When Trump won the 2016 election, many of us sat up and asked, “Did anyone get the number of that truck?” Words came to mind like flummoxed and flabbergasted (to say nothing of shocked and devastated.) A great moment in history for reminding us of
the folly of getting too sure of ourselves.
Great. We learned our
lesson. Now can we go back to sanity?
Unfortunately not. We
have to live with the consequences of a Trump presidency for what could be years. And one of those consequences is the endless
Monday morning quarterbacking over how it happened. Chief
among these is the claim that we deliberately ignored the signs. The country had undergone a terrible
financial crisis in 2008. The Obama
government bailed out the sons of bitches responsible. The taxpayer watched it all happen and
realized the government was working in tandem with the 1% and we were just
going to go on getting screwed over and over again.
So the manipulators of information simplified the message,
making government the sole bad guy, and the Republicans were in like
Flynn. They liked to tell you that
government was the problem and to get around government we needed to allow the
business sector to run things.
Never mind that this only led to continued control by the
1%. Americans like their explanations in
plain language. No need for facts. We leave those to the Pied Piper to make up as he goes along. We are into self-indulgence, into
entertainment, and we don’t like things that don’t make us happy. So we manufacture facts to suit us. Evil in the world? No problem.
God will answer your prayers.
Afraid of dark-skinned people? No
problem. We’ll just throw more of them
in jail. Or keep them out, if they’re
coming from foreign countries.
Simple-mindedness is the way to go. Allows time to watch Netflix.
I remember Robert Reich warning, long before we thought
Hillary could possibly lose to Trump, that we had made a mistake not taking
care of the folks in America who were out of a job because of
globalization. We needed a better safety
net, better social protections for people thrown out on unemployment, better
retraining for new jobs. Better social
welfare generally.
But we are Americans.
Strong individuals who can take care of ourselves. Don’t need no damn government handouts. So we didn’t do anything about the
globalization safety net. We just let
the marketplace do its thing. Got
screwed, did you? Tough. Sorry.
Shit happens. Unions? A minimum wage? Universal education? What are you, a socialist?
Enter the Pied Piper with an easy explanation and
easy solutions. He’s going to build a
wall to keep Mexicans out so they can’t come in and take your jobs. And you, my fellow Americans – not all of
you, obviously, but a critical mass of you, believed that shit. And were too stupid to realize that Mexicans
can fly in as tourists and then just not go back, the way most illegals have
always come in. And the ones crawling
through the desert are probably not taking your automobile manufacturing jobs,
anyway. And if you look at the actual
statistics, you’d see that Mexicans are going home to Mexico more than they are
coming in these days. And unemployment is at a new low. And the stock market at a new high. Just more facts. We're not into fact; we're into fears. Don't care that it's robots, not Mexicans. Can't stop the robots, so let's do what we can and stop the Mexicans.
Reminds me of the battle in 1978 over the Briggs Initiative. Orange County California State Senator John Briggs wanted to prevent gay men from becoming teachers because, Briggs insisted, gay men were child molesters. Even after Harvey Milk demonstrated that most child molesters were heterosexual, Briggs persisted. There are too many heterosexuals to go after, he said, so let's go after the gays.
If you don’t read, you don’t know that it’s not
foreign labor threatening your jobs; it’s technology. Robots, not Mexicans. I think most people know that now. But Trump's wall idea still resonates with his supporters. And with all the Republican legislators who obviously know better.
I became a Bernie Sanders supporter early on because he was
the one focusing on economic inequality as the real source of American
discontent. I thought he was right about
that, and I thought that Hillary was too much part of the rich democratic
establishment – Wall Street, for short – to be in a position to fix things. When Debbie Wasserman Schulz and the New York
Times and others put all their support behind Hillary, I went along. What’s not to love about the idea of having a
female president? Sure is time, don’t
you think?
We got our priorities all wrong. We didn’t address the national discontent,
and the result is Trump. We didn’t build
the wall high enough to protect against a tsunami, and now we’re going to spend
years bewailing the water in the carpets and drapes, the broken furniture, the
stains and the smell. A long, very
painful, very tiring clean-up. No way
around it.
Because I feel a responsibility to stay in touch with the
world outside my door, I watch the news on a daily basis. That means a steady barrage of bad news – the
roll-back of civil rights, the risk of nuclear war, the Great Lie that is Trump
who, instead of cleaning the swamp, is reinfesting it with alligators. And that means I need to supply myself with a
steady diet of Mozart, dog and cat videos, good food and wine, a good long soak
in the bathtub as often as possible. And
lots of good writing about all the other things going on in the world. (I’d like to add diet and exercise, but so
far that’s been a total bust.)
