Ma[g]a L[oc]o*

Or

Reckoning the State of Politics in the U.S.

 

The results of 2015 elections made it crystal clear that racism/white supremacy and religious fanaticism/Christian supremacy are diehards of the American psyche despite and since the 1860s. It must be incontrovertible that 2015 election result was that psyche’s reaction to the 2007 election and 2011 re-election of a black man and to his successful and popular performance. In fact, the reaction was so emotionally charged that all extremists on the right, like nationalists and xenophobes, joined the racists and religious fanatics to elect a shady real estate hustler from New York (as the successful businessman Michael Bloomberg once called him, “con man”; he must have known, because he was the Mayor of the city).

The election success of this far right group surprised the nation, if not the world, and even the elected President himself. For the first time in its history, the less educated and consequently the “fallen behind” section of the society felt the bewildering taste of power. The choices for appointments in the administration, their chaotic performance, frequent replacement of these officials soon confirmed the truth that the multitude and complexity of managing a heterogenous immigrant society and of world affairs, in which the country is in a leading position, required “knowledgeable” officials. The “unknowledgeable” President and his base could not meet that requirement. His administration failed miserably.

“Unknowledgeables” cannot, and could not by nature, accept failure (because such acceptance also requires wisdom). The simple, easy defense available to them is use of force, which they did not hesitate to resort to when they lost elections in 2019. Although they did not succeed in recapturing power, their surprising success in 2015 had emboldened them. And, their failure in 2019 attempt to regain power by force taught them that trying to gain power at the back-end of the election process may not be successful, but taking forceful measures to influence elections at the front-end of elections would certainly succeed. Accordingly, they set to work to get ready for the next election. They regrouped and are retraining their forces, including transforming more of the “resurrectionists” into insurrectionists.

There are at the least three factors in the American political scene that may work in favor of the “armed unknowledgeables”. They are armed with real weapons and with the blind belief of “unknowledgeable” mind; there is already an organized and legitimate political party that supports them; the political system (democratic freedoms) provides the fertile ground for their actions (this may be the aspect that autocracies like Russia or China mean when they refer to the end of Western dominance or to the dawn of a new era). There is not much that can be done to deter or mitigate the first and third facts. As to the political party that plans on benefitting from this section of their support-base for coming to power, they are miscalculating. Firstly, taking power by forceful means will raise the question of legitimacy of the incoming administration. Secondly, once in power they will need a knowledgeable team in administration to succeed. A knowledgeable team with “unknowledgeable” base will require unquestioning trust of that base.  Otherwise, when the administration cannot meet all expectations -as is the case for any administration-, they will alienate that base. There is no historical example for unquestioning trust, but plenty for alienation.

Another more immediate and specific miscalculation of the political party that depends on that “armed” base is to let the indicted and defamed apparent leader of the base run for the next presidential elections. Because doing so will clearly rule out any chance for other hopefuls in the Party to run for the job. This will secure his election. Once elected, he will not spare any of the Party’s “knowledgeable” elite, as his last performance demonstrates. On the other hand, if the Party blocks his candidacy and/or his nomination the same base would constitute a threat to the Party. In other words, the political party that expects to benefit from the support of the forceful portion of the base will be a loser under any circumstances. They will not be able to put the genie back in the bottle.

 We may safely deduce from this ominous description of the current US political scene that none of the factors working in favor of the “armed unknowledgeables” may be deterred or mitigated. One positive expectation, however, we may glean from history is that a forcefully grabbed power is usually short lived.

*Inspired by the current eerily crazy phenomenon.

August 2022