Understanding the Trump Phenomena Part I

My Interpretation of Walter Dean Burnham's View of Politics. The best approach that I know to help us come to grips with present political reality.

The man I admired most in my life was my teacher and friend, Walter Dean Burnham, whose knowledge of history, theology, opera and literature was only exceeded by his ability to employ statistical analysis of election data to uncover fundamental insights about American politics.  He wrote with grace and erudition.  He cared deeply about our country and valued integrity more than fame.

I’ve been rereading some of his last writings about American elections and the rise of Trump in 2016. 

Shortened URL for this post: http://bit.ly/29GDqcv This year’s upside-down election is part of a political realignment which encompasses both parties, and is fueled by public rancor.

In 2017, Trump and the ultra-right wrecking crew will continue to roll back history | USAPP (lse.ac.uk)ent-which-encompasses-both-parties

and https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2016/05/18/lessons-for-2016-from-the-smashup-of-the-second-party-system-and-the-war-of-the-whig-succession/

While an outline of his thinking doesn’t do justice to its richness, it is a good starting point. Please write me if any of the following is unclear or raises interesting questions. I’ll try to elaborate further.

Some of what I write here I’ve already written in my Blog “Fuel for the Fires than can Burn America.” My apologizes for the repetition, but I think this blog provides additional insight, particularly emphasizing elite disregard of, and inaction toward, the basic injustices of an unreformed capitalist society. You might benefit from reading them together.

Here, in brief, is my summary of Burnham’s basic view of electoral politics in industrialized societies. 

• Technology and new idea bring about immense changes in society. They impact how people live, work and even think about the world. Some gain wealth and privilege; others suffer serious loses. Many are left confused, embittered and hurt.

• Political leaders in democratic societies achieved their positions of power and trust by responding to existing economic and social interests. In significant ways they become the voice of these interests in government, dependent upon them for electoral support. They turn, therefore, a deaf ear to the claims of new interests and largely ignore those hurt by these changes.

• Large parts of society belong to organizations that explain societal change and chart courses for social action. They can be traditional churches or “political churches,” such as membership political parties, labor unions, etc. They anchor their members within communities that provide meaning and support and direction to their lives.

• Others, however, face serious loss, or threat of loss (of income or status) without such support and understanding.

• They are aware, however, that the existing political system essentially ignores their needs and suffering, and they continue to lose faith in government, social institutions and existing political parties.

• The stage is thus set for a charismatic leader, offering convincing, if simple, solutions to complex problems.

• Such a leader appeals to tribal identities/enemies and may advocate a way back to an imagined past or a way forward to a possible future.  A “time-machine” politics.  In either direction the path tends to break with tradition, ignore the customs and guardrails of established governance and promise revolutionary change.

• I might add that such a movement is likely to find support among wealthy elites whose economic interests are also threatened by technological change (think gas and oil today) and their political power weakened as new economic interests increase their own influence within the system.

• There is much more to be said. In Part II next week I’ll discuss Burnham’s understanding of how the United States weathered such disruptions in the past and, so to speak, lived to tell the tale. He referred to it as realignment, the reconfiguration of political forces into a new party system. In foreseeing, however, this present fragmentation of American political life, he was not confident that we could once again (Civil War and Great Depression) manage the crisis and preserve our democratic form of government.

• This is just a framework.  It should be elaborated, as Burnham did, by historical parallels and detailed analysis. Each society is different.  But the basic pattern is recognizable.

Keep this in mind. The despair and loss presently experienced by many in the United States is real, and the failure of government to address their grievances is real. The legitimacy of any government depends in part on the perceived capacity of that government and its leaders to understand, sympathize with, and act to assist, broken lives and stolen futures. During the last half century, the failure of the government of the United States to respond to the needs of the most vulnerable has created an extreme crisis in our political life and now threatens the very nature of its democratic future.

Reading and remembering Burnham, I recall his passion and realism. He never hesitated to face the full implications of his analysis. He never ceased calling for a rebirth of faith in our form of government as we live through this third and greatest challenge to our belief in the possibility of a self-governing Republic.