The Grievance Culture Gerry O'Shea
The Senate hearings for the
confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh started on September 4th last year. Early
on in Mr. Kavanaugh's testimony, he accused his opponents of "a calculated
and orchestrated political hit" motivated by people seeking revenge
"on behalf of the Clintons."
President Trump supported his
nominee's assertion by adding that the liberal billionaire, George Soros, was
orchestrating the opposition, including paying the protesters. Senator Charles
Grassley, the hearings committee chairman, warned that "we will not be
bullied by the screams of paid protesters."
It is difficult to believe
that at this stage in our mature democracy these bombastic accusations were
given credence during confirmation hearings for a justice of the Supreme Court.
The outcries by Kavanaugh, Grassley and Trump have all the marks of a grievance
culture, of men convinced, it would seem, that Democrats would stoop to the
basest level, including falsely accusing the candidate of rape, in order to stymie
the appointment of an honorable conservative nominee.
More important than any analysis of the rational arguments made was the planned emotional impact of
mentioning the Clintons and George Soros and arguing in harsh language that the
Democrats were engaging in malicious and bullying behavior. All this emotional rhetoric impacted like
mother's milk in rallying the large Trump base in the Republican party.
Many commentators wondered
how the political party that controlled all three branches of government could
portray themselves somehow as abused outsiders with, for example, Senator
Lindsey Graham in a state of red-faced apoplexy accusing the Democratic
questioners of talking "crap" and engaging in an "ethical
sham."
There have always been
outsider groups with political grievances in America. Today, however, the divisions run
deeper and the alienation is more profound than at any time since the end of
the Second World War.
A recent Pew study shows that
49% of Republicans would not approve of a family member marrying a Democrat. In
the reverse situation negative feelings are also strong with around one-third
of Democrats looking askance at a matrimonial alliance with a Republican.
Donald Trump is a brilliant
tactician when it comes to eliciting a desired populist and emotional response from his audience. During his
campaign announcement on the steps of Trump Tower in Manhattan, he claimed that
America is in the throes of an immigration crisis. He talked about Mexicans
trooping across the border, raping women in Texas and rampaging in nearby communities.
To top it off, he claimed
that he had proof that Muslims were openly celebrating the Twin Towers
destruction on 9/11, dancing in the streets of some New Jersey town while New
York City was trying to deal with the devastation in lower Manhattan.
All of this poofery and fear-mongering with no
basis in reality was designed to appeal to disenchanted voters, people who resent
a political system that seems to them uncaring, hostile and highly elitist.
It is easy for Trump to stoke
up feelings of paranoia against those "others", for instance,
emigrants from Africa and Central America. America First is a great rallying
cry. Tough luck on foreigners, especially Muslims. Powerful rhetoric replete
with all kinds of grievances!
There is an important
economic dimension to this sense of disempowerment felt by many workers,
especially in low-paid jobs. The American GDP has more than doubled in the last
forty years mainly because of big technological advances with consequent
soaring company profits. However, the salaries of the line workers have remained
static.
This unfair situation heightens the sense of
understandable victimhood felt by these employees and their families. For many
of them the American Dream is seen as a false promise benefiting only elites in
places like Hollywood and Wall Street.
Many of these workers showed
up at the big Trump rallies. They responded enthusiastically as Trump named
their enemies: immigrants, the media and the corrupt Washington establishment.
They shamelessly yelled their support for his repugnant demands to actually
lock up his Democratic opponent.
Amazingly, this new revolution of the
disenchanted was being led by Donald Trump, a plutocrat who opposes trade union
power and said that workers' salaries are too high. But logic is not a major
force in guiding voting preferences. The last budget gave massive tax relief to
the top 1% of earners and to large corporations with very little for
middle-income families. Still, polls show only a slight erosion of support in
the Trump base which continues to feed on a feeling of near-tribal paranoia.
Democrats are divided on how
to deal with blue collar voters in next year's presidential election. The new
diverse wave of leaders, mostly young
women, elected to Congress in the recent mid-term elections is not inclined to
devote any special attention to these
disgruntled white voters in states like Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida. They
believe that suburban women and young people, radicalized in many cases by the
right-wing shenanigans at the Kavanaugh hearings, will carry the Democrats to
success in 2020 as they did so convincingly in the mid-terms.
Older heads in the party
point to historical arguments showing that winning these important swing states
is a prerequisite for dislodging President Trump. They will look to leadership
from candidates like Sherrod Brown or Joe Biden, both of whom have real
credibility with ordinary workers, to win back voters that Hillary Clinton lost
in 2016.
The politics of fear and
group estrangement is not confined to the United States. The populist movements
in, for instance, Austria, Hungary and Poland are all characterized by a strong
sense of alienation from the prevailing liberal culture in Western Europe. President Trump openly identifies with and strongly
encourages their frustrations and fears.
It is very difficult to
predict if and when this ethos of resentment and estrangement will recede.
Gerry O'Shea blogs at
wemustbetalking.com
Comments
Post a Comment