The Daily Fix: Trump won, Clinton lost. Liberals across the world must ask themselves why

The Big Story: Illiberal dream

In the United States of America, a “stunning upset”. Republican candidate Donald Trump will become president after beating Democrat Hillary Clinton. Trump turned the swing states red, he even took fairly secure Democrat strongholds such as Pennsylvania and Michigan. He ran a campaign powered by xenophobia, racism and misogyny and won. With Trump’s victory and Clinton’s defeat, many are writing epitaphs to liberalism. While these may be premature, it is time for liberals everywhere, including in India, to question why the consensus on “values that we all hold dear” is patently fading.

The American elections have drawn comparisons with Europe, where voting populations are making similar choices – Britain with Brexit, the rising vote share of anti-immigrant parties in Germany, France’s growing warmth for the Far Right before the elections next year. In India, the same aggressive nationalism and fear of outsiders is gaining political currency across states. A number of historic and economic factors have converged in these choices but it is not enough to blame forces outside the liberal project. Why is it that a worldview that is meant to have room for all communities and all opinions has ended up making such a large number feel excluded? Post-poll diagnosis has put this down to the disaffection of the white, working-class male and the myopia of the “liberal elite”. By all accounts, Trump’s main votebank was the white, working-class male who does not live in the city and did not go to college. But explaining this through class alone is lazy, as if educated elites are hardwired to love plurality and justice, and the working classes cannot. In the past, some of the most radical, inclusive politics have emerged from working class angst.

Is there a creeping conservatism in the liberal consensus? An article written in the wake of the 2012 presidential elections predicts why liberalism cannot last. Among other factors, it points to the Barak Obama campaign, which “ must paint the political alternative, conservatism, as the faction of social injustice”. This conviction of being on the side of the angels, this inability to admit the argument of an opponent as a valid one, may have been the undoing of the liberals.

The Big Scroll: Scroll.in on the day’s big story

Girish Shanane says Trump’s victory may be traced to the anger of the white workig and middle classes.

Davide Dapice muses, in an article that first appeared in YaleGlobal Online, on how Trump now faces a bitterly divided United States.

Shoaib Daniyal notes that India will not be much affected by a Trump victory.

Rohan Venkataramkrishnan imagines how a Trump victory would have been described if America had been a “third world country”.

Political pickings

1. in demonetisation news, the revenue secretary announces that deposits above Rs 2.5 lakh within a period of 50 days will attract tax and a 200% penalty if there is found to be an income mismatch.

2. Anti-corruption crusader Anna Hazare comes out of the cold to say demonetisation is a revolutionary step towards fighting corruption.

3. The vice-chancellor of Jammu University says arresting Hizbul Mujahideen commander Burhan Wani would have been better since his death caused a “huge loss of our children”.

4. In Uttar Pradesh, the Samajwadi Party, the Janata Dal (United) and the Rashtriya Lok Dal talk alliances.

Punditry

1. In the Indian Express, Pratap Bhanu Mehta on how Trump’s victory shines a light on the dread that lies in dark spaces.

2. In the Hindu, Nirupama Rao on how Trump tapped into the mother lode of grievances among white American, particularly the blue-collar rural population that did not go to college.

3. In the Telegraph, KP Nayar on the anger that propelled Trump to power and how it affects India.

Giggles

Don’t miss...

Ajaz Ashraf on how small traders in Uttar Pradesh are reeling from the scrapping of high-value notes and how it will affect state parties ahead of the polls:

Unlike the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Congress, which are the beneficiaries of corporate munificence, the vibrancy of the Bahujan Samaj Party’s campaign, as is true of most state-based political outfits, depends on the money collected through donations from cadres and sympathisers, the resources of individual candidates, and funds gathered from local businessmen.

Before issuing an election ticket to a candidate, the Bahujan Samaj Party takes into account whether the potential candidate commands the financial resources to contribute to the party’s kitty, and also bankroll his or her own campaign. Each candidate gathers these funds in stacks of high-denomination notes months before the election. This stash is now worthless piles of paper.

Similarly, a chunk of donations from party cadres is made in cash, not least because it is often given spontaneously. A party such as the Bahujan Samaj Party will find it difficult to exchange these donations for the new currency notes that will be available from November 10.