Confronting Trump and Trumpism: 10 Observations after “The Morning After” / moving “Beyond Alarm”

I am proud that we at the Democracy Seminar have published two compelling pieces responding to the free and relatively fair election of Donald Trump as the 47^th President of the United States. Together Marci Shore’s “The Morning After” and Jeffrey Tulis’s “Why We Should Be Alarmed” remind me of two hard to take political facts: democracies can and do self-destruct, i.e. there is a democratic road to dictatorship and fascism, and that the United States of America is not as exceptional a country as we Americans have believed, i.e., that it can and now is happening here (to augment Sinclair Lewis’s famous declaration).  

Shore and Tulis also remind me of a classic imperative, the need to answer the question: What is to be done? It is a question that requires careful consideration of the nature of the threat we face, as well as steps we should take to address the threat.

Here, some preliminary observations:

1. As Tulis underscores, the election of Donald Trump presents the real possibility of regime change. This was not a normal election. Trump’s words must be taken seriously, clearly confirmed by his post-election proposed appointments, which he also proposes should bypass normal Senate scrutiny, i.e., to avoid a normal democratic control. The alarm that Tulis sounded “the morning after” should be ringing ever more loudly. The proposed appointment of Robert F Kennedy Jr, as the Health and Human Services confirms the subordination of science to politics, a definitive characteristic of totalitarian rule. Here we have the real enactment of political correctness. Support of the great leader will determine the truth about public health, not independent medical research. This poses an immediate danger to public health. It should further be understood, confirmed by other appointments, that the subordination of truth to Trump’s will strongly endangers the health of the body politic.

2. This is a radically broadened role of “Commander in Chief.” It suggests a radical politicization of culture, the arts and sciences, universities, news media and other cultural institutions. Self-censorship, such as that which was exhibited by the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post even before the election, is now a part of our social landscape. Universities, especially state universities in red states, I fear, are early candidates (I’m especially concerned about how this will unfold for my friends in Indiana and Florida), and private universities are likely to follow soon thereafter.

3. Matt Gaetz as Attorney General, along with Trump’s personal lawyers to fill the top ranks of the Justice Department, would politicize the law. Vengeance and retribution, not justice, will rule. Other early proposed appointments, some requiring Senate confirmation, Tulsi Gabbard, Kristi Noem, Pete Hegseth and Lee Zeldin, others not requiring confirmation, Stephen Miller, and Michael Waltz, et al. indicate ideology, not competence is Trump’s goal and that above all else, loyalty to the leader is the primary qualification for leadership in the new regime. 

4. Indeed, it’s a new regime, not a new administration. Under usual transitions, changes in policy direction are to be expected, sometimes quite radical ones, Roosevelt’s and Reagan’s are prime examples. But the nature of truth did not change. Now, I fear, a significant segment of the population will be living more and more in a post-truth reality, enforced by the state. Factuality, and not just consent (as Chomsky once warned) will be manufactured through the media complex.

5. Yet, the sources for hope mirror my profound concerns. Trumpism is an empty ideology that is centered around a cult of personality. It’s a politics of resentment and hatred for “them,” meaning dear readers “us.” It is radically anti-intellectual and radically against expertise, against those who think they know better than us, anti-urban, anti-secular, about owning the so-called libs. Yet, there are profound fissures in the emerging Trump regime. Kennedy may ultimately not be confirmed as the head of the EPA, not because of his crazy ideas about vaccines and his anti-Semitic, anti- Chinese conspiracy theory about the coronavirus, but because he favors women’s reproductive rights. The deeply disturbing prominence of the world’s richest man in this transition period, Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla, whose ambition is to save the world using advanced technology, culminating with the colonization of Mars, obviously takes climate change seriously. He shares xenophobia and anti-wokism with Trump, but his vision for the future is at odds with Donald Trump’s primordial utopian vision of America. The Trump – Musk bromance can’t last. 

6. And their likely breakup is indicative of a more profound contradiction, between pernicious policy plans and capacity to govern effectively. Trump is appointing leaders of complex organizations that have little to no management knowledge or experience. Of critical importance are the Justice Department and the Department of Defense. Thankfully his promise to clean the swamp, i.e., to enact a political purge of the civil service and the military of those who are disloyal and woke, is likely doomed to failure. His most despicable plans likely will not be enacted because of a purge of the competent. 

7. There’s still, of course, a lot to be worried about. Primary is the very fate of the earth. All indications are that the Environmental Protection Agency will be transformed into the Environmental Exploitation Agency. It will soon be the official truth that climate change is a hoax and all attempts to limit it are off the table. Mass deportations of immigrants appear to be the most clear and most present danger. Surrender to Russia in Ukraine is likely. The unconditionality of American support for Israel will continue and likely escalate, with the pro-Israeli settlements, anti-Palestinian Mike Huckabee the Ambassador to Israel. Political and military leaders, ‘the enemies from within’ are likely to be prosecuted. The extent of this is unclear, but it surely will happen. The use of the military against civic dissent also now seems likely. An escalation of the persecution of trans people seems to be all but assured, and the LGBTQ people and groups will certainly be on the defensive. Federal support of mass transit will diminish. Unions will be weakened. Open xenophobic and racist expression and action will be more visible in public life. The previously politically incorrect will be the new politically correct. 

