On the Steps of the
Jefferson Memorial
By Linda Pastan
We invent our gods
the way the Greeks did,
in our own image—but
magnified.
Athena, the very mother of
wisdom,
squabbled with Poseidon
like any human sibling
until their furious
tempers
made the sea writhe.
Zeus wore a crown
of lightning bolts one
minute,
a cloak of feathers the
next,
as driven by earthly lust
he prepared to swoop
down on Leda.
Despite their power,
frailty ran through them
like the darker veins
in the marble of these
temples
we call monuments.
Looking at Jefferson now,
I think of the language
he left for us to live by.
I think of the slave
in the kitchen downstairs.
From Prairie
Schooner (Summer 2007)
On the interior frieze
below the dome of the Jefferson Memorial are Jefferson's words from
an 1800 letter defending the constitutional refusal to recognize a
state religion:
“I have sworn upon
the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over
the mind of man.”
Author Josie Holford
writes …
“The context makes it
clear that the kind of tyranny Jefferson feared most was religious
tyranny. Absent from this statement is any indication that he
objected to the ultimate tyranny – that of slavery. He noted that
slavery diminished both master and slave but he was unable to call
for equality. That was best left, he said, to God.”
So, in his day and with
all of his wisdom and greatness, the liberator and crafter of the
Declaration of Independence wrote a morally blind definition of man.
In contemplation of his timely injustice, Jefferson also wrote …
“For the eradication
of slavery we must await with patience the workings of an overruling
Providence.”
(Josie
Holford. “On the Steps of the Jefferson Memorial”
Rattlebag
and Rhubarb. April 25, 2017.)
What have we learned as a
country in our relatively brief existence? Have we progressed with
due diligence and proper attention to the transgressions of our past?
Given the present state of the nation, those questions have gained
new significance. "Overruling Providence" -- America's fate in the 21st century.
I fear the political
invention of a new “god,” a so-called “chosen one” by his
followers. Unlike Thomas Jefferson, this man lacks the necessary
intuition and judgment to lead, and much like Jefferson, his moral
flaws reveal a dark side rooted in acquisition of control of wealth
and power.
President Donald Trump has
no intentions of exacting equity or equality. A monstrous creation of
the GOP Republic, this self-proclaimed Zeus fires partisan lightning
bolts of juvenile, divisive words one minute and self-serving and
egotistical tweets of grandeur the next. And, through his eternal
barrage of insults and lies, I, like the speaker in Linda Pastan's
poem, can think only of those he considers as “slaves downstairs”
– his unfortunate underlings.
Once again, these are
revolutionary times. Americans are now engaged in a War of Democracy
that pits honest American values against a demagogue who seeks the
unbridled accumulation of personal gain. Trump believes his position
rightfully enables his unethical and criminal behaviors.
Our national sins are
linked to, and intensified by, the existential threat we face today.
In order to make needed changes, we must confront the sins of white
supremacy and make them right. Given President Trump's history with
African-Americans, Muslims, Latinos, immigrants, unionized labor,
environmentalists, and people with disabilities, he poses an ongoing
threat to democracy.
As Harvard University
political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt demonstrate
in their comparative analysis of global authoritarianism – How
Democracies Die – the warning signs of this threat to the
republic are all around us.
The two primary norms that
Levitsky and Ziblatt think underpin democracy are “mutual
toleration” and “institutional forbearance.” They amount to the
same thing: resisting the temptation to take every cheap shot going.
This is where Trump comes
in. Who could possibly equate Trump's presidency with any shred of
“toleration” and “forbearance”? Trump treats the presidency
as a platform designed for settling personal scores. He appears to be
almost entirely lacking in impulse control, yet without impulse
control there can be no lasting democracy.
David Runciman, professor
of politics at Cambridge University, says …
“As a result, the
U.S. now has as its commander-in-chief the norm-shredder-in-chief as
well. Levitsky and Ziblatt do not think Trump spells the death of US
democracy. What they fear is what he will leave behind. He has taken
the growing mistrust and mutual intolerance that preceded him and
turbocharged it. Levitsky and Ziblatt call it 'democracy without
guardrails': a helter-skelter race to the bottom.”
(David
Runciman. “How Democracies Die review – Trump and the shredding
of norms.”
The Guardian. January 24, 2018.)
The Trump administration
fulfills all four marks of an authoritarian regime, including
rejecting democratic rules and norms, attacking the legitimacy of
political opponents, condoning violence against political opponents
and people of color, and curtailing civil liberties of opponents and
the media. Please allow me to explain how these characteristics of
Trump's presidency are leading the country to a blind submission to
authority.
1. Rejecting Democratic
Rules and Norms
Trump’s failure to
divest from his businesses was the original sin of his presidency
because that failure made conflicts of interest inevitable. It meant
that countless decisions he would make as president would have the
potential to be influenced by his own financial interests. The extent
of Donald Trump's personal financial gain through the office of the
president obliterates any credible sense of upholding the emoluments
clauses of the U.S. Constitution.
