"Trump - An Enigma?"
Sydney M. Williams
swtotd.blogspot.com
Thought of the Day
“Trump – An Enigma?”
April 24, 2017
“It is apparent
that almost equally marvelous concealment devices,
in one shape or another, are general throughout
the animal kingdom…”
Abbott
H. Thayer (1849-1921)
Introduction
to Concealment-Coloration in the Animal Kingdom, 1909
Gerald
H. Thayer
Like most animals, politicians
are expert at concealing their true intentions.
Last fall, when explaining why
I had voted for Donald Trump, reactions included expressions of horror and
words of disbelief. While not enthusiastic, I felt justified. The two most
important ingredients in a President are character and judgement. From my
perspective, in neither category did Mr. Trump score well. However, his
opponent, on this scale, registered far lower, at least in my opinion. And,
having been in the public eye for almost two and a half decades, Mrs. Clinton’s
flaws were well known. Additionally, she promised to continue the policies of
Mr. Obama, which had resulted in anemic economic growth, social division at
home, and a weakening of the U.S. overseas. For these reasons, I voted as I did. One of
the two was going to become President. And I couldn’t vote for Mrs. Clinton.
We did not, last fall, have a choice between the blemished and the
unblemished. One was a coarse, successful businessman, a political neophyte,
but astute enough to recognize that Democrats had abandoned their traditional
base – middle-class, blue-collar, working Americans – in favor of special
interests. The jilted, therefore, became Mr. Trump’s opportunity. We knew Mrs.
Clinton was a charlatan, a dissembler who had used public office for private
gain. Despite Mr. Trump’s financial success in cities throughout the world,
which required cultivating political elites, he campaigned as a populist. It
was assumed, then, that that is what he was. As for Mrs. Clinton, her real character
was revealed in her response to Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI), when testifying on
Benghazi before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee in January 2013.
Her reaction was reminiscent of Anthony Trollope’s description of Mrs. Proudie
in Framley Parsonage: “The
countenance of Mrs. Proudie became darkened with black anger and the polished
smile of her company manners gave place before the outraged feelings of her
nature.”
Armchair psychologists have provided myriad descriptions of Donald
Trump: an authoritarian demagogue; an inept, misogynistic, xenophobic buffoon;
a fascist and fan of strong leaders. David Brooks went so far as to argue we
are “entering the age of Putin, Erdogan,
el-Sisi, Xi Jinping, Kim-Jong-un and Donald Trump.” Lumping Mr. Trump with
those thugs is using hyperbole to augment a debatable point. Mr. Trump may not
be the neighbor I would prefer, but his critics are wrong in their demagogic
characterizations.
They dislike him in large part because he disrespects them. They make
fun of his hair and his malapropisms – an anathema to those who rely on
teleprompters, which allow disingenuous politicians to sound both judicious and
temperate. Today’s technology lets speech be taken out of context. Interviewers
seek not to discover who or what a person is, but to confirm predetermined biases.
Little time has been spent, for example, analyzing Trump’s early years as a
Democrat, or learning more of his immigrant wife. His Cabinet is criticized as
being composed of billionaires, never assuming they may want to give back to
their Country.
All American Presidents get tested. It is the most powerful office on
earth. Enemies want to know the mettle of the individual. Allies want to
understand their resolve. Mr. Trump is being tested on two foreign fronts:
Syria and North Korea, and by their respective patrons: Russia and China. Mr.
Trump’s initial responses have shown more steel than his predecessor’s, but have
not been out of line with other Presidents.
Nevertheless, when he did respond with horror to the chemical attack by
Bashar al-Assad’s Airforce on the Syrian town of Khan Sheikhun that killed
dozens of children, it was said he let emotion rule reason. When, within 72
hours, two U.S. Navy destroyers launched 59 Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles at
Syria’s Shayrat Airbase and destroyed 20% of the 7th Wing of Assad’s
Airforce, it was noted that the attacks violated his previous warnings about
getting involved in a Mideast war. His condemnation of Mr. Putin as a
co-conspirator in the chemical attack was met by disbelief from those who
thought him Putin’s puppet. A President may not, and perhaps should not, always
adhere to a campaign’s promises.
China’s President Xi Jing-ping was visiting President Trump at
Mar-a-Lago when the missiles were launched against Syria. The timing, I am
sure, was deliberate. President Xi is key to reining in Pyongyang. While the media focused on misstatements
regarding the whereabouts of the USS Carl Vinson, they ignored the fact of the
proximity of the U.S. Naval Base at Sasebo, Japan, about 500 miles from
Pyongyang. More importantly, Mr. Trump appears to have made headway with Mr. Xi,
in terms of the risks North Korea poses. Last week The Financial Times
reported that China was “…slowly coming
to view its fellow Communist neighbor’s atomic tests and missile launches as a
threat to its own security.”
Mr. Trump’s curriculum vitae is unique in the annals of American Presidents.
He had never been in the military and had never held public office. He had been
a businessman. The Trump Organization, LLC, was efficient. Like any business, it
operated in favor of core stakeholders – owners, employees, customers and communities.
In contrast, democracies are deliberately inefficient, so the rights of
individuals will be protected by the balance between the three branches. That
inefficiency may bother a man used to getting his way. As well, the President
cannot bypass Congress and the Courts. Also, the main stakeholder is the citizen.
Government employees, including all elected officials, are servants to
the people.
Historically, American Presidents have campaigned from the fringes and
governed nearer the center. That changed with Mr. Obama. He had campaigned as a
centrist, but governed from the far left. Mr. Trump campaigned as a right-wing
populist, but, as President, seems to be moving toward the center. As Holman
Jenkins, Jr. recently wrote in the Wall Street Journal, “Trump’s Presidency is coming into focus.”
It is too early to conclude whether Mr. Trump’s selection of a cabinet and
advisors and the decisions he has thus made reflect sound judgement, or suggest
centrist leanings. Apart from Executive Orders, he has had few notable
successes. But neither has he made an ass of himself. I remain cautiously
encouraged.
So, is Trump an enigma? He is seen by some as the archetypal rich,
white businessman. He is seen by supporters as having their back. He is seen by
opponents as an authoritarian wannabe, a thin-skinned diva, or a loutish oaf
intent on imperializing the Presidency. But I don’t think he is a mystery. The New
York Times’ Peter Baker suggests he is driven by instinct, not ideology. In
my opinion, he is a pragmatic man, driven by a strong (and unattractive) ego.
He is not loveable – at least not to in the way Reagan or Bill Clinton were. He
is a man who when presented with a problem wants to fix it. He is a man looking
for answers in a complex and disjointed world. So, my answer is “no;” I don’t
think he is an enigma.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home