Defeating Trump would merely be treating the symptom, not the disease
Donald Trump’s victory in the Iowa caucuses and his lead in coming primary contests should put to rest the fantasies of those Republicans who still cling to the hope their party can be rescued from his clutches. That’s not going to happen precisely because the former president’s foes don’t understand his hold over voters.
Frustrated Republicans and many Democrats continue to operate as if the problem were just the man, that if only he could be beaten, all would be well, or at least “normal”, in American politics.
There is no question Mr Trump represents a problem for the US. And yet despite the best efforts of his own party’s leadership and others to discredit him, Mr Trump has only grown in strength. On Sunday, after finishing second in the Iowa caucuses, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis bowed out of the race.
There are two major reasons for the party’s failure to rein in Mr Trump. The first is those seeking to depose him ignore the fact his support base is grounded in the deep discontent that predated his emergence on the political stage. The second is that because the attacks against Mr Trump emanate from the very institutions and individuals he has targeted, those attacks have only served to reinforce his popularity.
Mr Trump isn’t the first demagogue to lead a US rightwing populist movement. There was the late governor George Wallace’s segregationist American Independence Party in the 1970s, the Moral Majority/Christian Coalition movements of the late 1980s, Pat Buchanan’s “Pitchfork Brigade” in 1988, and the anti-Barack Obama Tea Party and “birther“movements. All of these set the stage for Mr Trump’s rise.
More than a half a century ago, many mainly white middle and working-class Americans experienced social, political and cultural dislocations resulting in an unsettling sense of loss of control over their future. The 1960s and ‘70s were especially traumatic for many, with the emergence of three transformative movements that shook society: the civil rights movement; the movements both for and against the war in Vietnam; and a cultural revolution that upended accepted social mores.
In the wake of these, what then-president Richard Nixon called “the silent majority” reacted: incidents of overt racism or fear of racially motivated violence; displays of hyper-patriotism or a loss of faith in the country’s institutions and values; and finally, a sense of being unmoored in the face of radical change.
For 50 years, Americans played out their traumas in reaction to the stressful changes of those two fateful decades. There were manifestations of racially motivated fear of the “others”, whether African Americans, Latinos, or immigrants. Driven by the pain incurred from defeats in foreign wars, or losses in jobs due to factory and mine closures, or other economic crises, Americans witnessed either a hyper-patriotism or a romanticisation of the “great past”. And finally, those who felt threatened by the challenges to long-accepted social and cultural values sought certainty, often seeking refuge in the embrace of fundamentalist religious beliefs.
The economic collapse of 2008-2009 and the election of Mr Obama brought these threads together, setting the stage for Mr Trump.
During this period, for the first time two thirds of the electorate indicated a loss of hope in the American Dream. And with the election of Mr Obama, Republicans pounced on his race and “foreignness”.
While all of the conditions for Mr Trump’s rise were present and had earlier manifested themselves in other forms, he was a masterful entertainer who knew how to exploit the fears and insecurities his public felt and how to project the strength and certainty they craved.
A decade later, his movement has taken control of the Republican Party. Despite efforts by the Republican establishment and Democrats, he has only grown stronger.
Their efforts to hold him accountable for his troubling and unlawful behaviour has relied on the institutions he
Trump’s winning argument with his supporters has been that he alone understands their pain
accuses of conspiring against him. By questioning the integrity of the courts, the FBI, the media, and of course, Democrats, Mr Trump has successfully inoculated himself against their attacks.
His winning argument with his supporters has been that he alone understands their pain. An attack on him is, therefore, an attack on them.
Mr Trump may still lose this election, but his movement will remain and continue to pose a threat of violence.
Lawlessness and acts of bigotry cannot be tolerated. While accountability is required, simply defeating Mr Trump and punishing him and his followers isn’t enough. There is no shortcut out of this bind. Instead of demeaning or attacking Mr Trump’s supporters, a concerted effort is needed to address the issues at the root of their insecurities and discontent.
Finding constructive and progressive solutions that demonstrate respect and concern won’t happen overnight, but if efforts aren’t made in this direction, “Trumpism” will only fester and grow.