Which path the world might take

America First and America divided

Trump appears to have first used the phrase “America First” during an interview with The New York Times, when he was asked if he was taking an isolationist position (Calamur, 2017). This slogan has helped Trump attract a wide array of support, but it also has a dark history associated with anti-Semitism and isolationism during the Second World War (Bennett, 2017). While Trump is determined to make the words his own, it might prove difficult for his adopted phrase to escape its historic connotations. Its characteristics of economic nationalism, trade protectionism, anti-establishment sentiment and white nationalism might well lead to a divided America.

Trump’s America First policy conveys a blunt message of economic nationalism. As Trump asserted in his inaugural address, “From this day forward, it’s going to be only America first, America first. We will follow two simple rules: buy American and hire American.” This policy will delude some Americans into thinking that their problems primarily originate abroad and can be fixed by tougher trade policies. Rather than following a more inclusive agenda, Trump deliberately chose to employ this policy to galvanize his supporters.

Economic nationalism is risky because it will result in trade protectionism. Trump aims to use protectionism to protect “American borders from the ravages of other countries” and bring jobs, wealth, and dreams back to America. Yet Trump forgets that the emphasis on open trade is not simply to bolster prosperity, it also aims to bind nations together and bring a more stable world (Samuelson, 2016). Therefore, his trade protectionism will redefine America’s global role and leave the world with profound and far-reaching uncertainty.

The third feature of Trump’s America First policy is his anti-establishment stance. Trump was openly critical that “a small group in our nation’s capital has reaped the rewards of government while the people have borne the cost.” These corrupt elites have benefited enormously from globalization, while American workers have stagnated economically (Cahill, 2016). This anti-establishment narrative sounds reasonable to some extent, but it also carries with it authoritarian tendencies (Levitsky & Ziblatt, 2016). Even more risky is the fact that, by using an us-versus-them philosophy, Trump has successfully mobilized angry working-class whites who feel they have long been ignored by the elites.

To fully appreciate this, it is necessary to understand the fourth characteristic of Trump’s America First policy: white nationalism. Actually, Trump sophisticatedly avoided this term in his inaugural speech, referring instead in race-neutral language to the “forgotten men and women of our country.” However, Trump’s “forgotten Americans” are not immigrants hiding in the shadows of American life or people of color struggling against police brutality and discrimination in the job market, but angry white voters who installed Trump in office (DeVega, 2017). This white nationalism is risky because populist politicians and anxiety over white identity can strengthen each other (Taylor, 2016). Trump’s Muslim ban is a prime example of this. If these nationalist inclinations cannot be properly handled, Muslims will be the first but not the last victims.

In sum, for many Trump supporters, “America First” is something to celebrate, while for others it is a source of discrimination, racism and even authoritarian tendencies jeopardizing democracy. This divergence is threatening to divide America. Could Trump heal the nation’s divisions and bring a new hope for all Americans? The next two sections seek to answer this question based on the socio-economic sources of populism and Trump’s political aspirations for solving them.

The socio-economic root of populism

Populism is a type of political action that mobilizes a large number of alienated persons against a government which is seen as controlled by a corrupt elite acting on behalf of its own interests. Populism is most common in democratic nations and normally comes into being where mainstream political institutions fail to deliver. Specific to America, white nationalism, a sort of populism combined with white identity, has been provoked by a series of socio-economic anxieties such as poverty, a dysfunctional education system, and the rise of crime and drugs. Trump’s criticism of new immigrants, people of color, and religious minorities exactly tapped into these anxieties, but it also shifted populist rage away from the real holders of power onto less powerful groups (Collins, 2016). These groups, however, are just scapegoats. It is the dominance of capital in the era of globalization that underlies the growing inequality and the populist movements.

The current populist movement in America is a reaction to the capital-dominated globalization that had its beginnings in the 1980s. The seeds of this globalization were planted after the Second World War, giving rise to the welfare state and the expansion of bureaucratic systems. These changes have increased the state’s capacity to regulate the economy and thus have constrained the development of capitalism. In response, capital itself has initiated a revolution (Zheng, 2017). At the domestic level, this revolution includes extensive economic liberalization policies aimed at weakening state control over the economy. At the international level, the revolution appears to be a capital-dominated globalization which has significantly changed the socio-economic structure of American society. Many jobs have been transferred from America to less developed countries (e.g. China and India), since workers there are willing to work for less and in worse conditions. The burden of taxation, meanwhile, has been moved away from corporations and onto individual citizens. This is because corporations have the ability to move to the locations where the tax rate is lowest while individual citizens have much less ability to make such a change. However, the current ruling elites are either mindless, corrupt, or “all talk and no action” in the face of these extremely harmful aspects of globalization. As a result, while globalization has resulted in creation of wealth and prosperity, wealth holders and unresponsive elites have ensured that rewards are not distributed equally.

