Ar Last Edition
Ar Last Edition

Download Our App

The veils are settling is an attempt to understand how the fortunes of humanity could turn out in the future. Of course, it is not the case that the fate of mankind depends on the American convenience, far from it. Although the USA can be described as a world power on the decline and many aspects underpin this thesis, it is still a superpower, without which many developments cannot be initiated and implemented. Furthermore, they are still the mouthpiece and the leader of the western hemisphere. In order for a consideration to be conclusive and to lead to a necessary systemic understanding of the factual relationships, scenarios of possible foreign policy developments require the inclusion of domestic policy development lines from the past and the present, including a multi-dimensional perspective. Accordingly, The veils are settling is divided into two parts. The first part, entitled Lessons From An Election & Beyond, deals with various political, historical, philosophical and socio-economic issues in America up to the day of Joe Biden's victory and aims to trace lines of development. The second part begins with the day of Joe Biden's victory and spans a range of possible future foreign policy scenarios, entitled Lessons For A VUCA World.

Stefan Knabe

The Veils Are Settling (2)

Leading to Trump

Did these developments culminate in the election of Donald Trump as president in 2016? Yes and no. This process was initiated at the beginning of 2000 and new standards in the political-democratic struggle were set. In 2001, as Elliot Weinberger described it, a coup d'état without bloodshed was carried out in America. What happened? George W. Bush won the election as American president by having a lead of a few hundred votes in Florida, whereby his competitor Al Gore won by popular votes with a head start of 540.000. After a long battle in front of the courts it was finally decided that Bush was elected as president. At first glance, not an exciting or informative story. Accordingly, we fill in the story with further facts. Bush’s candidacy received massive support from the oil industry, just like Core got money from other branches of industry. The crucial difference was that his brother Jeb Bush, who also run for president in the pre-elections for the Republicans in 2015, had political responsibility as governor in Florida at this time and was therefore responsible for all election processes. Let us turn to Weinberger’s report on this: “By the time the ballot papers were counted by the machines, Bush had won by 547 out of about six million votes. In almost all elections in the USA, such a narrow lead automatically leads to a recount. Since the older machines are notorious for their inaccuracy - even their inventor stated that they had an error quotient of 3 to 5 percent - these recounts are usually done by hand. The republican home secretary refused to order such a hand recount, and the republican-ruled Florida legislature declared the elections valid. After several weeks of manoeuvring and digging, Gore's campaign finally reached the Florida Supreme Court, which ordered another vote count. In the hysterical surrealism of the 24/7 news networks, Republicans kept claiming that the Democrats were stealing the elections and that humans couldn't count the vote as objectively as machines - with the hand-count being in Bush's home state of Texas and common in most other countries. Even more sinister, however, was the practice of the Republicans - in the style of the Indian Congress Party or the Mexican PRI in office - of carting in hired demonstrators who disrupted the recount. They were staying at the Hilton, and Wayne Newton, the reigning King of Las Vegas who was flown in, sang for them at a specially organized Thanksgiving dinner. The demonstrations were so violent that the election office in Miami-Dade County, the place of great hope for further votes for Gore, had to be closed. It was clear to everyone that Gore would win the recount - by at least 20,000 votes, according to the conservative Miami Herald's estimate. So, the Republicans turned to the Supreme Court. The deadline for election of representatives to the Electoral College required by the laws of the state of Florida ended on December 12th. On December 9th - when, after endless legal battles, a system for the correct counting of votes was finally devised - the Supreme Court suspended all further action for the duration of the negotiations on the disturbing finding that recounting the votes would cause irreparable damage to Bush because it did could cast doubt on his side. (The irreparable damage to Gore was out of the question.) The result of the vote was five to four. The judges of the Supreme Court are appointed for life; seven of the new incumbents have been appointed by Republican presidents. Sandra Day O'Connor has officially announced that she would like to retire but will not do so if a Democrat is elected President. The wife of Clarence Thomas, another judge, was already on the Bush transition team and interviewed applicants for the position in the new administration. Anthony Scalia's son, also a Supreme Court Justice, was a partner in the law firm that Bush represented in court. In addition, Gore had promised in the course of the election campaign - without suspecting that precisely these people would have to decide the election - that he would not appoint judges like the stubborn right-wing Thomas and Scalia; Bush said they were exactly the kind of judge he wanted - after all, his father appointed them. On December 12th at 10 p.m. the court again decided against a recount by a majority vote for three reasons: There were only two hours until the deadline - thanks to their own hesitation - so it was too late; the Florida Supreme Court had nothing to decide on an election in Florida; the re-counting of the votes was unconstitutional because the different voting procedures and the different ways of counting them contradicted the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which guarantees equal protection for all citizens. This decision created a practical dilemma. Every ward in the States votes differently, with different ballot papers and different machines. To claim that these differences are unconstitutional would open the way to questioning any future regional and national election in the country. So, amazingly, the court ruled that this breach of the constitution only applied this once and only to the Florida election. Judge John Paul Stevens put it in his minority opinion: "Even if we will never know with absolute certainty who won this year's presidential election, it is clear who lost them. It is the nationwide trust in this court as the independent guardian of the law ". Until December 12, Americans had blind faith in the Supreme Court: no matter how corrupt or misguided the executive or legislature was, the judiciary's overriding freedom of interest would definitely endure. This flagrant politicization of the Supreme Court represents the biggest shock to the system since Watergate and Nixon's resignation. What effects this will have remains to be seen.”

