Populism vs Solidarity

Populism (for popularity) versus solidarity (for values). That may be a useful way to describe the contest the U.S. witnesses today. 

When the U.S. Senate voted 57-to-43 to convict Trump for inciting an insurrection, the choice before the chamber’s 50 Republicans was between principles and what “the base” presumably wants. Remembering their values, seven Republican senators could not bring themselves to defend Trump. Added to the Democrats’ fifty, their votes made the 57-to-43 “guilty” tally the most bipartisan in the history of presidential impeachments. 

Though the “guilty” number didn’t meet the two-thirds threshold needed for disqualifying Trump, it corresponds to current polling. Around fifty-seven percent in America seem to favour Biden’s inclusive policies, while roughly 43 percent are seen as inclined to support Trump’s populism. 

Whether openly avowed or merely hinted at, White nationalism is a well-known component of Trump’s populism. In addition, the former president promised lower taxes, barriers to immigration, a large cheque for Covid relief, and tariffs to benefit the U.S. worker. 

Evidence that Trump didn’t lift a finger on January 6 even after being told that violent rioters were chasing his faithful vice-president Mike Pence was among the factors that pushed the seven senators against him. 

Though Mitch McConnell, the leader of the Senate’s Republicans, defended his “not guilty” vote with the argument that only a president can be convicted under the impeachment law, not an ex-president, he also delivered a blistering attack on Trump from the floor. 

The extent to which Trump has been damaged is hard to estimate. The 43 Republican senators who judged him “not guilty” were swayed by Trump’s feared ability to “primary” them – to have them defeated by a rival Republican in the primary contests that must precede the next round of Senate elections. 

Diehard loyalists may indeed love Trump even more for his success in obtaining acquittal in the teeth of undeniable evidence. White nationalists and White supremacists may admire Trump’s dexterity in evading punishment. 

But others among the 74 million Americans who had voted for him last November appear to be reacting differently. Attracted by the Republican party’s domestic and foreign policies, they had excused the former president as “a candid talker” even though Trump’s lies, and his unrestrained praise of himself and abuse of others, had put them off. 

After the January 6 Capitol Hill attack, and the attack’s graphic reenactment during the impeachment trial, many in this group of supporters seem to have re-thought their loyalty to Trump. They seem swayed less by nationalism or populism, and more by concern for the institutions of democracy and by discomfort with the notion of White supremacy. 

The case for solidarity beyond party lines was powerfully presented to the Senate, and also exemplified, by the nine Democrats from the House of Representatives, all gifted lawyers, who argued for Trump’s disqualification. 

Coming from from six states and one “U.S. territory”, these nine representatives were Jamie Raskin (of Maryland), Joaquin Castro (Texas), David Cicilline (Rhode Island), Madeleine Dean (Pennsylvania), Diana DeGette (Colorado), Ted Lieu (California), Jon Neguse (Colorado), Stacey Plaskett (Virgina Islands) and Eric Swalwell (California). 

Belonging to different races and religious groups, the nine are linked by their roots to Africa, Asia, Europe and Latin America. Three of them are women. Much of the world saw these nine prosecutors present seemingly irrefutable evidence that Trump had incited violent elements to attack the Capitol and prevent, physically, the certification of Biden’s victory. 

Trump’s defence team was noticeably less impressive. Apart from arguing that the Senate could not try an ex-president under the impeachment law, Trump’s lawyers claimed that their client did not “directly” incite the violence of January 6, which they alleged was the work of criminals and terrorists unconnected to Trump. 

This bid to separate the former president from the hordes of fervent admirers who invaded the Capitol carrying Trump banners and shouted, “Fight for Trump”, will not please the admirers, many of whom are facing the wrath of the law. These followers may conclude that the Trump who abandoned Pence has used and betrayed them too. 

Or, as the Americans say, “thrown them under the bus”. 

While presenting his case before the Senate, Jamie Raskin, the impressive leader of the House’s team of lawyers, recalled that democracy is not the inevitable or natural condition of societies. It is a rare thing, achieved (he seemed to suggest) through struggle, sacrifice and solidarity, and sustained by the same qualities. 

Under Trump, the U.S. saw its democratic foundations damaged. Trump seemed to defend the past’s Confederacy, and he exalted modern-day coercion and violence. His defeat in November drew sighs of relief across the world. 

Despite the technical “not guilty” verdict, Trump’s trial strengthens the recognition that democracy and solidarity go together.