Socio-economic anxiety then gives rise to cultural anxiety, another reason for the current populist movements. Because of the changing demographics, the civil rights movement and a push for multiculturalism in many quarters, America is no longer a nation built solely around white identity (Taub, 2016). Having seen their dominance and privilege eroded, many whites feel oppressed and disadvantaged. Some resent “immigrants, Muslims, African Americans and feminists, anyone who challenges the hierarchies that reigned back when America was great” (Beinart, 2016). Some of them merely view Trump as the lesser of two evils. Existing political and economic establishments have not worked out well for them, and they believe that Trump at least sees them and might improve their situation. The likelihood is that they are not racists like other Trump supporters, but are nevertheless susceptible to racist appeals during times when they are struggling (Beutler, 2016). However, many liberals fail to distinguish between these two kinds of whites. Instead of understanding why some whites feel ignored and forgotten, liberals simply call them racists, mock and even insult their Christianity, commitment to marriage, and Southern culture (Collins, 2016). This attitude will fuel rather than cool populism and at the same time divide rather than heal the society.

Trump’s personality, inner circle and political aspirations

In looking to deal with the aforementioned economic and cultural anxiety, different politicians may favor different strategies. A moderate solution is to heal the divisions of the society and at the same time unblock the currently sealed avenues of opportunity. This would mean Trump and his supporters at least admitting that the white working class is not the only group who has been betrayed by three decades of neoliberal economic policies. Millions of black, Latino and Native American workers are also waiting patiently for the line to move. At the same time, liberals should curb their prejudice against the white working class and take the time to understand the deeper economic, cultural and identity reasons for their distrust of the current establishment and its liberal agenda. Finally, the capital-dominated globalization should be effectively controlled by the government in order to better share prosperity among all these frustrated groups. Will Trump choose this solution? If not, what are his most valued goals as president? The whole world continues to wait with bated breath for a clearer indication of his response to these questions. This section provides some clues to help enrich our understanding of the situation.

The first of these clues lies with Trump’s personality. While a range of factors (e.g. world events and political realities) can determine what a political leader can and will do in office, fundamental tendencies in human personality, which differ dramatically from one leader to the next, are definitely among them (McAd, 2016). Thus, understanding Trump’s personality will help us to better predict what philosophy of governance he might follow and what agenda he might lay out for the nation and the world. Many articles have discussed the dark side of Trump’s personality. They believe that Trump is unfit to be president because of his insults directed at women, Latinos and disabled people. They also think that Trump is dangerously mentally ill based on his aggressiveness and malignant narcissism (Cassidy, 2015; Milligan, 2017). Obviously, these prejudiced comments cannot objectively reflect Trump’s total personality, which also has a positive aspect. Trump is an energetic person and a strong activist. Over the last three decades he has worked efficiently despite only sleeping four hours a night (Haglage, 2016). Trump is also a flexible and pragmatic person. His recent acceptance of the One China Policy has shown that he is able to switch positions and leave room for maneuver in negotiations. More importantly, Trump is a highly ambitious and competitive person. During his entire life Trump has demonstrated competitiveness, and a desire to come out on top and be in charge (McAd, 2016). All these personality traits suggest that Trump should not be underestimated. Furthermore, Trump’s inner circle is constituted by a group of like-minded people. Given this type of personality profile, Trump and his inner circle will tend to implement more radical policies which might deliver a big payback but which could also prove highly controversial. Actually, many of Trump’s stated policies have already exhibited this tendency, including the proposed construction of a wall between the US and Mexico, the temporary banning of Muslims from entering the country, and the intended removal of the Obamacare reforms (Briguglio, 2016).

The shared affection of Trump and his inner circle for the works of Ayn Rand provides another clue. Rand is influential for her defense of capitalism and her scathing critique of government intervention. She is also popular for her celebration of independence and individualism motivated by creative work rather than the attention or approval of others (Hohmann, 2016). However, to fill Trump’s cabinet with “Randians” may exert negative effects on the current economic and cultural anxieties of American society. One reason is that capitalism has already attained an unprecedented level of power. As long as politicians admire efficiency and free trade rather than fairness and human sympathy, the dark side of capitalism cannot be effectively rectified. On this point, Trump’s reform of tax cuts for wealthy and corporate-friendly deregulation will not fix the underlying drivers of inequality (Collins, 2016). Second, Rand fans regard the pursuit of their own happiness as the highest moral purpose and deny the value of sacrificing themselves to others. This may further exacerbate rather than heal the divisions among different groups.

