Monday, 4 November 2024

The Insanity of American Politics

Kamala Harris and the Democrats should be sailing their way to a second term in the White House. Especially when faced with the unhinged Donald Trump campaign, easily the most racist and misogynistic effort mounted by the Republicans in recent times. Here in Britain, when a party last presented itself as the representative of capital in its naked glory it was sent packing. In the United States, the same is within spitting distance of winning. The polls, naturally, are no help. Early voting projections, MRPs, and polls by reputable local surveys suggest anything from a narrow to a handy lead for Harris with boosted turn outs from constituencies one would expect to lean the Democrats' way. And there are others suggesting Trump will just about edge it. In 48 hours we'll have a good idea which way the electorate jumped.

There shouldn't be any doubt, but there is. It is often said the Democrats do a bad job of talking up their achievements, and you would think that under Joe Biden, before his forced retirement they would have a good story to tell. The US economy is expanding faster than any other major advanced industrial nation. Biden has got inflation back under control and real wages are growing again. Unemployment has decreased since the summer and vacancies are on the rise. Yet, clearly, "it's the economy, stupid" isn't working as it should.

The Democrats got themselves into two difficulties. Just like the so-called centre left across Europe, they've tried leaning into immigration. The Trump-era walls, detention areas, cages, and border militias have got through the last four years untouched, and none of it has stopped people from coming. Their adoption of a Fortress America approach is on a hiding to nothing. They could have moved to neutralise the issue by, again, challenging the assumptions that right wing anti-immigration politics rests on. It wouldn't be a panacea, but the job is to diffuse it as an issue and limit its mobilising appeal for the right. Treating it as a technocratic, managerial issue only invites accusations of failure or, at worst, feed racist great replacement narratives. A lesson Labour here would do well to heed, but it won't.

And then on the left has been the utter disgrace and hypocrisy over Gaza and Israel's massacre of the Palestinians. Or, to be more accurate, the US State Department's attacks on civilians in the occupied territories and Lebanon. That you have celebrities, such as Michael Moore, running around the rust belt states pleading with left wingers and Arab-Americans not to vote for third party candidates demonstrates the unerring ability of the Democrats to put the US state's interest before those of their political careers. You would never catch anyone on team Trump being so foolish. Luckily for Harris, as forecast the Democrats haven't put a woman's right to an abortion on a legislative footing because, in the absence of positive messaging, they needed it in the tack to power progressive voters to the ballot box. And the early forecasts seem to indicate this cynical delay has worked out as intended. Early voting reports suggest bigger than usual turnouts from women.

Looking over at Trump, no candidate anywhere has ever run such a disastrous campaign and still remained within a shout of winning. Never underestimate the power of blowjob mimes and rambling delivery, I guess. Racism and misogyny is the glue that keeps his effort together, though one would think his anti-politics edge was blunted by the disastrous years spent in the White House. Not least his negligence during the initial wave of the Covid pandemic, which disproportionately impacted the conspiracy-tinged base of the Republican party and killed them off in their tens of thousands. But what is also interesting is his pull among fellow oligarchs. If fascism is the terroristic and open dictatorship of capital over labour, Trump's programme - often revealed on the hoof - is the closest to it we've seen so far in American politics. He might be incompetent and incapable, but those around him and the billionaires supporting him are looking at using the state to shake down the body politic for billions, if not trillions of dollars. Regulations are to be ripped up, the power of the law circumscribed. The most unhinged American conservatism preaching authoritarian moralism while it ignores the subordination of everything to the cold, hard cash nexus is the dystopic vision of the United States Trump is offering.

Weighing the two up, it's not difficult to see why millions will, again, be fastening on the nose pegs and trudging along to vote for the lesser evil. And given such insanity and without viable alternatives, who can blame them?

Image Credit

6 comments:

Lucy Parsons said...

Now we know it’s a Trump victory, your second to last paragraph captures the future. Who needs terroristic fascism, when you can, in plain sight, create those ideals without the paraphernalia of its clunky insignia.

Martin said...

Phil, you're usually perceptive analysis has failed you. The reliance on "fastening on the nose pegs and trudging along to vote for the lesser evil" no longer works. Our own GE suggested as much by the low vote that Labour managed despite the utter failure of the Tories. Obviously our politics is more nuanced as there are more than two options and we don't have the peculiarities of the electoral college and the senate. Nevertheless, the days of the lesser evil seem over.

This is probably because now the evil is manifest such that if we believe in it, we cannot justify support for either approach. Which means that you either have to convince yourself that evil does not exist, or look for someone who challenges it. The option then is to embrace the evil and hope that you can ride the tiger and avoid the worst of it, or to choose something that clearly stands against it.

Think of Trump supporters as those who have seen the mafia take over the town and realise that when they feud, throwing your lot in with the most ruthless capo is safer than the alternative. Convincing yourdself that he will look after you, and that he has your interests at heart just makes it easier to make the choice to go with the most powerful and dangerous lunatic.

The lesser psycho just looks weak. Plus, in a bar fight, the guy who will glass anyone and doesn't care has the edge over the person trying to fight fair. In a world where the rules are clearly rigged, might as well go with the biggest cheat.

Kamo said...

I dislike Trump on a personal level, but the fascist claims have always seemed more than a stretch, perhaps it's the distance from WW2 that means actual fascism is so faded from living memory that it can be reimagined as a vague slur to people we don't like. But, the main sticking point is that Trump style 'fascism' involves the US state, on balance of everything, being distinctly less interventionist into individual lives of US citizens than his opponents desire (such state paternalism being portrayed as good, vital, etc). Yes, certain groups, like illegal immigrants might see disruption to their lives, but that is surely a known and accepted risk of not using legal channels? I suspect life for the majority of US citizens will go on largely as before, as it would have done if Harris had won.

Robert said...

Trump trump horrible Trump
Nothing quite like him to give you the hump
Trumpety trump trump
Trumpety trump trump
Horrible horrible horrible trump.

Sean Dearg said...

..."might see disruption to their lives". As in, 3am door break-ins, arrest and incarceration? Deportation? More fences and walls, this time with automated guns and minefields? Bear in mind that we are talking about possibly 15 million people. These people are working in sh*t jobs that others don't want and often in awful conditions. If as a good right-winger you believe in supply and demand, then they are meeting a demand that legal migrants can't meet. If they are all rounded up and kicked out, will that mean a surge in legal migrants, or just even more dangerous routes for illegals? The need for them won't vanish when they do. What's the free market answer to that?

Sean Dearg said...

If the only consequence of Trump is people get less 'interference" from government then I suspect many of his supporters might be a bit disappointed. They want interference, just of the right sort. Tariffs on Chinese imports and return of offshored industries(but without it pushing up prices). Better paying jobs. More police. More crack downs on drugs. Affordable housing (but no undesirables in it). Cheaper food - and grown in the USA (but not by Mexicans) More oil drilling. Fewer foreigners and socialists. Women in their place. The return of old-style masculine pre-eminance (and more sex for incels). Fewer abortions and more white babies. Fewer restrictions on weapons, but strict control on potential terrorists. Freedom to say whatever you want, but control on unpatriotic or anti-American speech. Remove the liberals from the establishment and replace them with right-thinking patriots. Strip the Universities of all leftists. Lock up liberal protesters and anyone who mentions climate change. Outlaw vaccinations. Defund the EPA. Fell all forests and shoot all wildlife. Sell off the Reservations. Remove speed limits everywhere. End the right to trial for anyone who threatens the true American way of life. Make the death penalty mandatory in all states. Quite a lot of interference required for that to all happen.