The Trump phenomenon
Donald J. Trump has become President-elect of the United States of America against the expectations and projections of the US and Western media, the pundits and pollsters and the political establishment in America, Europe, Asia and even Africa. It was a stunning upset as almost everyone had presumed the inevitability of Hillary Clinton’s ascension to her “entitlement”-the US presidency. I am one of those however who was only mildly surprised, rather than shocked by Trump’s victory. As November 8, 2016 approached, I wondered at the huge disparity in the crowds attending Donald Trump’s rallies relative to those at Clinton’s campaign events-Hillary even had to resort to bringing JayZ, Beyonce and Jennifer Lopez, amongst other music and entertainment figures to draw decent attendance at the closing stages of the campaign.
It was evident that the Trump voters were more motivated and enthusiastic about the election and that Clinton would have some relative difficulty drawing her presumed voters to the ballot box. In a way, this should not have surprised the Democrats-Hillary Clinton was an unpopular, generally unloved figure; the relentless news about scandals trailing her over Benghazi, the so-called emails, the accusations about “pay-to-play” that plagued her relationship with the Clinton Foundation and its (mostly) Arab-Muslim regime donors and the Wiki-leaks revelations about Democratic National Committee (DNC) gerrymandering to secure her the party nomination all did nothing to boost enthusiasm for her candidacy amongst Democrats and especially Independents. The FBI letter to Congress re-opening the investigation into her e-mail server scandal just days to the vote proved to be a fatal blow to her election prospects.
Beyond the problem presented as elections approached, there were fundamental problems with the Clinton and liberal platform. In my reading, the underlying theme driving the 2016 US presidential contest was the contrasting visions of the place of the US between the liberal internationalist conception of the Democrats and the Americanist or America-First inclination of the majority of US voters. This internationalist versus Americanist visions played out in at least four critical dimensions-immigration and borders; jobs and economic policy, faith and values; and national security and terrorism. In each of these four dimensions, Hillary Clinton and the Democrats offered an international perspective-large scale, unrestrained immigration or a defacto policy of open borders that many US citizens feared would end the notion of the US as a nation-state; free trade and other economic policies anchored on assumptions around the inevitability and irreversibility of the forces of globalization, irrespective of the costs in terms of domestic jobs and manufacturing; the liberal LGBTQ agenda that sought to eliminate gender as we ever knew it, end the institutional and Christian conception of marriage and erode the place of faith in US society replacing it with a secular, rational or even atheistic alternative; and finally a troubling acquiescence or at least ineffectiveness in respect of global Jihadist terrorists as Democrats especially outgoing President Barrack Obama and Hillary Clinton either avoided or over-rationalised the issue. In all these four dimensions, liberals were significantly out-of-touch with the popular mood-most Americans were concerned about large scale immigration especially as the issue conflated with their concerns about jobs, crime, security and terrorism; the liberal insistence on immigration from Syria in particular did not sound like a reasonable position to most Americans with the exception of the over-sophisticated liberal intellectuals and those accustomed to automatically internalizing liberal/democratic talking points. The evangelical community in the US, including several Nigerians were deeply troubled by Obama’s LGBTQ roller coaster which were rapidly embraced across Europe and South America, and measures which appeared to subject their religious freedoms to the right of gays; and many voters had concluded that Obama and his partner and former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton were unlikely to be effective in the war against ISIS and other international and domestic terrorists. Donald Trump tapped into these popular concerns and with the benefit of hindsight was going to be difficult to defeat!
There were other sub-themes also favourable to Trump, the depth of which liberals, the media, pundits and international observers underrated-the increasing aversion of ordinary citizens not just in the US but across Europe to the political, media, entertainment and intellectual establishment who presumed to know what was good for everyone else not realizing the rising contempt for their ilk, and fatigue with the relentless evolution of “progressive” liberalism in a social rather than economic direction. It is interesting that the concerns over immigration, jobs, faith and terrorism that appear to have delivered victory to Donald Trump were probably the same driving forces behind the BREXIT vote! Contrary to the liberal, internationalist urge of liberals and establishment politicians and bureaucrats, voters in both the UK and US appear to have voted firmly in defense of their nation-states! The losers in these two episodes are clearly the media, liberals, pundits and pollsters, plus the political establishment in both countries and their international allies.
It remains to be seen how Trump(ism) would affect Nigeria and Africa. Much of Trump’s anti-immigration rhetoric appears directed primary at South America and the Middle East and North Africa, yet there are significant African populations that may be affected in the aftermath; Trump is likely to be more aggressive in his energy policy which may result in yet lower oil prices; and his promises of trade wars with China, Mexico and others may spill over into global trade. On the other hand, we expect a stronger Trump policy on terrorism as well as stronger US economic growth (lower taxes, less regulation, more energy investments, freer financial markets) may power higher global economic growth. I expect continuation of specific US programmes in Africa such as AGOA, funding for AIDS and Power Africa irrespective of partisan shifts in Washington since these programmes enjoy broad bi-partisan support on Capitol Hill.
The main risks Trump faces may be around how he manages the potential conflicts of interests that may involve his business and family interests, sustained opposition from liberals and the media, possible hubris in the wake of his stunning victory and meeting the very high expectations of his supporters who expect him to dismantle Obamacare, restore American jobs, destroy ISIS and “Make America Great Again!”
Opeyemi Agbaje