—
A core element of the brand image that the United States has built for itself is that it is supposedly the one nation that people from everywhere will sell their possessions and endure long queues and cross perilous rivers and thoroughly remake their lives to move to. While conveniently neglecting to let its Native population have any say on the matter, the United States has sold the world a simple proposition: that it is the place you would want to live in too, if only you could afford it.
I will admit that it is a country with points in its favor. Having the right to criticize your government without being punished is a luxury that humankind only very recently gained, and one that is easy to take for granted once made part of ordinary life. The never-ending explosion of creativity in books and television and cinema make keeping up impossible. Just the fact that breaking with tradition and seeking your way is socially acceptable makes all the difference. Being the nation of NASA and IBM and Google and Pixar and Netflix and SpaceX give it an aura of je ne sais quoi, a sense that there’s something in the air or in the drinking water that—if you are willing to believe the pitch—makes greatness grow on trees.
◊♦◊
That greatness does not at all resemble the one alluded to in Donald Trump’s campaign slogan. His temperament is not inclined to celebrating openness or diversity; his vision of the country is drastically less colorful than the one you learn from civics textbooks. The problem is that reading Trump is hard: his speeches are not terribly clear as to the nature of the greatness he professes to believe in; at the least, debate moderators ought to have asked him exactly when he supposes the greatness was lost.
As a rule of thumb, I like to call the United States’ bluff of defining itself as a nation of immigrants by mentally following the direction each of its politicians points to and asking one question of that image: does it describe a country where people would want to move? That needs to be the central question for a country that is no longer able to unlearn the compulsive need to position itself as the greatest, prettiest, friendliest, shiniest, richest, loudest, coolest, strongest, smartest, trendiest, proudest, happiest collection of people to ever live. Take a serious look at what you have to offer, United States, and tell me whether it is what the world would rather have.
◊♦◊
Take the vision offered by the leaders of your Republican Party, now hostages to Trump’s whim and forced to assent to whatever falls from his mouth or lose their voters’ favor. Can you consider the prospect of a national culture that understands the world in terms of zero-sum games? Where reasoned compromise makes you a weakling? Where you risk losing the respect of onlookers if you once fail to hit back harder? Where you have to keep making ever bigger boasts to maintain whatever you think is your reputation, and call that greatness?
The country promised by Trump, and his followers is not one where the rest of the world would want to live, and that should make them worry. The United States suffers heavily if it allows itself to be defined as a particular ethnic origin or language or political philosophy or religion. The United States is supposed to be above accidents of birth. More than a nation, the United States is a promise. That no matter what language you speak, or how you pray. What you look like, or whom you love. How old you are, where you come from, or why you chose to relocate, it should not suck to be you. That is the message at the center of what used to be called the American Dream. Now appended by Trump’s victory with an asterisk that points us to a warning in small print that says limitations and restrictions apply.
The obvious question that arises is. If the country that Trump is about to create will not be appealing to potential newcomers, does that force its current inhabitants to consider a similar choice? The big challenge facing any third-world leader is to some day give the people a place nice enough that they will no longer want to leave. The degradation of civil liberties, economic advantages and international reputation that is sure to come under a Trump presidency necessarily puts the same problem before his citizens. Why bother keeping your membership in a club that is looking less fashionable by the minute and will soon adopt as its official policy to discourage outsiders from joining?
◊♦◊
This obsession with keeping immigration in check can backfire badly for the Trump faction: the surest way to keep people from wanting to leave their countries for yours is to turn yours into the lesser option. The tired threat to move to Canada will stop being a joke now that all branches of government have fallen in Republican hands. Now unimpeded to enact their full agenda. Like banning gay marriage, limiting reproductive rights, restricting the movements of non-Christians, adding exceptions to freedom of speech, ignoring global warming, weakening trade unions, reducing healthcare coverage, bulletproofing the glass ceiling, reversing decades of civil rights gains, worsening every axis of inequality. In a nutshell, removing the entire reason why people want to live in the United States in the first place.
If Trump gets his way, he need not bother with a wall.
—
Photo: Getty Images
The more I see of this election, the more I realize how brilliant the founders were. To be thinking literally now, 216. Years into the future is absolutely amazing. How did they do this? . Of course they were educated. But did they also know so much of human nature too? So is our educational system now lacking.? Based on results I think it is.
The power of the new president of the US is not unlimited and I consider this article by far over the top, totally exaggerated. Legal immigrants do not need to climb over a wall or over fences, they use legal entry points and present their valid travel documents on request. I can hardly imagine how a new president could restrict the movements of non-Christians as long as they fully respect US-laws while within US-territory. For sure a new president, even a winner by a narrow margin as in case of Trump, does not justify riots if you do not agree… Read more »
Legal immigrants arrive then stay beyond their visa. This is the primary source of illegal immigration. Immigration being a federal mandate we would need a very well funded federal system to manage the comings and goings. Alas the GOP prefers to under-fund. Perhaps Donny boy will be able to finally whip them into shape and offer a reform (there have been a handful proposed but never passed over the years). The solution most countries use is a national ID card which includes employment information. In the US the states-rights folks really hate the idea of federal ID card. It’s a… Read more »
[Greg Rowe-Pasos: RIOTS are a form of free speech …]
This is a joke, right? Let me say the behavior of people who are unwilling to accept the result of the election and are now out in the streets beating up other citizens, setting fires, smashing cars and destroy property which does not belong to them is totally unacceptable. Police should arrest them and charge them with assault, arson and vandalism.
No, man. We’re a nation of legal immigrants. Simply stated. Everything that has been done, and supported by an apathetic administration, is against the very values we stand and hold a light to. But that day of a bastardization of that principle, no actually the outright theft of that has come to a hopeful end. Obama was raised as a socialist. An anti colonialist. He is who he is. He lied to us to get him there. I have no qualms about him as a person. But we were fooled, yet it fed into a philosophy that has been fermenting… Read more »
As far as I know the executive branch answers to the legislative branch. The GOP has had a majority in both chambers of the legislative branch for six years now. The last congress was the least productive since the 1930’s.
Remind me again who is apathetic?
Actually you’re wrong. Each branch provided a check and balance on each other. This was the beauty of what they did. They had their roles and until recently fulfilled them. But then popular politics entered. And a Supreme Court abdicated because of who appointed them. A Congress abdicated because of voters. An executive grabbed what he could, and no one challenged him. Joe Wilson was the last line of defense.
Actually. Now that I think of it, Stephen Breyer started this. SCOTUS. appointed by Regan, but then really was a leftist. Maybe he voted his conscience. But he created a point of contention that began the divide of the culture. You realized that you couldn’t count on anything. He began chaos.
Your opinion, and I can appreciate that, but as far as I’m concerned someone just turned the lights on to what is happening in this country with the far left progressive, socialist agenda.
YUP. Their agenda is coming to light for ALL to see and they’re nervous as heck about it.
That’s the important point, Tom. They know this gravy train just pulled into the station. The tracks ended.
Actually, not someone, inferring Trump, but the American people did, DJ. They flipped that switch. We saw it, but had no real voice. Quashed for being racist and haters, fearful of losing our jobs for it, since the corporations became even more weasely than they already were. Look at grubclub, or whatever. Their exec said yesterday that if you even hold these values he believes trump was elected on you might as well turn in your resignation. So the coin just got flipped. The conservative corporations were already there, and will stay there because they’re weasels.