American

democracys gravest trial

The system is teetering whatever the outcome of the

US election Edward Luce
Fuente: Financial Times NOVEMBER 6, 2016
URL: https://www.ft.com/content/93d2f040-a29c11e6-82c3-4351ce86813f

Fair enough, there was the US civil war. Amid all the
carnage the Yankees still went ahead with the 1862 and
1864 elections on schedule. Other than then, there is little
in US history to compare with what is at stake on Tuesday.
Donald Trump, one of the possible next presidents,
forecasts that the vote will be rigged. A Trump victory
could still happen, which makes it so odd that he plays the
sore loser before actually losing. Hillary Clinton, the other
candidate, believes the US system is working fine except
for the threat posed by Mr Trump. In its way, Mrs
Clintons outlook is almost as deluded as her opponents.
Americas system of democracy is teetering, whether or

not Mr Trump wins on Tuesday.

Imagine two kinds of threat: one where a bear breaks into
your cabin, the other where termites eat it from within. Mr
Trump is the bear. The upside to a Trump victory is that he
would be unable to claim the election was stolen. Far from
it. The 2016 vote count would be the cleanest in world
history. America would be great again! That aside, it would
be a disaster.
Many serenely predict US democracy would emerge intact
from a Trump presidency. Their reassurance comes in two
parts. The first is that Mr Trump would surround himself
with experienced advisers who would curb his worst
instincts. The second is that even if Mr Trumps team were
crackpots, the US constitution would correct any overreach.
They are too complacent. Most of those advising Mr
Trump are as unsettling as he is. First among these is Mr
Trump. My primary foreign policy adviser is myself and I
have a good instinct for this stuff, he says. Bear in mind
he has questioned the point of nuclear weapons unless
they are used. He has also recommended Chinas
neighbours acquire their own. The decision to play the
nuclear card is the presidents alone. The Pentagon can
only advise. Virtually every Republican with national
security experience signed a letter in August warning that
Mr Trump would be the most reckless president in
history.
Then there is his political team. We need go no further
than Stephen Bannon, his campaign chief, who is former
head of the hard right website, Breitbart News. Anyone
who cherishes Americas first amendment rights should be

very afraid. Mr Bannon would be in line to become Mr

Trumps White Houses ideological director.
Second, Americas system of checks and balances relies on
those upholding it. Leaving aside his character, Mr Trump
has no respect for constitutional boundaries. The last
president to breach their limits was Richard Nixon. He
was forced from office in 1974 for covering up his
administrations complicity in the burglary of the offices of
the Democratic National Committee. The system worked,
but it took two years.
Nixon had an expansive view of the presidents powers.
When the president does it, that means it is not illegal,
he said. That is also Mr Trumps view.
But Nixons secret lawbreaking pales against what Mr
Trump openly vows to do. He has publicly urged Russia to
burgle Democratic databases. He has also threatened to
jail Mrs Clinton, reinstate torture, cancel treaties and start
a global trade war. Some of this is illegal. Some of it is
legal.
Much of what Mr Trump promises lies in between. Either
way, it could take the US courts months or years to rule on
his actions. By then much of the damage would be done.
How could a Clinton victory possibly compare? If she won
by a landslide and the Democrats regained control of
Congress all bets would be off. But that is not going to
happen. No poll has put her close to 50 per cent since the
election began. The dangers of a Clinton presidency are no
less troubling for their subtlety.
Before Mrs Clinton is elected, Republicans are vowing to
block whatever she tries. John McCain, her closest
Republican friend, says he will oppose any Supreme Court

nominee she submits. Others have threatened

impeachment hearings.
The Republican party is hopelessly divided. It spans proglobalisation
multiculturalists and nativist protectionists. In most other
democracies, it would have split into different parties. The
one glue keeping Republicans together is abhorrence of
Mrs Clinton.
This is without mentioning Mr Trumps threat to cry foul if
he loses . Either way, Republicans aim to make a desert of
Mrs Clintons presidency and call it democracy. They have
the means to do so. Four more years of gridlock would
only deepen Americas popular frustration.
The good thing about a bear is that you can see it coming.
Termites are invisible. It is hard to pinpoint when they
began to eat away at the foundations. When and why did
Americans lose faith in their system? There is no
consensus on this either. Some point to rising inequality.
Others blame the growth of government. It does not mean
Americans cannot regain the trust they have lost.
But for the time being the US is becoming steadily harder
to govern. As Abraham Lincoln said, a house divided
cannot stand. Though he faced far deadlier challenges,
Lincolns observation is as true today as when he said it.
The basis of US democracy is co-operation. Whatever
happens after Tuesday is unlikely to fit that description.
edward.luce@ft.com

Letter in response to this article

Christ is the source of the house divided quote / From

Lorenz Jorgensen