8. Yet, Islands of democracy, large and small, against this Fascist wave will become of crucial importance. It’s imperative that “Blue States” resist pressures to succumb to central authority. To date, “states’ rights” has been a racist motto, dating back to the Civil War. But using state authority to confirm basic civil rights, to protect dissent, to protect the environment, to protect immigrants, and people who are marginalized because of their race, religion, sexual orientation, and gender identity will be crucial. And smaller islands, including local governments, city, town and village, and non-governmental organizations and associations will be of great importance. To put it simply in my terms, my study of the politics of small things will be of ever greater importance in the United States of America. 

9. And also Islands of decency against the indecency, of civility against incivility are crucial. Trump is a vulgar man. A sociopath, a narcissus who reveals little to no respect for others who do not serve his immediate interest. Such behavior models the actions of many of his supporters in and outside of government. Trump is a barbarian and there is a real threat that we are becoming a nation of barbarians, or at least a significant part of the population. Even in my very blue corner of the nation, I see this in everyday life. Pickup trucks with huge Trump and American flags speeding around the community, non-verbally and sometimes verbally declaring a big “fuck you” to the anti-Trump local majority. I fear that this will become infectious, that “our side” will mimic such behavior. I confess that my fear is a matter of taste and disposition. I am a person who admires good manners, a conservative in this regard. But more is involved. I think civility is a key to turning back the present Fascist threat.

10. Trump won a decisive victory in the popular vote and in the Electoral College, but the majority of those who voted did not vote for Trump, and the vast majority of voters did not vote for him. I think it is especially important because among these many did not vote for principled reasons. Not voting for Harris or Trump was for them a vote against both of them. I am thinking of many of my friends and colleagues, perhaps a significant percentage of the people reading these reflections, who didn’t vote for Harris because she is not sufficiently progressive, and perhaps even more significant, because of the Biden – Harris support of Israel despite the war crimes it has been committing in Gaza. Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez both supported Harris in cutting off military support for Israel, a position with which I fully agree, but many couldn’t do this including Muslim and Arab Americans in Michigan and beyond. With this in mind, I think it is important to recognize that there is an anti-Trump and potentially significant anti-Fascist majority in America, especially if we also consider that many people, some of whom I meet in local interactions, who voted for Trump because they believe he will lower the price of eggs and other groceries that they find it harder and harder to afford. 

This anti-Trump majority includes many with different and often competing political beliefs and commitments. This is where civility comes in and where intellectuals have a special role to play, which I emphasized in my book Civility and Subversion. A key democratic role of intellectuals is to make it possible for people who hold competing positions to collaborate with each other in pursuit of a common cause. This role was crucial in creating the democratic consensus that pushed forward the rights of women, of African Americans, of workers and of immigrants of the past in the U.S.. I personally witnessed how crucial civility was to the transition from dictatorship to democracy in Poland and then again in the 2020s. Such collaboration in this sense is a key to turning back the Fascist tide in the U.S. today. 

I hope it is not too late. Given the resoluteness of Trump and the Trumpists (there is now an anti-democratic party in control in America) and the present disorientation of their opponents, I am not optimistic. I look forward to working with colleagues in the Democracy Seminar and also within my own community to work against my pessimism. In fact, I am going to such a local group tonight.

P.S. So, I went to that local meeting, and we discussed what our initial practical responses should be. I think I can accurately summarize the discussion with the old Joe Hill slogan: Don’t mourn, organize! In this case, organize to specifically respond to the likely first Trump created crisis, the mass deportations of the undocumented immigrants. 

Also, I shared my first draft of this piece with a number of colleagues, including Jeff Tulis. He sent me this response:

“My one suggestion concerns your great question – what is to be done? It is the right question, and I have received messages since my posted piece asking just that. What your piece does is provide some reassurance that there are resources with which to fight. But I think we need to also give readers more concrete suggestions on what is to be done now and what the readers themselves can do. Mine would be this: 1) Democrats in Congress need to be pressured to use the two months they have before inauguration to take advantage of the power and platform they have. They need to hold pre-confirmation hearings on the highest priority issues: 1) the vital need for security clearances of nominees, 2) the vital need for commitment to the basic overall missions at Justice, Defense, HHS, and Homeland Security. How to accomplish missions can be decided in elections. Changing missions, if they should be changed, is a matter for Congress not Department heads. Congress can begin to systematically educate the demos about this. 3) they can be pressured to do this by quickly ramping up local organizing. The “Indivisible” organization knows how to do this and has resurrected itself to do it. They have already revised their materials and their website for this fight. It was successful in 2018. It can be now. If you buy these points or something similar you could link to Indivisible in your piece.  Here is the link.”

I certainly do buy Jeff’s points  and thus have published them here. I would also be very pleased to use the Democracy Seminar platform to share other suggestions. If you send them, they will be published.

Jeffrey C. Goldfarb is the Michael E. Gellert Professor of Sociology Emeritus at The New School for Social Research and chair of the Democracy Seminar.