As the 47th president of the United States, Donald Trump confounds critics at home and embarks on a tour of Asia, it is essential to understand the phenomenon the man is and the movement he represents-that is Trumpism. To get a grip on either, a brief historical tour - going first back to 1989 - is warranted. 1989 was indeed a watershed moment. This is not because of the end of structural bi-polarity, or the Cold war, between America and the former USSR. It was significant because 1989 begat an era of liberal hubris.
Best emblematized by the US establishment intellectual Francis Fukuyama’s ‘End of History and the Last man’ thesis, 1989 may be the year that millennial history began. So, what did Fukuyama have to say? Twisting and spinning the Hegelian dialectic (master-slave), and interjecting fancy phrases like ‘thymos’ and ‘thymotic pride’, Fukuyama postulated that with communism’s end, liberal democracy (a curious marriage) and market capitalism had won. With this history had ended, and the ‘Last man’ born.
This ‘last man’, postulated Fukuyama, was free from ‘blemishes’ like nationalism, nationalistic pride and so on. All previous struggles that constituted the motor of history were dusted off the coattails of this ‘man’. Given the dominance of ‘progressives’ in the American establishment then, Fukuyama’s thesis gained not only prominence - but it was elevated to the canons of policy. To cut to the marrow, the political - policy paradigm that emerged was that of globalism, midwifed by free market fundamentalism, identity politics and allied themes.
In the schema, the ‘value’ that was of cardinal importance was consumerism. With a global(ist) mindset, and policy paradigms thereof, nations and borders thereof would go way of ‘Tyrannosaurus Rex’, the dinosaur – in other words, a relic of the past, a global middle class would emerge wedded to the consumerist ethos, utilitarian calculi would be determinative of this class which then know its ‘true interests’ and a homogenous ‘capitalist nirvana’ – emblematized by the ‘Davos man’ - would ensue.
To go back a little more in time, this was what precisely the great Hungarian political economist Karl Polyani had called the ‘marketization’ of the economy. By dis-embedding it from society - where all things were commodified and a ‘market society’ sought to be created, a market society was sought to be created - at a global level. (Laissez Faire and Free trade were to be central to the global market society).
But the prescient Polyani in his lucid book, ‘The Great Transformation’ called attention to the ‘double movement’ – where a counterculture movement arose. This movement sought to re-embed the economy in society though ‘labor laws and tariffs’. (Intriguingly Polyani’s thesis was published in 1944; having echoes in the present it appears to anticipate Trumpism!).
While free trade and laissez faire were central catalyzing the global market society these were complemented by social policy and rejigging of the social contract in America. In this schema, the ‘last man’ was midwifed by central banks. This entailed, among other things occluding the historical in favor of the utilitarian.
A new present was sought to be created in America where the rule of law and civil society became the intervening variables that invisibalized American history, privileged new variants. Important and significant in their own right, this is not to demean the rule of law or civil society in America.
The larger point is that by making these as the new mediating social contract between atomized ‘last men (women) at the expense of other important themes - US history and nationalism - the stage was set for the double movement. American history thus rewritten (or sanitized) and reified by policy made university campuses arenas for ‘micro-aggressive’ wokeness.
Progressive dominance of campsues ensured that Alternative views were marginalized and not given space. Politics was reduced to ‘identity politics’. In the matrices of these, nihilism and relativism were elevated to a fetish.
This had implications for economics and industry. In the quest for yield and rate of return, industry moved to where super normal profits were to be made, by virtue of wage arbitrage (wage differentials between high wage and low wage countries).
The working classes in the US were hollowed out (one demand side cause of high fentanyl use in America?). The despondency induced by the migration of jobs, the abysmally low safety nets in America and social Darwinism was allied to identity and culture concerns.
This was superimposed by the educational divisions in the US where ‘blue America’ created more college and university grads’ ‘red America’ lagged behind. Into this volatile mix was thrown high levels of immigration into the US.
The white superstructure of the country feeling like a minority in their own country - besieged economically and culturally - revolted (through and in the form of Trumpism). Called ‘deplorables’ superciliously by ‘blue America college and university educated elite; the victims of globalism threw their lot with Donald Trump- wearing the ‘deplorables’ tag with pride.
The ‘McWorld (or the homogenous market society)’ sought to be created by market fundamentalists began to crumble. Its protagonists saw the interlude and the prelude and postscript as the ‘necessary pain’ to be absorbed and borne with equanimity. (It was that they were not the ones bearing the burden).
The reaction to McWorld, which reached a climactic phase in the 2008 financial crisis, had Polyani’s double movement writ all over it. The economy was sought to be ‘re-embedded’ in society - through tariffs and labor laws among other things. Plus, people being people or humans being human, the last man’s social contract was felt to be wanting and actually demeaning of emotive abstractions (community, nationalism etc) that give humans meaning.
At intersecting multiple levels - economic, social, cultural and national- the reaction gained traction with Trumpism becoming a potent political force.
The larger point of this discussion is to put Trumpism, its foundational well springs, potency into perspective. The corollary is to tease out the premises of Trumpism and tracing it to globalist excesses. This is the normative standpoint. But what are the lessons that can be drawn?
First, Trumpism is not a flash in the pan, ephemeral force. It is a movement whose face is the 47th president of America. By no stretch of imagination will Trumpism vanish after Trump leaves office. Two, politico-philosophical-policy extremes are a recipe for disaster. (Globalism and its excesses are a case in point here.) Three, while there can be no real return to autarkic self-sufficiency, managed globalization (different from globalism) may be a more prudent alternative. Four, culture is important to humans and so is national identity.
The atomized last man(woman) is a nihilist par excellence. But humans are meaning seeking, values yearning creatures. Last, borders are important in national and international lives.
What then are the political and policy implications?
Extremes and hubris are sure shot recipes for disaster is one prong of the answer. When both are wedded to fine sounding, high faulting theories, the centre breaks and a counter movement emerges. Is this counter movement necessary?
Absolutely. Why? Any political philosophy and the structures and frameworks that it builds has to be inbuilt hedges that give this equipoise. Be it the left or the right, in any society or region of the world, it is the centre that is important. This is what gives societies and polities balance.
In this sense then, the Trumpian interlude in America - not an ephemeral passing fad - might be the necessary cathartic jolt to the extremes of globalism. Is there a lesson for the rest of the world? Indeed. It lies in adjusting, recaliberating – at the international levels - and being ‘eternally vigilant’ of excesses-political, philosophical and policy kind!
History, to conclude, has not ended. It repeats itself and is being made as this essay goes to press. Asia and Asian leaders must do their bit, decolonize their minds from postmodern fads like globalism, insert themselves and engage with history in a dignified way.
This calls for reading the ‘proverbial tea leaves’. A good and prudent starting point for this would be to get a reasonably accurate grip and handle on Donald Trump, what he seeks and represents. The follow up to this could be to engage with aspects of the man and the movement, Trumpism, for the larger good of Asian peoples!
Have you liked the news article?