out of a population of 57
million Latinos legally living in the US, a projected 27.3 million were eligible to vote
in this election – that is, 4
million more than in 2012.
There is no
denying that Latinos were enthusiastic about voting. But many were not
motivated enough by Hillary Clinton´s message: her campaign clearly failed to
wake up the sleeping giant. Only 65%
Latino voters supported her, whereas 71%
supported Obama in 2012. If you consider the increase in eligible Latino
voters and Mr. Trump´s targeted attacks, this is certainly not the outcome
which her campaign expected. Mr. Trump’s support among Latinos reached
29% – Mitt Romney got 27% in 2012 –, something that can be understood by
recognizing that the narratives about Latinos
voting as a bloc are misleading. Latinos did support Clinton over Trump.
But the Republican candidate was able to find enough white voters to
counterbalance her advantage. Mr. Trump was elected not because of Latinos, but despite
them.
During the
campaign, Mr. Trump positioned himself as the defender of American identity. But he knows little about belonging. Millions of
Latin Americans have family living in the United States. And they share a
social and cultural bound. Questioning the Latinos’ place in the US would send
shockwaves throughout the continent. It would have an unpredictable impact on the
region. And the resulting tensions would go far beyond trade deals. Where these
tensions stop depends on the willingness of American parties – both of them –
to protect their citizens, and on the ability of Latin America to stand up once
more against populism, authoritarianism and racism – abroad, this time.
Mr. Trump was elected not because of Latinos, but despite them.
Ignorance and hatred cannot become a good thing
Many Americans decided
to vote for a candidate who stands for hate and divisiveness. They are free to
do it. In the end, citizens are free to choose their leaders and to ignore
reason and rationality.
However, both
political institutions and the law must remain vigilant – ignorance and hatred never
produce anything good. And we should remember that history proves that autocrats
do emerge from democratic systems. Why not in America? American institutions
are solid, and the rule of law is strongly installed in American political
culture. But institutions can be co-opted: just look at Russia
or Turkey.
Most Americans
believe that tyranny is not possible in their country. But it would be a
mistake to think that democracy comes naturally to us. It doesn’t. Democracy is
a process that requires tolerance and empathy. Values are not inherited, they
have to be taught and nurtured.
Mr. Trump can
teach us nothing about tolerance and empathy. Denouncing him for his disrespect
for democratic principles is not part of an institutional campaign in favor of
Democrats, the Liberals or the Establishment.
It is part of a social campaign to prevent autocratic principles from
being normalized and thus becoming as
good as democratic ones.
Democracy is a process that requires tolerance and empathy. Values are not inherited, they have to be taught and nurtured.
Democracy
requires equality, respect for the rule of law, for human rights, for due
process and privacy, for freedom of expression. It requires a free press. It
doesn’t need easy answers.
It has never
been so important to take time to reflect, to listen to each other, to learn
and make sense of what is going on. And to show that, in a democracy, even all-powerful
administrations can be held accountable by the people. We have done it before,
we must do it again.
