America’s Unpredictable Imbalance

A shrinking middle class and excessive fear of terrorism have combined to destabilize the American political system, opening avenues for an authoritarian demagogue like Donald Trump and but also for a democratic socialist like Bernie Sanders, writes Lawrence Davidson.

By Lawrence Davidson

Converging avenues of fear are eroding the political and social status quo in the democratic West. Healthy democracies strive to maintain an equitable balance of forces within their political, economic and social spheres. Balance is a salve that induces comfort and confidence. Fear and uncertainty, on the other hand, are irritants that can quickly throw things out of balance. It seems that, at present, fear has the upper hand.

The scenarios that are increasing popular fears reflect issues of economics and public safety. The economic policies that have prevailed in the West since the 2008 financial crisis have not been corrective and have allowed for an ever deepening divide between the wealthiest strata of society and everyone else.

Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who is seeking the Democratic presidential nomination.

Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who is seeking the Democratic presidential nomination.

In the case of the United States, a Pew Research Center study announced on Dec. 9 that the “middle class” has shrunk to the point that it no longer represents a majority of the American people. “After more than four decades of serving as the nation’s economic majority, the American middle class is now matched in number by those in the economic tiers above and below it,” the Pew study said, adding that this trend “could signal a tipping point” in which the middle class will shrink even more.

From 1971 to 2015, the study said, “the nation’s aggregate household income has substantially shifted from middle-income to upper-income households, driven by the growing size of the upper-income tier and more rapid gains in income at the top. Fully 49% of U.S. aggregate income went to upper-income households in 2014, up from 29% in 1970. The share accruing to middle-income households was 43% in 2014, down substantially from 62% in 1970.

“And middle-income Americans have fallen further behind financially in the new century. In 2014, the median income of these households was 4% less than in 2000. Moreover, because of the housing market crisis and the Great Recession of 2007-09, their median wealth (assets minus debts) fell by 28% from 2001 to 2013.”

The exalted “American Dream” is centered around a belief that all citizens can attain middle class or better economic status. The Pew report calls that possibility into question for most Americans and, as this slowly dawns on the public, the resulting economic fear and anxiety becomes a politically and socially destabilizing factor.

A similar scenario can be found in Europe’s Euro Zone nations. Another Pew Research Center report on a poll conducted in this region during summer 2015, and reported by the New York Times on Dec. 11, found “extraordinary gloom about the state of their economies.”

Simultaneously, a second avenue of fear and anxiety has been created by an ongoing series of terrorist attacks, the latest in Paris, France, and San Bernardino, California. These attacks were carried out by Islamic extremists and the media on both side of the Atlantic have exaggerated the threat they represent. This, in turn, has given rise to a growing Islamophobia.

Indeed, we have gotten to the point where, in the mind of the public, the term “terrorism,” now means the violent actions of extremist Muslims. Yet this is a dangerously restrictive definition. For instance, in the United States, similar and much more frequent violence carried on by non-Muslims is often not labeled terrorism.

The truth is that throughout the West the violence carried on by a small number of fanatics identified with the Middle East has become an obsession with a growing number of citizens. According to the Times article, 19 percent of adult Americans define “Islamic terrorism” as the “top issue facing the country.” Their number is sure to grow. Muslims have become the scapegoats of our age.

The Role Model Demagogue 

These two converging fears, over failing economic security and threatened public safety, have created the most unstable socio-political environment since the interwar years of the Twentieth Century. Historically, it is at such times that the political parties of the “center” – the more moderate parties – begin to appear weak and the capacity of their leaders to control and improve conditions becomes suspect.

It is under these conditions that more and more people are attracted to the campaigning of demagogues, warmongers, and authoritarian opportunists. Policy proposals which, in more settled times would never be taken seriously, now begin to appear reasonable to increasing numbers of citizens. And, this is exactly the trend we now see in both the U.S. and Europe.

The role model “leader” here seems to be the American presidential candidate, Donald Trump. Trump is a billionaire real estate tycoon and “reality show” star. For Trump, who has no political experience, all problems have simple and direct answers which are to be presented to the public, not so much as policy suggestions, as orders.

And, as befits a businessman with an authoritarian personality, Trump has displayed real talent for this sort of behavior. What is Trump’s answer to the exaggerated problem of Islamic terrorism? Declaring that we are at war, Trump promises to defeat ISIS “big league” – a non-answer which allows for anything from the invasion of Syria to the use of nuclear weapons.

Trump would ban Muslims from coming into the country (while at the same time deporting millions of immigrants from South and Central America), and set up internment camps for those already here. He would also kill the families of identified Muslim terrorists.

That such policies, if actually implemented, would mire the nation in continuous war in the Middle East, spark a conflict with Russia, and leave constitutional law and protections in shreds, seems not to matter at all to Donald Trump. And, his supporters don’t seem to mind such consequences either. According to the Times article, Trump currently has the support of “40% of Republican primary voters without a college degree and 26% of those who have a degree.”

