Before Peter Capaldi regenerated as the twelfth Doctor Who,
his most well known role was as Malcolm Tucker, the fictional Director of
Communications for the British government in The Thick of It and In The
Loop. Spin doctor and Prime Minister's enforcer, Tucker uses rumours, smears, or threats of violence to
achieve his twin aims of spinning the party line and keeping ministers out of
trouble. I thought of him this week when Donald Trump popped up on television
and in various parts of the internet and tried to imagine exactly how Tucker
would have handled him. I imagine there would have been lots of swearing and many
reference to Trump's barnet; it would not be pretty.
If opinion polls are any guide then Donald Trump appears to
be gathering more support than might be expected from someone with what can
only be described, from this distance at least, as extreme views. A lot of what
he says seems to be prefaced with a disclaimer that he is not "politically
correct." Much of what he says could equally be prefaced by a similar
statement omitting the word "politically." Look at Trump's thoughts
on the internet. He wants to "close it off" to certain groups, children
and the so called Islamic State (IS) in particular, without having the foggiest
notion of how or if that could be achieved. Like a company director instructing
his IT department to develop software to do something that is impossible or
impractical or cost prohibitive, he imagines that if he can think of a thing
then it can be done. Up to a point he is right that the internet could be
closed off, in part. Countries like China and North Korea have done it, but
crucially, only for their own citizens; if Trump thinks that because he can
imagine blocking IS from using the internet then it can be done, then he is
going to have to think again. And blocking the internet, or parts of it, to his
own citizens could violate rights of free speech protected by the First
Amendment.
 |
| Trump. Picture: businessinsider.com |
But there again Trump has views on free speech; on the one
hand he would restrict it for people whose views he disagrees with while
maintaining his right to speak as freely as he wishes, even if the views he
espouses are objectionable to a lot of people. His views that many Mexicans in
the US are criminals and rapists for instance, or that Arab Americans cheered
the 9/11 attacks, that Muslims should be banned from entering the US purely on
religious grounds, are all opinions that many find repugnant, but the US
constitution that he would ride roughshod over for others protects him when he
voices his own particular beliefs. His outspoken views have resulted in some in this country calling for his being
banned from entering the UK, which while it might be questionable while he
remains simply a Presidential candidate, would be even more problematic should
he be elected. And there is the gauntlet that you run when you advocate free
speech; sometimes you have to listen to things you find objectionable, but as
the saying goes, sometimes you may object to what someone says while defending
their right to say it.
There is a popular belief that the USA is quite an insular
country; that may well be a myth, but Trump's pronouncements do little to
discredit that view. Given the chance he would build a wall to keep Mexicans
entering the USA illegally...and he believes he can get the Mexicans to pay for
it. Trump wants Apple to build their computers, their iPads ,and their iPhones
in the States. Forget the costs involved (Apple manufactures their devices
overseas at costs they could not compete with at home), forget the changes to
laws necessary to prevent Apple (and others) outsourcing their business and it
could be done...but at what cost?
 |
| About 670 miles of fencing already exists along the US-Mexico border. It cost $2.4 billion. The entire border runs for 2,000 miles. Picture: Getty Images |
Trump's popularity, he leads a number of opinion polls after
all, may confuse and surprise many people, but an article in The Washington
Post goes some way to explain it. In a nutshell, it said that Trump has simple
answers to everything, taps into a dislike or mistrust that many people have of
immigrants, that many Americans are sick of the political establishment, and
lastly, he says things that people have been afraid to say. Terrorism and other
threats to a nation's wellbeing are very real and reasonable fears. Demonising
people, exploiting people's fears and their lack of understanding have served
many politicians well in many countries for centuries. Trump is just another in
a long line of them.
Should Trump's apparent popularity translate itself into
nomination as Republican Presidential Candidate and ultimately lead him to the
White House, would he be forced to tone down his controversial statements and
proposed policies on the world stage? Behind all politicians are a raft of
civil servants who understand better than their elected leaders how the world
works, how diplomacy works. The real life Malcolm Tuckers wield as much power
and influence as elected leaders and would doubtless reign him in should he
ever sit in the Oval Office. Even so, based on his pronouncements so far, it
seems probable that a Trump administration would be more confrontational than
its predecessors.
Trump's appeal seems to be largely with people who feel
marginalised, impoverished by a remote, elitist cabal of business moguls and
politicians (ironic, since Trump is one of the former and wants be become one
of the latter). He promises solutions to problems without asking his supporters
to consider what cost they will come at, what sacrifices will be needed.
To those of us on the eastern side of the pond, Trump's
campaign has all the hallmarks of an omnishambles[1]
and the first real test of his popularity comes this Monday in the Iowa caucus.
As popular as the polls suggest Trump is, his advocates might consider that it
is wise to be careful what you wish for; sometimes the solution can be just as
unpalatable as the problem.
[1] Omnishambles:
A situation that has been comprehensively mismanaged, characterized by a string
of blunders and miscalculations.
No comments:
Post a Comment