The
Man Who Would Not Be President
Roger Cohen
Roger Cohen NOV. 18,
2016
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/19/opinion/the-man-who-would-not-be-president.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0
What was evident
during the campaign is more apparent after Donald Trump’s election:
Mr. Trump is deeply ambivalent about becoming president. He’d
rather stay in his lavish New York penthouse. Policy is a headache.
It requires concentration. There are annoying laws against nepotism.
Trump won 4.1 percent of the vote in the District of Columbia.
Washington does not pine for him.
It all began as a
game, turned into an ego trip and ended in a strange apotheosis.
Trump has uncanny instincts but no firm ideas. He knows the frisson
authority confers. A rich boy from Queens who made good in Manhattan,
he understands the galvanizing force of playing the outsider card. A
man who changed his past, purging German lineage for “Swedish,”
he understands America’s love for the outsized invented life. For
his victory he depended on America’s unique gift for amnesia.
Trump saw the
immense potential appeal of an American restoration — all
nationalism finds its roots in a gloried, mythical past — after the
presidency of a black man, Barack Obama, who prudently chose not to
exalt the exceptional nature of the United States but to face the
reality of diminished power.
The proposed
restoration went beyond that. It was of the Judeo-Christian West
against what Trump’s chief strategist — read propaganda minister
— Steve Bannon calls “this new barbarity.” That barbarity has
many components. One is the crony capitalism of the “party of
Davos” — the elites who have the system rigged. Another is the
dilution of Judeo-Christian values through rampant secularization,
migration and miscegenation. The mass 21st-century influx of Muslims
in the West may be equated, in these people’s eyes, with the mass
emancipation and emergence from the Shtetl of Jews in 19th-century
Europe: disruptive, threatening, a menace to the established order.
Obama is of mixed
race. Who could better symbolize the looming decadence? For “Make
America Great Again,” read “Make America White Again.” Trump
saw that racism and sexism could be manipulated in his favor. He was
the self-styled voice of the people to whom he bore least
resemblance: those at the periphery far from the metropolitan hubs of
the Davos consensus.
From headline to
headline Trump stumbled, ending up with the last thing he wants: a
minutely scrutinized life. You can wing a campaign; you can’t wing
the leadership of the free world. An unethical commander-in-chief is
a commander-in-chief with problems.
Receive occasional
updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and
services.
PRIVACY POLICY
Trump knows all
this. He was big on hat; now he needs cattle. That’s problematic.
He does not really know where to begin. Clearly not at the State
Department, which has yet to hear from him.
One is put in mind
of H.L. Mencken: “As democracy is perfected, the office represents,
more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a
lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the
land will reach their heart’s desire at last and the White House
will be adorned by a downright moron.”
Except that Trump is
no moron. That makes the outlook more sinister. Michael Bloomberg,
the former New York mayor, got it about right when he said of Trump:
“I’m a New Yorker and I know a con when I see one.” He might
have said a gifted charlatan.
Bannon, as set out
in remarks to a conference held at the Vatican in 2014 and reported
by BuzzFeed, believes that “we’re at the very beginning stages of
a very brutal and bloody conflict” that will, absent a firm stand
by “the church militant,” “completely eradicate everything that
we’ve been bequeathed over the last 2,000, 2,500 years.”
The thing is, of
course, this fight — this imagined restoration — will be waged
against the very essence of the modern world: the movement of peoples
and ever greater interconnectedness, driven by technology. Taken to
its logical conclusion, the Trump-Bannon war can only end in
apocalypse.
I believe money
binds Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, and Trump. Precisely how
we do not know yet. But there is also a cultural aspect. Putin has
set himself up as the guardian of an absolutist culture against what
Russia sees as the predatory and relativist culture of the West. The
Putin entourage is convinced the decadence of the West is revealed in
its irreligious embrace of same-sex marriage, radical feminism,
euthanasia, homosexuality and choose-your-gender bathrooms. Enter
Bannon.
It’s all a
terrible mistake. Trump affects something close to a regal pout,
close enough anyway to be perfected through Botox. He loves gilt,
gold and pomp. He’s interested in authority, but not details. He
yearns to watch the genuflections of the awed. He loves
ribbon-cutting and the regalia of power. Used to telling minions
they’re fired, he prefers subjects to citizens. In short, he’d be
better off at Buckingham Palace.
That won’t happen.
I see a high chance of disaster within the first year of the new
presidency. Trump won the game. But now the game for him could be up.
Or perhaps the world will go down in flames.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário