Divided We Fall: Russia, Democracy, and the Cult of Trump

Christine M. Griffin 

December 12, 2020

(Prior to Russian Invasion of Ukraine & January 6 attack on the Capitol)  

    As President-elect Biden calls for unity, 74 million voters still believe Trump is at the mercy of a liberal “deep state”. Disputing Russian election interference, they laud imprisoned Trump allies as “heroes” and believe a failed impeachment effort resulted in “liberal” collusion with China to launch the “plandemic”, all to garnish a Biden win. It’s not political inclination or differing needs that currently divide us; Trump and Biden voters hold oppositional belief paradigms. Trump pleads mail-in ballot fraud and election machine tampering, while loyalists heed his call to arms.

     It’s us versus them, and democracy is at stake. 

     In a 1998 CNN interview, Oleg Kalugin, a former KGB foreign counterintelligence director, described Soviet intelligence goals as “subversion... to drive wedges between alliances.. to weaken the military, economic, and psychological climate in the West.” A populace divided by idealogy, geography, education, race and religion, and, most especially, income disparity, the US has been rife for exploitation. A 2007 New York Police Department report outlines a four-stage process by which the vulnerable become terrorists: pre-radicalization, self-identification, indoctrination and jihadization. 

    Have we become radicalized by our own free speech? 

    In 1987, no longer bound by the Fairness Doctrine, cable and radio news began to deliver opinion-as-fact, skewing the national conversation with deliberately biased rhetoric. Our increasingly media-obsessed culture tuned in, eagerly self-identifying as “liberal” or “conservative”. When the 2010 Citizens United decision reversed previously regulated campaign donation limits, super PAC’s funded the deliberate obfuscation of motive and fact, increasing confusion, widening the divide. The effect has been paralyzing. 

    As changes to news media and campaigning open the arena to foreign actors, political disillusionment and distrust discourages 40-50% of eligible voters from turning out to the polls. Russian intelligence exploited an internet and social media environment rich in click-bait, sound-byte, meme-based divisiveness that preys on instinct and emotion, rather than critical thought. Indoctrination was well underway when candidate Trump took to Twitter. Displaced followers, voracious for a leader to coalesce relevance in a sea of hatred and divisiveness, jumped onboard. 

     Trump’s demonizing rhetoric fuels fear, skepticism and doubt, triggering anger and resentment, intensifying “otherness”. During his presidency, Trump’s claims became increasingly ludicrous. In a February 2017 tweet, Trump called journalists “the enemy of the American People”. Subsequent allegations of “fake news” were used to substantiate his false narrative. Post-election, the chasm between Trumpism and fact-based reality continues to widen, which leads us to that jihad thing. . . How close to mayhem are we?          When a counter protester was killed during a 2017 Proud Boys-organized white supremist rally in Charlottesville VA, Trump referred to “very fine people on both sides.” In June 2020, after threatening to use the military to quell national protests of the George Floyd killing, Trump authorized the use of tear gas and rubber bullets to dispense a crowd of peaceful protestors outside the White House for a photo-op. During the first debate in September, pending election results, Trump called for the Proud Boys to simply "stand back and stand by”. 

    Trump’s calls to violence have not gone unheeded. U.S gun sales hit new records in 2020, with over 5 million Americans purchasing guns for the first time. The NRA, identified by a 2019 Senate Finance Committee report as a Russian asset in the 2016 election, must be pleased. Armed counter-protesters turned out in US cities for the George Floyd protests, which became fatal. Murders in US cities are up 15%, according to preliminary FBI reports.The death toll of innocent blacks by US police climbs. 

    Partisan rivalry, long bitter, is suddenly dangerous. Biden’s win in Michigan was decisive, but that didn’t stop dozens of armed protesters from gathering outside Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s home last week, shouting threats through bullhorns as she prepared for Christmas with her four year old son. Chris Krebs, the Homeland Security cybersecurity specialist fired by the White House after he declared the 2020 election the “most secure in American history”, called the Guliani press conference contesting Biden’s win the “most dangerous hour and forty-five minutes of television in American history”. In a subsequent right-wing Newsmax interview, Trump’s campaign lawyer Joseph diGenova called for Krebs to be “taken out at dawn and shot.” 

    Biden calls for a return to civil discourse, but it’s only taken four years for Putin to deftly manipulate Trump’s Republican cadre of grifters, opportunists and social climbers, capturing 74 million spellbound new loyalists. Biden’s ability to restore calm may well depend on the results of Georgia’s runoff elections. Indeed, democracy is at stake. At least that, we can agree on.

US vs China: "This Time It's Real"

Christopher Layne’s article “This Time It’s Real: The End of Unipolarity and the Pax Americana” ( International Studies Quarterly, 2012) persuasively contends that the United States is fading as the pre-eminent global power and has been or will soon be usurped by China. Layne hangs much of his argument on his predictions of an American economic decline in a post-2007 “Great Recession” climate and the 1980 “Declinists” predictions that US strategies of military dominance and economic prosperity would collide. While the “Declinist” predictions certainly did ring true during the Bush/Cheney Administration and it’s aftermath, the economic circumstances of the 2007 collapse have not played out according to Layne’s dire predictions: while the US continues to suffer an sluggish economy, it is in a far better position in terms of national debt.Layne further asserts that ascending new world powers, including the growing economies in India, Brazil, South Africa, Indonesia, Turkey, will challenge US dominance. Robert Kagan “Not Fade Away: Against the Myth of American Decline” (Brookings) negates these assertions, contending that stronger economies in US-friendly countries strengthen US international position overall. While Layne relies strongly on economic evidence, including national debt, GDP, and the cost of US military action, Kagan hinges his contentions on narrative and anecdotal evidence, relaying incidents from recent history that illustrate global impressions of America’s political pre-eminence and world respect. I take issue with the weaknesses in both arguments, frankly. Layne’s predictions are dire: Kagan affectively challenges Layne’s contention that rising economies “threaten” US dominance by aptly pointing out that the rising economies of Turkey, Brazil, et al. enjoy positive diplomatic relationships with the US. Kagan further asserts that these countries do and likely will continue to compliment US global hegemonic power: it can be assumed that they have and will continue to benefit the US economically as emerging markets. Layne cites an Arnold Wolfers 1952 statement on the constitution of a “modern power:. “Modern Powers must be national security states AND welfare states, providing military capabilities to defend AND necessary public goods.( education, healthcare, pensions).” Layne’s focus on international policy is a politics argument, while Kagan cites US military strength with a nod to the vagaries of international perception basing his contentions primarily on foreign reception of Presidential visits. Clearly, the US continues to dominate militarily in terms of percentage of national budget allocated, size of military troops, and technologic sophistication; Layne does not challenge this. But neither Kagan nor Layne adequately address the current status of “necessary public goods” as evidence of rising or declining power; in fact, neither mention this topic at all. Neither article cites current conditions of “public good” in either the US or China, with the exception of a Layne reference to China’s economic might in consideration of its PPP, and Kagan’s statement that US citizens enjoy a higher GDP. Regarding domestic agenda and domestic policy, no evidence is presented in either article on life expectancy, quality of life, access to healthcare and education, evidence of opportunities for upward mobility, etc., all of which are, I believe, important indicators of existing and futur domestic stability, economic vigor, and national strength. No one would argue that the American middle class is not suffering. In fact, a recent Princeton study definitively identified the US not as a democracy, but as an oligarchy. Yet neither Kagan nor Layne adequately address evidence of US internal “weakening” vis a vis political infighting and the inability of the legislature to respond proactively and address substantive internal economic and domestic policy issues. I believe that the 2007 Recession combined with a dysfunctional Congress has caused to greater internal stresses and overall weakening of the US economy, as evidenced by policy gridlock, spiraling costs of higher education, middle class indebtedness, the housing crisis, etc. I further believe this “plague” is a crisis of vision, and crisis of confidence in leadership certainly affects international perception. On an international stage, the budget stalemate and other recent Congressional bumblings do not speak well for America’s domestic strength. Finally, both articles fail to cite what specific threats, if any, a “rising” China presents to the US or to international perceptions of US hegemony. By relying on anecdote rather than fact, Kagan’s argument against a “Myth of American Decline” fails to cite any reasoned argument regarding current US status as compared to China. Layne acknowledges Chinese investment in US, he does not and really cannot contend that this is evidence of US “weakening”. Clearly, China has gained strength as a global manufacturing and economic power. However, as a manufacturing center, it relies on a strong US economy as a source for its exports. So I contend that in fact, Chinese investment in US markets would seem to be evidence of a recognition by both powers that Chinese and American economies are complimentary and in many ways co-dependent, and are likely to remain so. My believe is that dynamics are changing, and those dynamics will require increased international cooperation, increased dialogue, and ever increasing opportunities for win-win global policies that preserve and protect the position of both existing superpowers and rising economies. It is my opinion that the three-pronged approach that Layne cites will likely continue to predominate as part of the balance of powers moving forward. That is, 1) The “benevolence” of US hegemony. International perception of US benevolence was negatively impacted during the Bush/Cheney years but has been diligently tended to by Obama/Biden/Clinton and is likely to continue in a Clinton 2016 climate. 2) The “Balance of Threat” argument. The US has just barely extricated itself from ill-conceived aggression in the Middle East. Many argue that the Iraq Invasion solved no problems and created many more. Extremism and terrorism are not going away, and the US and other international intelligence agencies will need to collaborate to continue to counteract attacks around the world. Certainly, if the US continues in its recent practice of more prudent intervention, it’s recently restored global perceptions as a peace-maker will remain intact and continue to garnish international approval. 3) “Soft Power”. The rising economies of India, Brazil, Indonesia, Turkey, South Korea, South Africa continue to be influenced by American cultural, business and academic ideologies, as have China, Japan, the rest of Asia and even, many would contend, Russia. I think the situation is neither as dire as Layne predicts, nor as dependent on anecdote as Kagan would have readers believe. I believe the US must continue to dominate not only militarily, but also diplomatically, and that the restoration of a vibrant internal US economy is a priority. Sustained US economic vigor would seem to be contingent on policies that restore an engaged, informed and upwardly mobile middle class. In the current crisis of leadership, this seems like a distant and nebulous reality.