Even if we anticipate what follows, these lines written years ago are a terrifying reminder of the current events after Donald Trump's clear electoral defeat. Furthermore, they are evidence that politicians like the former President Bush and his entourage have only laid the foundation for both, the political phenomenon Donald Trump, and his political approach. It can certainly be stated that this approach has now been fed back into the American political system now. However, the conclusion that Weinberger draws is even more disturbing. “There are coups d'état led by powerful people in order to come to power themselves, and those in which powerful interest groups install a figurehead. The American variant is obviously about the latter. If you look at George W. Bush's previous office, he is the least qualified person to ever become president.” From today's perspective, it can certainly be discussed whether Trump did not make this title controversial. It can also be clearly stated that the book by Tocqueville is compulsory reading for all people who are interested in America as well as democracy and its varieties.

 

Election Day – Judgement Day

Well, on November 3rd the day was supposed to come when the fate of the world and America was supposed to be decided. Since you can draw a certain common thread from Nixon to Trump, including certain developments that at least invoke die-hard democrats with a shudder, this stigmatization can certainly be approved. The chief editor of El Pais (Spain) Javier Moreno made the following statement. "Spain has experienced a legitimation of political speeches and practices that would have been absolutely unacceptable 10 years ago: a rise of populism - in part literally - tactics and idioms adopted from the US President". Adam Michnik, editor-in-chief of Gazeta Wyborcza (Poland) stated, that in the days before Trump Europe was always convinced that the strategic partnership with the United States would always last and cannot be destroyed. That does not seem to be the case. In addition, the east European right has happily adopted methods from Trump to wage its political struggle, which is based on xenophobia and populism and denies European integration. The struggle is directed against the press and the judiciary, including the stirring up of fear of communism. Trump let them go and drove, among other things, Hungary towards Russia, and China. In addition, such developments call NATO into question. Ulf Poschardt, chief editor of Die Welt (Germany), also commented on the importance of the election: “The democracies of the West can only master the challenges of the 21st century together - but that requires transatlantic on both sides. In Washington, but especially in Berlin”. In addition to these international voices, two further circumstances must be brought up here: technical and sociological circumstances.

Since 1845, the election day has been fixed on the Tuesday after November 1st, which means that the election always falls between November 2nd and November 8th. At the same time, a third of the US Senate and the House of Representatives are also elected. Often, on the same election date, state, district, and local elections, as well as regional referendums and referendums, are held, for which a long ballot paper is used in most cases. It is therefore a decisive day in the political system of the united states, which decides on the further fate of democracy at different political levels and the effect of skipping should not be underestimated.  If there are emotional upheavals on one level, the other levels are also influenced. Thus, voting decisions on one level also influence the other.

The anthropologist Peter Turchin from the University of Connecticut is researching the connection between individual drive and political instability together with sociologist George Mason. The focus is on the question of what causes growing inequality with societies and political stability. A summary of their results could be as follows: The elites have monopolized economic gains and thereby cut off the path to social advancement. (In the land of unlimited opportunities!) By undermining state institutions, they avoid paying taxes or gradually reducing their share of it. This promotes social distrust and resentment. They designed the PSI Index (Political Stress Index) to illustrate and determine the location of a society. Among other things, he relates Wage stagnation, national debt, competition among elites, distrust of the government, urbanization, and the age structure. Let us Turchin comment on his results himself. “What we see is that the PSI was an accurate leading indicator of rising tide of political instability in the Antebellum America, which culminated in the American Civil War. As to the present, we live in times of intensifying structural-demographic pressures for instability. The PSI has not yet reached the same high level that triggered the Civil War of 1861–65. However, its explosive growth should be a matter of grave concern for all of us—our economic and political elites, as well as the general public. Will we be capable of taking collective action to avoid the worst of the impending demographic-structural crisis? I hope so. More, I hope that the theory and data explained will contribute to finding solutions that will help us find a non-violent escape from the crisis.”

