The past eight months of the tedious, at times distressing and always irresistible 2016 US presidential election resembles no earlier ones I can recall. Hundreds of books, movies, TV series and documentaries are being contemplated or are already being assembled from the debates, tweets, blogs, social media in general and the pundits. Some of whom are predicting frightening, even dire results, should any of the surviving candidates win the White House.
One aspect of the election seems crystal clear: millions of American voters are angry, unhappy and believe the federal government, or some elements of it, are responsible. Interestingly, senators, governors (sitting/former) with years and years of experience IN national or state government are loudly amplifying this chorus. Somewhat irrational, particularly given they are fiercely fighting each other to become the head of the government they “hate”. After 230 years Americans appear to still believe the ship of state can reverse course with a new captain. Who knows, maybe one of the leading contenders, the one with absolutely no relevant experience, can.
However, frankly it’s impossible to address the entire span and content of this tumultuous electoral scene because there is too much clamoring for attention. Therefore, I’ve decided to focus on how 21st Century America deals with millions of unruly voters versus others in earlier times.
Rome
In ancient Rome, restive citizens were calmed by free bread, cheap wine and then emotionally reassured by watching “others”, clearly inferior to them – conquered captives, Christians, gladiators and disposable slaves – bloodily dispatched by large animals or each other. The imperial message: you could be next in the Coliseum.
Medieval Europe
Everyone knew their place and stayed there. If a villein, serf or servant raised his hand in protest or objected to the way things were being run at the manor, he was eliminated. No one voted except the Holy Roman Electors and the College of Cardinals. Too free speech was dangerous. In England, there was the Magna Carta, which benefitted the barons at the expense of the king, at least for a while, but did little for anyone else. The barons needed grunts to fight for, not against them and to till their soil and empty the slop pots. Some social balance.
Renaissance Europe
Everyone knew their place, but did not always stay there. Guilds and bankers and rich merchants had power, even over their political overlords, but only to a point. If the king or a powerful noble owed too much money to say, a Jewish banker or was slow paying their sculptors, painters and architects, the creditor had some leverage. But, only the fool-hardy pressed. Communities, cities, artisans achieved some participation in self-government. The sensible, longest-lived rulers listened for unrest and less seldom killed to suppress it. Bribes, carnivals, sports and a taste of torture, tended to keep the peace. But, then there was Martin Luther.
18th Century Europe
The Rights of Man, American and French Revolutions, US Constitutions, anti-institutions, and violent turning of societies upside down. Dutch Republic and parliaments in England. English king had Porphyria. The Industrial Revolution provided an option for the serfs. Votes definitely counted, but could be bought. Read Common Sense by Thomas Paine to fill in the blanks.
21st Century America
This admittedly, short-handed, encapsulation of the past two thousand plus years is meant to show the progress rulers have made in responding to emotional venting from below. The Democratic Republic of the United States has evolved its political system for 230 years. The federal, state and local legislatures have dealt with problems, both great and small, with some semblance of tuning in to their voters at least every two or four years. The US fought a Civil War that cost over 600,000 American lives because the Founding Fathers and their friends refused to confront slavery, probably for the very good reason that doing so could have prevented the creation of an independent United States of America and its Constitution.
Setting aside the reasons why so many Americans have lost their earlier respect for legislatures, executives and even to some extent their judicial institutions of government, we in 2016 have reached a point where no one trusts anyone in authority. But, they are angry and rebellious and believe no one from government understands why they are so upset and why they want things to change. What changes and how brought about remain somewhat incoherent.
Political parties in 2015 produced 20 candidates for the presidency. By March, 2016, that number has been whittled down to six, four from one party and two from the other. While not openly expressed or confronted, there seems to be a widely held sense among millions of voters that the constitutional system introduced in 1787 no longer functions to their benefit.
Two candidates say they have solutions, but beyond sound bites and stump speeches, have not moved to explain what they are. However, these two sitting senators have followings among the discontented. Another, a sitting governor, has refused to be aroused and remains calm pointing out his success as the leader of an important state. Two others, one a sitting senator and the other a former senator and secretary of state, have by and large behaved themselves, avoided tirades and offered actual positions. Of the two, one has found his voice with a segment of the angry-ones – youth – by offering a lovely vision for the future. He also talks about America needing a political revolution.
However, of them all, only one person, the total non-politician, with considerable inherited wealth and a gilded life style has captured the emotions of millions, many disadvantaged white men. During the eight months since the election season opened he has won more state primaries and caucuses across disparate American populations than his competitors.
Donald Trump has done this by the sheer power of his personality. He has convinced grievance-filled voters that he and he alone understands and shares their anger. Coming from a sybaritic billionaire this is startling.
However, what is stunning to me is that the American political system may have prepared the path, but it absolutely did not produce him. What appeared impossible only months ago, has now become likely; Donald Trump despite tardy recognition and counter attacks by institutional American politicians, could become the candidate of one of the two major parties in the United States.
Conclusion
Finally, back to my point. How does 21st Century American politics deal with a popular cauldron of citizen discontent? It ignores them. A quote from Ben Franklin comes to mind: “…as nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.”
Tom Timberman is an expert on military policy and now lives on the Eastern Shore. Among his many assignments with the US Department of State, he has headed a provincial reconstruction team, embedded within a combat brigade in Iraq. He has also helped implement a new counterterrorism strategy in South East Asia as Senior Advisor for South Asia in the Office of Coordinator for Counterterrorism.
Stephan Sonn says
There is no mystery here Tom, just one man trying to understand what is not in his nature to understand.