URBANISM at PAFA

Arlen Bendler Browning

                                        
 

Urbanism: Reimagining the Lived Environment

July 2- September 4, 2011, Fisher Brooks Gallery

Samuel M.V. Hamilton Building,

Pennsylvania Academy of the Arts

118-128 N. Broad Street, Philadelphia, PA

“Urbanism” speaks to social priorities and cultural tendencies in the postmodern age. The genius of the exhibition is in the cumulative dynamism of the four iconic artists/ teams. Brilliantly curated by Julien Robson, the themes are timely, relevant and intellectually engaging.

The work is stylistically diverse, with aesthetic range.

Arden Bendler Browning’s paintings are semi abstract, expressionist landscapes. Sweepingly gestural, they encompass a distinctly  contemporary urban experience. Immersed in the composition and color and energy of these highly emotive, visually compelling environments, the viewer is transported by the energy of the city.

Amy Walsh’s minutely detailed architectural installation incorporates deception and discovery. A pathway through coarsely veneered walls of cardboard and detritus leads to peepholes through which four minute, personalized, layered, private spaces are revealed. Each is its own painstakingly constructed, miniature model urban environment, simultaneously literal, referential and surreal.

The Dufala Brothers play with the aesthetics of urban “bling” to create compelling, repurposed metaphor. “Twenty Yard Dumpster Coffin”  is an upholstered cavity of a giant green dumpster. This luxury-limo, padded lounge is “contained” in an impenetrable, steel industrial shell.

 Ben Peterson’s elaborately imagined cartoons carefully illustrate managed chaos. Disintegrating environments are cheerfully propped with scaffold. Elements of whimsy and leisure are interjected amongst cantilevered decay. Buckled turf, reinforced to support multiple layers of tilted structure, shelters intricate subterranean cities. Peterson addresses human reaction to external forces, incorporating themes of evolution, decay, denial, and persistence.

This exhibition invites the viewer to consider scale, intimacy, and materialism in  the context of the constructed environment, addressing social context, dynamic reinvention, and the sustainability of a material obsessed culture.

Find out more: http://www.pafa.org/Museum/Exhibitions/Currently-On-View/Urbanism-Reimagining-the-Lived-Environment/989/

This article is published and can be viewed with images at

http://christinegriffininfo.blogspot.com/2011/08/urbanism-at-pafa.html