America’s Sectarian Politics

Donald Trump’s election victory reopened some old fissures in American politics. The Middle East, parts of Europe and other places have no monopoly on the politics of ethnicity, religion and blame of outsiders. In the West and particularly in America, however, a mainstream culture came into force that pushed such sectarian politics – especially appeals to hatred or negative stereotyping of other groups -- to the fringes of society. No longer, it seems.

“Politically correct” discourse in America studiously avoids certain words and rhetorical arguments, seeing them as verbal incarnations of intolerance and bigotry. In the process, the language and political conventions of “correctness” can feel tiresome to some. Such people come to feel that the rules prevent honest and frank discussion of issues that matter politically, privileging some views and policies and forbidding even the open discussion of contrary opinions.

Donald Trump trampled the niceties of political correctness from the beginning of his campaign, leading to both his appeal among many voters and the revulsion that others developed towards him. His depiction of black American neighborhoods as cesspools of crime and violence (even as he promised to help and “clean up” such places as President), the blame he placed on undocumented migrants (“illegal aliens” in the less politically correct parlance) for crime and all manner of ills in American society, the language he used towards women (unduly focusing on their physical appearance and often treating them as objects that, in one infamous leaked recording, he could thrust himself upon at will), his tendency to cast Islam and all Muslims as an exotic unfathomable threat to America, and even an incident in which he mocked a newspaper reporter’s physical disabilities, all placed Mr. Trump outside the pale of previously accepted parameters of discourse in America.

This kind of discourse and his lack of political experience led Mr. Trump’s own Republican Party establishment to shun him during the campaign. Instead, he found his advisors, policy wonks, campaign managers and most ardent supporters from the fringes of the American political world, which only aggravated the politically incorrect style and substance of his positions. These people included Steve Banon, the former chairman of an incendiary news outlet who wants to “destroy all of today’s establishment” in America and who believes, among other things, that there are too many Asians running companies in California’s Silicone Valley. Mr. Trump recently tapped Banon to become his “chief strategist and senior counselor,” which sent the establishment and liberal portions of America into another state of shock.

Those who voted for Mr. Trump see things differently, of course. Many of them even watched different media that described Mr. Trump differently than the establishment media. While a portion of his voters were no doubt avowed racists and bigots, most were not. Accusations of racism and sexism by “the establishment” in America’s big cities and coasts, along with insults casting blame for Trump’s victory on “ignorant, dumb, rural people,” explains a lot of these voters’ bitter resentment. In their view, the establishment cares more for political correctness, illegal aliens, the feelings of Islamists, free trade and affirmative action (what they often call “reverse discrimination in hiring”), than their needs and welfare. As they see it, one needs to work hard and remain disciplined to succeed in America – but an overly large government, intent on catering to elite economic interests and rewarding people for who they are rather than what they do, siphons away resources from the hardest working parts of the country. They thus wanted change from the 2016 election.

After the Democratic Party establishment seemingly rigged its primary election so that Bernie Sanders or others never had a chance, the Democrats offered these voters the archetypal status quo candidate – Hillary Clinton. Middle America already knew and hated Ms. Clinton, but elites, people on the coast or in big cities, and the media sources they read remained clueless about how the more rural parts of America felt. According to an Edison Research National Poll, 51% of the people who voted for Trump did so because of their “dislike for other candidates,” while only 42% of his voters said that they “like Trump.” Enough core Republicans liked Mr. Trump to propel him to the top of the Republican Party primary contest, of course, but he would never have gone on to win the national contest had the establishment Democratic Party not run with a “corrupt” candidate with no new ideas (as many saw Hillary in rural America).

All of which has led the world’s strongest state to its present situation, wherein reawakened sectarian politics threaten the domestic political scene. As readers of this column in the Middle East know well, such politics of fear and anger do best when people feel insecure. The irony is that American insecurity only exists in an economic sense, and only for some sectors of society left behind by globalization. In terms of physical security, Americans are amongst the most secure people in the world. No other country can really threaten America, American crime rates are at all time lows, and the average American has a bigger chance of being killed by lightning than by terrorism. After several years of living in different parts of the Middle East, your humble columnist even felt so safe and comfortable in America that he had to buy a motorcycle…

 

David Romano has been a Rudaw columnist since 2010. He holds the Thomas G. Strong Professor of Middle East Politics at Missouri State University and is the author of numerous publications on the Kurds and the Middle East.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of Rudaw.