A president’s foremost
concern should be the well-being of the republic — not advancing
his own personal fortunes. Noah Bookbinder, the executive director of
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, explains …
“When our Founders
chose to make a president removable from office for 'treason, bribery
or other high crimes and misdemeanors,' they had in mind the misuse
of official power that breaches public trust. President Trump’s
conflicts documented by CREW, many of which represent likely
violations of the Constitution’s emoluments clauses, easily fit the
bill.”
(Noah
Bookbinder. “G-7 at Trump's Doral resort? The original sin of this
presidency is failure to divest.” USA Today. September 4,
2019.)
Trump has rejected many
other democratic rules and norms by his lawless actions:
- His welcoming of Russian meddling in the 2016 and 2020 elections,
- His threats to human rights and the International Criminal Court,
- His obstruction of justice detailed in Volume II of the Mueller report,
- His uniform obstruction of Congress performing its constitutional duties.
Far from being devoted to
the rule of law, Trump revels in usurping power and control while
rejecting legal limitations. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics
in Washington (CREW) reports over 2,300 conflicts of interest in the
current presidential administration. These conflicts constitute
abuses of the powers of his high office that, themselves, should be
the subject of an impeachment inquiry.
(Alex
Mikulich. “It's time for sustained mass civil disobedience.”
National
Catholic Reporter. September 12, 2019.)
After the Department of
Justice (DOJ) recently overruled career prosecutors to seek a lighter
sentence for longtime Trump aide Roger Stone, the move raised new
questions about potential White House interference at the agency.
Trump told Attorney General William Barr he (Trump) had a "legal
right" to intervene in cases. Senate Minority Leader Charles
Schumer addressed the issue on the Senate floor…
“Left to his own
devices, President Trump would turn America into a banana republic,
where the dictator can do whatever he wants and the Justice
Department is the president’s law firm — not a defender of the
rule of law.”
Robert Tsai, law professor
at American University, says …
“Long-standing norms
about what’s necessary for the rule of law to survive – the very
kinds of democratic norms we demand of other countries – are
undermined by a prosecutor’s office who takes partisan
considerations into charging decisions and sentencing
recommendations.”
Barbara McQuade, law
professor at Michigan University, posits …
“The ability to hold
the president accountable has shrunk substantially. Trump has fought
to avoid criminal charges, convinced senators that he can be
impeached only for a criminal violation, rejected congressional
oversight in the form of subpoenas and rejected state criminal
investigations.”
The Hill.
February 16, 2020.)
2. Attacking the Legitimacy of Political Opponents
Trump's consistent attacks
on the legitimacy of political opponents undermine democratic
opposition and erode conditions of the possibility of realizing
universal justice and equality. Trump repeatedly and regularly
denounces “evil” and “crooked” lawmakers and the “top scum”
at government organizations such as the F.B.I. for trying to take him
down.
The president has
viciously attacked President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden,
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Speaker of the House Nancy
Pelosi, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Representative Adam
Schiff, F.B.I. Director James Comey, Special Counsel Robert Mueller,
and even Republican Senator Mitt Romney – just to name a few.
A few politicians and
aides who have worked with Trump describe him as a narcissist whose
self-image is mortally threatened by criticism of any sort. Seth
Norrholm, Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences
at Emory University School of Medicine who has written about Trump’s
mental state, explains …
“For Trump, criticism
seems to amount to an attack that is lethal to the public veneer. The
invariable response is not just (to) extinguish the threat, but to
humiliate and destroy the threat.”
Norrholm believes Trump is
unfit for office. According to him …
“Some of this comes
from immaturity – you can imagine a person who’s narcissistic,
but has the intelligence and brains to back it up. But there’s not
a lot of firepower behind (Trump’s) narcissism, so you end up with
grade-school nicknames and playground-level insults …
“… neither logic
nor consistency are within Trump’s realm of consideration or
concern. When this President says “We’ll see what happens” it
is because he, too, does not know what his next thought, emotion, or
action will be — and we are all held hostage by the whims of his
disordered mind.”
(Seth D.
Norrholm, Ph.D. and David M. Reiss, M.D. “We Would Rather Not ‘See
What Happens.’” Medium. August 22, 2019.)
3. Condoning Violence
Against Political Opponents and People of Color
Trump has consistently
condoned violence against political opponents and people of color. A
nationwide review by ABC News identified at least 36 criminal cases
where Trump "was invoked in direct connection with violent acts,
threats of violence, or allegations of assault."
Alex Mikulich, Roman
Catholic social ethicist and activist, says …
“A litany of threats
to basic civil liberties marks the (an) assault on our democracy.
These include the Muslim ban, the denial of due process to Americans
and newcomers facing deportation, seizing unilateral power to detain
people indefinitely, separation of families and child detention, and
attacks on freedom of speech by the press and political opponents.”