The third clue comes from Steve Bannon, Donald Trump’s chief strategist and ideologue. Bannon is controversial primarily for two reasons, and both may bring a negative influence to the current chaos. First, Bannon was a former executive of Breitbart, a conservative news site advocating white nationalism and economic populism. This website has frequently featured stories about black crime, rampaging Muslim hordes, the perils of diversity and political correctness, and outrageous tales of crimes committed by immigrants (DeVega, 2017). Second, Bannon is also well-known for his criticism of Ayn Rand’s capitalism, which he believes is turning people into a commodity, objectifying them and virtually using them (Sunde, 2016). What Bannon appreciates most is the capitalism of the “Judeo Christian West,” which combines the Jewish and Christian faiths with capitalism. However, Bannon’s conservative view of capitalism is even more risky than secularized capitalism since it implies a certain kind of cultural superiority. Taking this viewpoint further will lead to serious clashes between different cultural groups (Edwards, 2016).

Will Trump provide China with a significant edge over America?

At the same time as President Trump was trying to make America great again by resorting to protectionism and populism, President Xi was attending the World Economic Forum at Davos, giving a full-throated endorsement of globalization, free trade, and cooperation between nations. As illustrated above, Trump’s America First policy is highly unlikely to help America out of its difficulties. Some observers thus believe that if America withdraws itself from a global leadership role, China will step up as the new leader of the world economic order (George, 2017).

It is true that Xi chose the perfect timing to portray China as a responsible and responsive champion of economic globalization and guardian of the international order (Wang, 2017). This will greatly promote China’s international image, especially when Trump takes the opposite tack of isolationism, thereby threatening to place the interests of many countries and companies in jeopardy. It is also true that the American economy is declining, especially relative to that of China, which is growing at an impressive rate. Its GDP will almost certainly surpass that of the US within a decade. This of course must be seen in perspective. A less dominant America will give China a precious strategic opportunity to strengthen itself, but China has a long way to go if it aims to replace America as the world’s leading superpower.

First, China should play a more positive role in leading globalization. As Xi warned, “Pursuing protectionism is like locking oneself in a dark room. While wind and rain may be kept outside, that dark room will also block light and air” (Xi, 2017). At the same time, China should make more effort to improve the quality of the economy as well as its size. According to the World Bank, GDP per capita in the US was $53,042 in 2013; in China it was just $6,807. This means that the American economy allows its citizens to grow along with it, but little of China’s dramatic economic growth is finding its way into the pockets of Chinese consumers (Bremmer, 2015).

Second, China should adjust its policies on technology innovation and talent introduction. America still owns the best high tech companies, research universities and scientific institutions in the world. Meanwhile, as a country of immigrants, America can draw on the world’s talents and recombine them in a diverse culture that enhances creativity (Nye, 2011). The advent of Trump and his antidemocratic tendencies now presents China with a valuable opportunity to narrow the gap and catch up with the leader. By investing more resources in technology innovation and adopting a more open policy toward immigrants, China can better seize this chance to expand its economy while enhancing its moral standing globally (Yan, 2017).

Third, China should reinforce its political influence in the world. Political power comes in many dimensions, embracing not only economic but also institutional, ideological and military influence. America has the oldest national constitution in the world, with strong institutions and rule of law to accompany it. Its liberal ideology is also attractive to many people around the world, and America remains the ideal place to start a new life (Nye, 2011). Again, Trump’s anti-establishment inclinations and his emphasis on realist benefits rather than ideological advantage provide China with a golden opportunity to increase its global influence. To fulfill this target, it is crucial for the Chinese government to develop an attractive ideology, based on modern civilization and Chinese traditional heritage, which can not only justify its development model but also provide an orientation for its improvement. Meanwhile, in order to overcome its geopolitical disadvantages, China should also consider ending its long-held policy of avoiding formal alliances and instead establish military alliances with as many neighbors as possible, especially while America retains its military superiority and has shifted its focus from the Middle East to the Asian-Pacific region (Yan, 2017).

Quoting from Dickens’ A Tale of Two Cities, President Xi noted that, “it was the best of times, it was the worst of times.” The current international situation is on the eve of great transformation. The world is still in an almighty panic following Trump’s election; this presents opportunities as well as challenges for China.