In the strangest election in our memories, the No Knothing candidate seems to be drawing closer to his much debilitated opponent in recent poling results. Many intellectuals and professionals are amazed that Trump has been able to generate such broad support, much of it among white males, in spite of a long history of insulting or denigrating various minority groups.
The shift is upsetting conventional political wisdommuch as Trump upset much touted collective wisdom in the Republican primaries. It is unclear where we are headed, but at the least it is hugely upsetting.
We seem to be watching another popular surge for Trump in spite of his outrageous demagoguery. Are we also seeing a more developeddisgust with Clinton regarding her private activities as Secretary of the Clinton foundation while she was the Secretary of State The continuing controversy over her private email server has not faded.
It is an ugly campaign. Both candidates suffer from the highest disapproval ratings in the history of Presidential campaigns. The disgust of minorities and women with Trump is clear. He continually fans those flames. In spite of his commentary, something serious underlies the popular mistrust that prevents Clinton from sweeping ahead in the campaign.
It appears to us that large segments of the public view the fund-raising activities of the Clinton Foundation as direct evidence of a huge conflict of interest between public responsibilities and the accumulation of private wealth. It dovetails with the absence of a clear explanation of the use of a private email server while serving as Secretary of State. Clinton continues to suffer daily disabilities through continued revelations and evolvingexplanations that shift with the wind. The old saw that the second liar doesnt have a chance, seems to plagueher campaign.
The recent focus on her joint tenure as Secretary of State and secretary to the Foundation reeks of a terrible conflict of interest made worse because suspicion can easily replace substantive facts. Many Democrats have called for the shut down of the Foundation. It is doubtful that will happen, and even if it did, it might well confirm the public suspicion that there was more hidden conflict in its appeal to potential donors and supposed additional access to important government officials that such donations secured. Public distrust will continue to rise unless a coherent and documented explanation of both the server and the a coherent counterargument to thepay for play charge can be established. That will be difficult task for Clinton this late in the campaign.
The deeper suspicion aroused by this campaign is that donors from both here and abroad have captured our Government, It will be hard to shed that mantle. Washing and cleaning ones clothes after having been perfumed by a skunk is a tedious and long process. Sometimes, one just has to throw away the soiled clothing. The average man and woman feel the growing distance between his governors and his daily life. Alienation abounds in the electorate. Somehow, we feel that the politicians shouldno longer count on our historical support. Many think theirvotes are taken for granted.
The same symptomology has recently been evidenced in many so-called democratic states (Australia, Canada, Great Britain, and even in the recent State elections in Mecklenburg-Pomerania in Germany). There is a long, continuous thread that links protests against the so-called 1%, the amazing popularity of the Sanders campaign and the continual accusations of Trump that Clinton is representative of interests other than her oft-proclaimeddevotion to the poor and middle class. Moreover, Clinton suffers from her continual resort to enlarging the scope of government in our everyday lives. That breeds suspicion all on its own. She wishes to further feed the Beast of enlarged Government.
The populace of many democratic republics instinctively knows that Government is distant and anonymous and that its mandarins have their own ideas of what is suitable government activity. Voting populations also see that while the nominal economy seems to be okay, numerous individuals feel leftout. Too many have departedthe labor force so the unemployment rate (even when at very low levels) doesnt impress. For the masses, cleansingthe Augean stables of cronyism and corruption is an appealing invitation even it one thinks it is fanciful. The popularity of the promise toclean out the Beltway will not die soon. Yet, practical men know that the likelihood of a slimmer and more efficient government is a chimera. The public is gradually absorbing the realization that Government is not the solution and that more government invites more cronyism and corruption, but the cry to throw out the rascals still resonates.
Bernie Sanders called for a revolution. One is in the making, but who leads it and where it is going is quite unclear at this stage. Ancient China had its Mandarinate. When a Chinese mandarin retired or was banished from the Imperial Court, he often retreated to his home and built a garden. When our Mandarins retire or are pushed out of office, they garden as well. Sadly, their gardens are populated by rolodexes and contacts and rows of growing cronyism. The fruit in those gardens is influence. The populace is revolting against the fare being offered to and by the higher ups.
This revolution is based on popular alienation with traditional politics. It is going to go on well past this election. We are headed down a new road but as yet we cannot see the destination. It doesnt seem as if we are headed toward the Garden of Eden. Even if Trump is defeated, the Dragons Teeth of hysteria, hyperbole and radical political extremism have been planted. The voters who followed Trump and even some of those who followed Sandersthe ones most alienated from the current political process—will still be there. A clever, disciplined and perhaps more sinister leader could yet arise, perhaps in the next Presidential election Those techniques, polished and capably financed, could well emerge again in a campaign by a dedicated politician who will learn from Trumps mistakes.
The parallel of Germany between 1928 and 1933 is a piece of history that this generation has largely ignored. Santayanas warning about the consequences of ignoring history should be kept in mind for those who deeply believe in the American experiment.