* * *
I try to keep abreast of what's going on in the German
political scene. Partly because, while America has clearly gone off the rails, Germany seems to be, so far, at least, humming along quite nicely, thank you. One of the benefits of
the information age is that I can watch all the political talk shows from
German television, as well as news from Germany. I’m still living out my “history of things
that never happened,” the decision I almost took, but didn’t, to emigrate to
Germany back in the 60s, before I got distracted by Japan. For about four decades, I pretty much
neglected Germany for Japan. Now in
retirement, I’m balancing the scales.
Japan is fading. Germany is
becoming more central to my life.
It’s not replacing my American identity, but it’s
enlightening it. I am currently struck
first with how very similar Germany’s social and political problems are to our
own. That’s true for most of Europe as well, of course – I just happen to be
focusing on Germany. And second, I’m
struck with how often Germany seems to be getting right what we are getting
wrong. Why, I wonder. Is it that they have figured out how to do
things better? Or is it that we have
lost what we once had? Complex
questions, obviously, and simple generalizations are worthless. But those questions at least guide the topics
I take on these days.
I’m struck with the impact Trump has had on German political
life. It’s front and center, and Germans
are all over the issues, asking themselves things like how close they are to a
similar breakdown of democracy. There’s
Marine Le Pen in France, Geert Wilders in the Netherlands, Viktor Orban in
Hungary. And the AfD in Germany. Is Germany at risk of falling to their own
Trump-like Pied Piper?
I'm developing some enthusiasm for the new SPD (social
democrat) candidate who seems to have half a chance against Merkel in the
September election for chancellor. Martin Schulz, his name is. Sort
of like electing "Marty Jones" for president. Despite the
"socialist" name, in Germany, they are actually a centrist party.
Then there's the new president, Frank-Walter Steinmeier.
Also a socialist. Not sure whether his election today will get in
the way of Schulz's candidacy for chancellor in September. Hope
not.
The socialists have been in coalition with the
conservatives, Merkel's party - which is actually two parties in one, the
Christian Democrats in the country at large and its sister party the Christian
Socialists in Bavaria. They are referred together as "The Union"
and are center-right.
Mirroring them on the center-left are the Greens, and the
SPD.
Then there is a party called simply "The Left,"
which kind of fills the slot where the former East German Communist Party used
to be (and don't say that too loudly or you'll piss a lot of people off).
Then there are several right-of-center to far-right parties,
all of which are making people nervous these days, especially the
"Alternative for Germany (AfD) Party," The AfD’s main shtick is
opposition to immigration, but they throw in a little homophobia and other
conservative issues as well.
What's amazing to watch, and what makes me admire the German
system so much and prefer it to our two-party system, is that while they yell
and scream at each other sometimes, they all seem to get together when it
counts. Coalitions form, come apart, others form. All adjusting to the times.
Anna Will had Martin Schulz on her program for the whole hour a couple weeks ago. During the interview, she confronted him with one of his constituents who had once voted SPD but now felt politicians had all let her down. It was a set-up no politician would ever want to be subjected to. He pulled it off with great grace, however. Not sure whether he persuaded the voter, but he gave it all he had. Persuaded me.
As miserable as it must have been for him, it's the very image of what one wants to see happen in a democracy. The Democrats in the U.S. are being held responsible for Trump. The socialists in Germany, who joined in a coalition with the conservatives, have also lost most of their support for that reason and are now trying desperately to get it back. Let us run the show, instead of being a minority party tied to the Unions, Schulz argues, and you will see. Why should I believe you lying politicians, asks his constituent. Maybe if the democrats would go back to being democrats, start looking out for the little guy again instead of being just another money-chasing party. Maybe if the socialists would be the socialists they were of yesteryear, the party of Willi Brandt, etc. etc. Amazing the parallels here.
If you want
to read up on German politics, there are much better sources than me. But I have brought in this much detail to
provide some context for what German politicians are saying about America these
days and at how well they are getting to the real issues we seem to skim over. And that includes commentary on what has been going on in the U.S. Leading politicians are saying (to
me) amazing things. Let me give you some
examples.