Let us anticipate the explanations a little again. On September the 5th Turchin posted a remarkable graphic on twitter, which indicated that 2020 is not the end of actual development. Having in mind the words by Jack Goldstone (sociologist) that revolutions often take place in times of population growth and urbanization and if we combine this statement with the so-called Tocqueville effect (The Tocqueville effect is a phenomenon in sociology or social psychology. The point is that revolutions do not break out when the repression is sharpest, but when the regime has already softened itself and is ready for reforms, so that dissatisfaction can express itself more risk-free.), then this could indicate difficult times for a future government, which, as we know today, is formed by Joe Biden.

Has Joe Biden's election already unified the country? The answer must be clearly no. Rather, and a look at Edison Research's numbers for the National Election Pool will prove this, it is even more divided than ever before, and Donald Trump did better than expected. One of the reasons for this may well be the pre-coronavirus time, in which Trump had economic successes: Record numbers on the labour market, incomes rose noticeably in 2019, inequality decreased and economic growth exceeded that of many industrialized nations. This was achieved, however, in the best manner of Nixon and Reagan: a major tax reform, the economy was further deregulated, and stock market prices rose, which explains why Trump won Florida. Florida is where most of the United States retirees live, and America's pensions are mostly equity-funded. One should assume that, especially in the era of Covid-19, the issue of health among older people was a reason for Biden to vote. Well, Edison Research made the following question: Which of these 5 topics was the most important for your decision in the presidential election: Racial inequality, corona pandemic, health policy, economy, crime & security.

The table No 1 indicates the results. Interestingly, the announcement of a tax hike and the oak tax to tackle inequality did not have a positive impact on Joe Biden. On the contrary. Many American companies are currently struggling to survive. Coupled with the attitude of the population that you have to look after yourself first and foremost and that any state welfare could mean socialism or communism at the same time, gives an indication of why Trump has received high scores in terms of the economy. However, these numbers allow for another interpretation. Especially non-white people in America are affected by the corona pandemic and are economically disadvantaged; there is an inherent factual relationship between financial strength and health care. Accordingly, an imaginary dividing line between parts of the population runs right in the middle of the table. 

In total, Joe Biden was not able to take voters away from Donald Trump. One could have assumed that non-white people preferred to vote for Joe Biden because of e.g. the Black Life Matters Movement, but the  colour of the voters  also played no decisive role in the choice of candidate. Table no 2 shows the percentage of the voters in terms of skin colour. To make a comparison, the 2016 numbers are taken from Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. The percentage of the group in the total electorate is shown in brackets after the name of the skin colour.

Table No 2

Joe Biden

Donald Trump

White (65%)            2016 - 2020

37% - 42%

57% - 57%

Black (12%)          2016 - 2020

89% - 87%

8% - 12%

Latino (3%)         2016 - 2020

66% - 66%

28% - 32%

Asians (3%)         2016 – 2020

65% - 63%

27% - 31%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

One aspect related to skin colour needs to be mentioned here, because it is a testimony to what personal engagement can achieve and offers a glimpse into the future. To do this, you must know some facts. The state of Georgia traditionally elects Republican and the black population has a share of over 30%. Atlanta, capital city of Georgia, is a city with a large black middle class and has the nickname Black Mecca.

If you want to vote in America, you need a driver's license, which should confirm the identity of the voter. You can only get a driver's license if you can afford a car. No driver's license, no participation in the election. Stacey Adams, a black coloured woman with a lot of personal commitment managed to persuade black citizens to vote and removed various obstacles so that as many blacks as possible could vote. These included driving services to the polling station and assistance with registration as voter. The result, Georgia clearly fell to Joe Biden. And it could fall into Democratic Parties hand forever. In Georgia a development has taken place which can be described as the replacement of the white man and this demographic change will change the entire USA in the next few years. The Asian-American population in Georgia has doubled in two decades, and many live in the suburbs of the capital city Atlanta, and they voted largely for the Democrats. Why is this development so revealing: Well, in America the electoral college determines the president and its composition is based on the number of electors from each state. Most people in the United States live in the big cities, and as we will see (and we have already learned from history), they tend to vote for the Democrats.