(Alex
Mikulich. “It's time for sustained mass civil disobedience.”
National
Catholic Reporter. September 12, 2019.)
Condoning violence began early in Trump's campaign and
continued throughout Trump's presidency. Protesters regularly
interrupted Trump's rallies during his 2016 campaign. During a rally
in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, on the day of the Iowa caucuses (February 1,
2016), Trump told audience members he would pay their legal fees if
they engaged in violence against protesters. Trump said …
"If you see
somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them,
would you? Seriously, OK? Just knock the hell ... I promise you I
will pay for the legal fees. I promise, I promise."
A study by Griffin Sims
Edwards of the University of Alabama and Stephen Rushin of the Loyola
University School of Law titled “The Effect of President Trump's
Election on Hate Crimes” builds on the existing literature on the
causes of hate crimes …
“The findings support
the hypothesize that it was not just Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric
throughout the political campaign that caused hate crimes to
increase. Rather, we argue that it was Trump’s subsequent election
as President of the United States that validated this rhetoric in the
eyes of perpetrators and fueled the hate crime surge.”
(Griffin
Sims Edwards and Stephen Rushin. “The Effect of President Trump's
Election on Hate Crimes.” January 14, 2018.)
Trump once referred to a
congressman who body slammed a reporter as “my kind of guy”
(October 2018). The notion of his philosophy of someone in power
"punching back ten times harder" appeals to a faction of
people who believe that the only way to “be a man” is to leave
your opponents battered, bloody, or dead. Trump has even convinced a
slew of evangelicals to swap Jesus’s mandate to “turn the other
cheek” for his own rule of “punch them as hard as you can, make
it hurt.”
In a speech on Long Island
in July 2017, Trump remarked to policemen that they should not worry
about injuring suspects and “please don’t be too nice” as he
described the precautions typically taken by police where they place
a hand over a suspect's head while they're being put into a police
car to protect them. Suffolk County police chiefs replied that they
do "not tolerate roughing up prisoners.” The American Civil
Liberties Union also responded, condemning the president’s remarks.
When a president talks
about how great it is to assault people and how much he appreciates
it when his supporters physically harm people they dislike, that
bullying leader off the rails.
4.
Curtailing Civil Liberties of Opponents and the Media
Trump stirs white
nationalist fears by blaring “fake news” and “the media is the
enemy of the people” as deflection against his many wrongdoings.
His assault on the civil liberties of immigrants is never ending from
the hideous policy of tearing children from their parents to the
executive order on Muslim immigrants and others. All the while, his
supporters admire him for his selfish, forceful agenda. George Orwell
called such admirers “bully worshipers.”
Since these “worshipers”
have accepted that victimizing others for the sake of personal gain
is more important than character, the climate for exploitation has
thrived. And once money became the most powerful form of influence,
those with wealth became able to tilt the playing field further and
further in their own favor.
“For those who are
scared, frustrated, and hurting having someone specific to point at
and blame can feel empowering and anyone providing such a target can
seem like a savior.”
– Jeff
Fox
Trump also has particular
admiration for dictators and strongmen like Russia's Vladimir Putin,
North Korea's Kim Jong-un, and Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte.
Perhaps that affection is rooted in Trump's fantasy of being
president for life. When President Xi Jinping of China essentially
became president for life, Trump said: “I think it’s great. Maybe
we’ll want to give that a shot someday.”
Just as troubling is that
the rise of Trump exhibits the deep partisanship of America based on
racial fears and political domination. Parties are not above selling
their souls for office. Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt say …
“The realization that
white Americans could become a minority in mid-21st century America
led the Republicans down the road of increasingly desperate
partisanship, to the point where they have pursued outright
anti-democratic initiatives like redrawing electoral districts to
benefit themselves and imposing strict voter ID rules designed to
disenfranchise non-whites.
“Unfortunately, the
Democrats have responded in deeply partisan ways themselves. The
result has been America's troubling drift toward authoritarianism and
democratic dysfunction. In the short term, it's led to Donald Trump's
presidency.”
The slide into democratic
obstructionism was pioneered by the Republicans under Newt Gingrich
and his adherents, but it has since come to dominate the GOP's
approach to politics. It also regrettably has strong adherents among
the Democratic Party, many prominent politicians of which argue they
must fight fire with fire. After examining the present political
climate, Levitsky and Ziblatt understand the American democracy must
be “made to work in an age of racial equality and unprecedented
ethnic diversity.” What a tall order.
The
Death of Democracy?
Although scarred by Trump
and his cronies, America can avoid the demise of democracy in two
ways. A 2020 Democratic victory so dominant and so overwhelming can
produce a model for social change that saves the government and
forces the GOP to correct its wayward course. Or, Republicans could
break from Trump and reorganize themselves in compatibility with
democracy. The latter seems only likely after Republicans face a
series of devastating defeats and realize that the path they’re on
is no longer viable.
No comments:
Post a Comment