When it comes to alleviating economic anxieties, Trump simply relies on the fact that he is a rich businessman to suggest that he can deal with such problems. This seems to suffice even though the problems come from the unregulated greed of big business people just like Trump. In times of trouble, image “trumps” reality (pun intended).

Europe, too, has its Trump equivalents ranging from France’s Marine Le Pen to Viktor Orban in Hungary. There is the Freedom Party in Austria and the Golden Dawn in Greece. And this is just a short list. All of these people and parties are presenting the kind of quick and direct actions that are much more dangerous and liable to get out of control, running roughshod over laws and constitutions, than the problems they purport to solve.

Cycles of Fear

Fears and anxieties are amorphous emotions which seem to come upon societies in an historically cyclical fashion. In the realm of economics this attests to the allure of power and riches that both individuals and groups, in the form of special interests and other factions, seem unable to resist. Without effective regulation capitalism is unstable and there is always exploitation leading to repeated recessions or worse.

Likewise, in a world of competing powers and ideologies insecurity seems forever just around the corner. This too comes in historical cycles. And, if such insecurity becomes deep enough and widespread enough, it can threaten finely balanced democratic political systems as citizens forget about constitutional rights, which support peace and stability at home, and go looking for “strong leaders.”

In a country such as the United States, it is the political right that always benefits in such situations. Thus, Republican right-wing “populism” can support an array of warmongering, xenophobic and simple-minded presidential candidates among whom Donald Trump is just the tip of the iceberg.

The same fears and anxieties, mostly of the economic category, have kept afloat only one candidate who can be described as being on the political left, the relatively benign Bernie Sanders. Sen. Sanders’s ability to contest the Democratic presidential nomination is surprising in a country that has vilified the political left for much of its history. However, his success comes out the same present quest for new leaders and new answers.

Though I speak of historical cycles of fear and anxiety I don’t mean to imply that they are inevitable. In principle, human beings can learn from history and improve their lot. Think of history, both personal and societal, as an undertow capable of driving one into potentially dangerous channels. Within these channels lie the demagogues and militarists who would drown us all. We know this is true because it has repeatedly happened before – the product of cycles of converging fears left unchecked.

Lawrence Davidson is a history professor at West Chester University in Pennsylvania. He is the author of Foreign Policy Inc.: Privatizing America’s National Interest; America’s Palestine: Popular and Official Perceptions from Balfour to Israeli Statehood; and Islamic Fundamentalism.

8 comments for “America’s Unpredictable Imbalance

  1. Peter Loeb
    December 22, 2015 at 08:18


    Like some of the commenters above, I usually agree with
    Lawrence Davidson. When he focuses on US electoral
    politics, he is often at his weakest,

    Thus the title above, “Musicians and Politics”. Very often
    Musicians are right on target in political matters.
    Often they err grievously. Just as often, one is left
    with the wish that they would return to music at which
    they are incontrovertibly sublime.

    Personally, I find no candidate of either party
    who expresses my passions, Even when
    the expressions are well said, I personally
    have the doubts of an old cynic. I recall
    only too well that the current President
    conducted a campaign in 2008 with
    the most eloquent promises. The argument
    can be made that it could indeed have
    been worse. What we have gotten was
    not good at all. It was political showtime
    in public. One can sing “Amazing
    Grace” at the funeral of murdered
    blacks and defer action against the
    manufacture of weapons to..when?
    Or the obligation of total commitment
    to the Israeli oppressor for a price
    (in dollars).The Federal budget for the military
    has soared. While “fighting
    for the “middle class”, the divide has become
    wider as most of us in what used to be almost
    “middle” hold on for dear life. Have you
    gone without three meals a day because there
    was no money? Have you heard the daily groans
    of an empty stomach which we try to
    associate with those we feel are
    “inferior” to our “superior” values? This writer
    has heard those groans.. You lose a lot of weight. Fast!

    I recommend Robert Parry’s description of
    Donald Trump’s discussion with George
    Stephanopoulis, Consortiumnews, 22 December.

    To commenters: A vote for Jill Stein is a
    protest vote. I may choose to vote for no
    candidate currently running for President
    of the US. I don’t count that as “apathy”.at all.
    (Am I obliged to vote for a warmonger
    like H. Clinton and if so why?)

    I shall feel not the slightest inhibition in
    criticizing whoever the next White House occupant
    may be.

