Thursday 28 January 2016

The Trump Omnishambles

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.


 Warning! This video contains language that some may find offensive...very offensive.

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

The Wrong Type of Football

Manchester City manager Pep Guardiola’s rant after his team’s FA Cup Semi-Final win over Chelsea about how unfair it was that his squad of 2...