Here are bits (translation mine) from Martin Schulz’s very
passionate acceptance speech before the SPD when he accepts the challenge to
run for Chancellor in September:
(about the nationalist tendency of right-wing parties):
the
party of Marie Le Pen, which the AfD identifies so closely with, translates to
“National Front.” We here in Germany
have had a party with an aggressive nationalism before. We experienced it in the first half of the 20th
Century. [This party] is no “alternative” for Germany. It is, rather, a shame on the Federal
Republic.
(about Trump and his politics):
We
will never surrender our values, our freedom and our democracy, our rule of law
and our pluralism, no matter what challenges we face. I say that in full knowledge of the fact that
a U.S. President wants to build walls, thinks out loud about torture, directs
dangerous attacks on women, religious groups, minorities, people with
handicaps, artists and intellectuals without shame. That is unacceptable. I am sure that European politicians will now,
when they travel to Washington, explain to the U.S. government that
international human rights and the rights of nations apply to Donald Trump as
well. I’m sure of that.
And here are bits from Steinmeier’s acceptance speech after
being elected Germany’s twelfth president since the end of World War II.
A brief aside... Worth mentioning is the fact that in the European political systems, nation and government are represented by two different figures, whether that’s the Queen and the Prime Minister in the U.K., or the president and the chancellor in Germany, respectively – and it’s similar in virtually all countries with a parliamentary system. That enables them to put all their efforts into assuring the national leader will be person of universal respect, while the political leader is expected to get his or her hands dirty. Schulz, once a small town mayor, later head of the European Parliament, was once an alcoholic. He never got his Abitur. He's not a "top drawer" type but he's drawing admiration from the voters for that very reason, a self-made man of the provinces with a bunch of kids. At the same time, Steinmeier, also a socialist, has become the national symbol. He will now represent the nation, and the praise (most of it sincere, as far as I can determine) is coming in from all directions. You see the current Chancellor coming in with a bouquet of flowers, even though her chief rivals in September will be those very socialists who were (and still are, at the moment) her coalition partners. It appears Germany has worked out how government should be run. Contrast that with the American way of putting those two jobs, government leader and national leader, in the same person. Look what that has led to. People wanted a dirty fighter who could smash the establishment as a political leader. What we got is a symbol of the nation who humiliates it on a daily basis, with his lies, with his demonstration that he was working for the 1% all along, with his out-of-control ego and his instinct for nepotism. The shame never seems to end.
I’m not kidding when I say I prefer the parliamentary system. We might have kept our dignity as a nation by electing an Obama or a Jimmy Carter to represent that nation. And allowed a Trump to have a go at running the government. Until he revealed his true intentions. Then we could have had a vote of no confidence and bounced him out. Instead we are stuck with a tyrant for at least four years.
I’m not kidding when I say I prefer the parliamentary system. We might have kept our dignity as a nation by electing an Obama or a Jimmy Carter to represent that nation. And allowed a Trump to have a go at running the government. Until he revealed his true intentions. Then we could have had a vote of no confidence and bounced him out. Instead we are stuck with a tyrant for at least four years.
Anyway, the bits:
Steinmeier began with the story of an encounter with a woman
in Tunisia who said to him, once, “You give me courage.” The woman was not referring to him
personally, he said, but to Germany as a whole.
And not because Germany was a perfect place, but because it was a place
that has shown that one can rise from misery and become a source of hope to the
world.
·
…and when
this foundation becomes shaky elsewhere, all the more must we stand by this
foundation
·
we must
distinguish fact from lies
·
nowhere in
the world is there more opportunity than here…
·
and who is
going to do it, if not us…
Remember when Americans talked like that?
I hope it's clear that I'm not trying to paint a black-and-white picture here of a lousy America and a spiffy Germany. It's not that America is bad and Germany is good. It's not even that the German political scene is better than the American political scene - that's true, I believe, for the moment, but things change. The only certainty is that things change.
I hope it's clear that I'm not trying to paint a black-and-white picture here of a lousy America and a spiffy Germany. It's not that America is bad and Germany is good. It's not even that the German political scene is better than the American political scene - that's true, I believe, for the moment, but things change. The only certainty is that things change.
2 comments:
Great blog, Alan! I was going to write to you today to ask what news you're reading. I guess this answers it, but I'm afraid I won't be able to keep up with the German news. Thanks for keeping us posted!
Yes, it's a wonderful blog. I especially like how blogs like this one help us gain a greater (more global) perspective on what's going on. Through it all, you project a sense of hope. I'm trying to regain hope. Very helpful this.
Post a Comment