Demographic forecasts predict that in around 20 years’ time, the Latinos will make up a third of the population. And how do they vote (at least for now)? The Democrats. Where do Latinos live mostly? In Texas, Florida, Nevada, and Arizona. And these states have always been considered the strongholds of the republicans.

And Latinos are interested in completely different topics such as the average voter: education, immigration and everything that goes beyond the borders of the USA takes place. Immigration is not just a domestic issue; it affects US relations with neighbouring countries on the American one continent. Leading representatives from Latin America and the Caribbean exhibit regularly on the importance of the US immigration debates for their own countries and their relations with the USA. The Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto, for example, stressed in January 2015 after his meet with President Obama at a press conference on the importance of these programs for Mexico and Mexicans living in the US. Also, the Presidents of El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras have done similarly highlighted the importance of US immigration policies to their countries.

In 2013 Michael Kimmel has written a book called Angry White Men: Masculinity at the End of an Era and it is a sociological critique of the angry white male phenomenon in America. Kimmel examines what he describes as the aggrieved entitlement of white men in early 21st-century American society. According to Kimmel, many white men, as members of a historically dominant group in America, have reacted to increases in social equality and the loss of economic advantage with overt anger and rage.

Just two question to think about: Who does Donald Trump mainly address with his rhetoric? Can you remember the acronym PSI?

While the above descriptions can be declared as developments in progress, there are areas in which a clear demarcation between the political camps can be made out. 62% of those under 30 voted for Biden and only 48% of those over 65. Evangelical Christians (Biden is a Catholic) only voted 23% for Biden, 76% for Donald Trump. In contrast, it is essential to take a look at the other religions. In the other religions, Joe Biden achieved over 60% and Trump only 37%.

Finally, the percentage distributions in relation to city, suburb and country are given here. Table No 3 presents this numbers. Like before, the numbers for 2016 have been picked from Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Table No 3

Joe Biden

Donald Trump

City

2016 - 2020

60% - 60%

34% - 37%

Suburbs

2016 - 2020

45% - 51%

49% - 48%

Country

2016 - 2020

36% - 45%

61% - 54%

 

As additional information for Table No 3, it is important to know that most of the people in America live in the cities and on the coast. Trump has won a lot more electoral areas (counties – about 2600) and if you look at the map of America, you could mostly immerse yourself in the red colour of the Republicans. (Joe Biden just won 600 counties.) However, land area does not mean a larger share of the vote cake. Joe Biden won the popular vote by around 5 million votes.

How can these numbers be interpreted in their entirety? Well, there's a deep gap between the rural and urban populations. Eszra Klein calls this a "deep trench" because "there isn't a densely populated city in America that regularly votes Republican." Furthermore, one can speak of a contrast between coast and inland. (This aspect will still be interesting in the future in relation to climate change and the associated increase in the seas and the resulting political and monetary flows.) Three quarters of Americans cast their votes where a party won by a long distance. This suggests polarizing echo chambers with regard to political and cultural exchange. New views, opinions and changes will find it difficult to change the face of society in the future. Further radicalization is to be expected, since the 2020 elections were no longer about winning voters from the other, but rather inspiring their own supporters. From a certain point on, enthusiasm can only be increased or maintained by making one's own positions more extreme and radical. Biden also won especially in high-income circles, e.g. in Texas, the Republican stronghold, and a bastion of Trump. In contrast, Trump was able to expand his leadership in the poorer regions.

 

Biden continued to win where counties have a high proportion of academics. Likewise, the income was decisive for the casting of the vote. The more people earned in a county, the more likely they were to be pro Biden. From an annual income of around $ 50,000, there was a slight tendency towards Joe Biden. The tendency was extraordinarily strong from an annual income of around $ 1,000,000. The explanation: people with high incomes benefit from globalization. The polarization between liberal elites and increasingly those classes who perceive themselves to be left behind is picking up speed. Those who were left behind are mostly the losers of the financial crisis of 2008. The American social system has never really recovered from this crisis to this day. An important part of society not only lost their job or their house but also lost their faith in the system. Previous analyses of the election in the state of Wisconsin have shown that the higher a person's level of education, the more likely they were to vote in the direction of the Democrats.

German writer and journalist, interested in European affairs and German foreign policy