    —-Peter Loeb, Boston, MA, USA

  2. eric f.
    December 19, 2015 at 03:54

    interesting story, but it seems off the mark in several ways.
    fear of terrorism has been a selling point for politics since 9/11, but it’s presented here as though it’s new. it’s what got bush re-elected after 9/11, and convinced congress to vote against constitutional liberties and for a surveillance state.
    and if there is greater fear now, there is also greater islamic terrorism. isis didn’t exist up until a few years ago, so now the world has to deal with al qeada and isis, experts at luring in recruits to do its dirty work. so it might be true that the risk of islamic terrorism is small here in the u.,s. , it’s also true that the risk is growing.
    there are plenty of u.s. terrorists, school shooters, anti-abortion zealots and the ted kasinskys of the world. the vast majority of muslims are not terrorists.
    but what percentage of suicide bombers are muslim? pretty much 100 percent. that fact naturally breeds fear.
    politically, voters have few choices,
    the story mentions demagogues and war mongers in the same sentence, as though the demagogues and war mongers are the same people.
    not true.
    trump is the demagogue running for president, but he is complimenting putin, and talking about how trillions spent on middle eastern wars would have better spent at home, a point made dozens of times in stories on this site.
    the warmongers are mostly everyone else in the running, minus perhaps bernie sanders, whose foreign policy is still a bit of a mystery.
    chris christie wants to shoot down russian jets and start world war 3, while hillary intimated months ago shes a chicken hawk in the dick cheney mode.
    fear didn’t destroy the middle class,.the forces of the corporate plutocracy did.

  3. Abe
    December 19, 2015 at 03:27

    Bernie Sanders’ Troubling History of Supporting US Military Violence Abroad
    By Michael Arria

    In “Why Russia is Serious About Fighting Terrorism and the US Isn’t”, Maram Susli wrote:

    “The US sees the Syrian state as one of the last spheres of Russian influence beyond the borders of the former Soviet Union and a threat to the US’s Israeli ally in the region. The US has a history of using terrorism to topple governments friendly to Russia. Al Qaeda itself was borne of the US objective to topple the Soviet friendly government of Afghanistan. The dismemberment of Russian-friendly Serbia and the creation of Kosovo was done via the same means.

    “More recently ISIS was a direct result of the US’s war on Iraq and it was only established in Libya and Syria due to overt US-backed regime change efforts in those countries.”

    Forget the paltry cosmetic votes, those sops for the progressively distracted. In those “show me the money” moments when it really counts, “the Bern” consistently backs the interests of Empire. And yes, that means Israel.

  4. bobzz
    December 18, 2015 at 19:19

    Per Dr. Davidson: “only one candidate who can be described as being on the political left, the relatively benign Bernie Sanders.”

    I usually agree with nearly everything Dr. Davidson writes, but here I also go along with F. G. Sanford. Jill Stein is the only one on the political left who is right on everything I have heard or read about her positions. Propaganda, Inc., (the main stream media) has totally, i.e., effectively, shut her out of the public view. My greatest regret is that the religious (Christian) right, 45% of the Republican vote, has no to little faith in God—hence part of the fear and anxiety that feeds the warmongers.

  5. J S Serilla
    December 18, 2015 at 19:03

    If we the people are in quest of new leadership, the question becomes what has our leadership let us down on?
    When fear arises, what is its source? Maybe I misunderstood, but to me this article suggests that anxiety and fear will automatically lead us down the wrong road. Is it not true that when problems arise our anxiety rises as well? Anxiety is a warning system that something is wrong.
    Yes, fear and anxiety can be used and manipulated. This I believe is what Trump is doing. However, when people see their income drop, become part of a middle class that has dropped to new lows, when poverty rises, and jobs move overseas, as this very article presents, yes, it is reasonable to have fear and anxiety when our elected officials actively act against their constituent’s interests.
    Making the comparison between Sanders and Trump as fear users I do not believe is a fair one. To point to an imaginary fire is different than pointing to a real one. Some fears and anxieties are valid. The mainstream Democrats ignore their base’s angst; whereas, the Republicans fan the flames. To not accept anxiety as part of human reaction to something, this article suggests that mainstream politics is somehow on the right path, that everyone else is just unnerved for no reason, and no new direction is needed.

  6. F. G. Sanford
    December 18, 2015 at 15:52

    If you think Sanders is a “democratic socialist”, you probably also believe Lyndon Johnson was a “New Deal Democrat”. The trade-off will be exactly the same: minuscule token social improvements on an agenda favoring continued “permanent war economy”. “Bernie the Bomber”, as he was affectionately known by his more progressive constituents, never met a military spending bill he didn’t like. His platform will employ the baited hook of social reform to maintain the progression of ongoing American military hegemony tainted by corrupt alliances that have characterized both parties for the last seventy years.

    • December 18, 2015 at 18:30

      “thumbs-up” for this comment.

    • John Kilcher
      December 19, 2015 at 06:26

      Regardless of who gets elected, once he/she takes the oath the corporations give the new president the play book…. simple as that.

Comments are closed.