America’s Political Blunders Are Worsening

Published in Huanqiu
(China) on 2 July 2020
by Jiadong Zhang (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Jaime Cantwell. Edited by Gillian Palmer.
Since the current U.S. administration came to power, making political gaffes has become one of the most prominent phenomena in American politics. The act of committing political gaffes has always been a common problem in modern politics, one that other countries have also had trouble avoiding. The current American administration, however, has performed differently from the rest.

Firstly, high-level officials in the American government are the ones taking part in this behavior. In most countries, the ones committing such gaffes are a minority of lower-level officials, such as press secretaries. High-level political figures have to adhere to the rules of their job and maintain their image, thus are not able to partake in these acts themselves. Despite this, everyone from the president to the secretary of state of the Donald Trump administration have not only committed political gaffes themselves, but have even enjoyed the process.

Secondly, America’s domestic politics affect its foreign diplomacy. In most cases, political gaffes usually occur within the scope of domestic politics. In the foreign affairs sphere, because of issues concerning cultural differences and mass media, it is usually difficult to start a fight about such blunders. The current administration is different in that it has not made any fewer verbal blunders with its own allies than it has with China.

Thirdly, the administration chooses to use low-level language. In general, everything on the national level, whether it is in domestic or international politics, all serves to represent the nation. The suitability of word choice to the occasion is usually emphasized, and common street language is rarely used in political statements. The current administration, however, more often than not, emphasizes the viral potential of its language, and instead worries about its diction not being at low enough of a level.

Generally speaking, political gaffes are actually an embodiment of America’s tendency to make base and crude remarks for the following reasons:

First, the intensification of American politics and social conflict is difficult to resolve with common methods. In any country, conflicts are not what scare people; it is the inability to solve them after a long period of time. Traditionally, this has been a phenomenon that has occurred in American politics, but generally this only happens within an election period. After the election, each opposing party moves closer to the center to close the social rift that widened as a result of the election.

This is especially true of the American president. After he is elected, the president usually adjusts very quickly, shifting from a competitive state to occupying an executive position and transitioning from a role in which he represents his as a presidential candidate to representing the citizens of the U.S. as president. But this time, the presidential system failed. After being in office for more than three years, Trump has never made the transition to a presidential role; he has not only continued to fail to resolve conflicts with others, but even has a tendency to make them worse. This demonstrates the seriousness of America’s social conflicts, problems in America’s traditional political mechanisms, which are already difficult to change.

Secondly, elite political traditions have been impacted by populism, and applying the filter of “political correctness” has failed. People today often see certain radical statements that have long existed in American society. In the past, however, these voices were filtered gradually during the political process, and eventually conformed to the American standard of “political correctness.” But now, a strong wave of populism has broken through the invisible layers of political filters.

Furthermore, new forms of media have broken the monopoly of traditional media. In the era of traditional media, the language used in the media was controlled by the elite. The ideas expressed in media did not have to conform to those of the elite, but the language used in dialogue was similar to and consistent with that of the political elite. Now, social media and independently operated media accounts are having an increasingly large influence on American society, and the boundary between politically acceptable language and the daily language of the masses has been breached. The line between advanced political language and low-level colloquial language has also become increasingly obscured.

Although America’s political gaffe phenomenon has exposed problems in American politics and society, it shows to some extent that some main functions of the American political system still exist.

First, the separation of powers in American politics is still effective. The political gaffe phenomenon is mainly concentrated within the conflict between President Trump and the anti-Trump community, which is consistent on the domestic and international levels. However, the fact that social media platforms such as Twitter seek to falsify the president’s remarks demonstrates that this phenomenon has not broken through America’s political tradition, and that it can still be seen in the relationship between public opinion and political power.

Secondly, conflict in American politics still develops in low-level politics. Although the scope of American verbal political blunders is broad, it is mainly concentrated within the field of low-level politics and the livelihood of society. Almost no one touches America’s fundamental political system — as for the Constitution, separation of powers, private property rights and other core ideas, both parties leave them be. This shows that there is still political consensus in these areas. Although America’s “political correctness” cannot regulate the language preferences and usage of all political parties, it can still regulate the choice of what gets discussed. This is not only the case for politics. Even the current issues of street violence in the U.S. are automatically confined to the traditional political framework, and have been blown out of proportion.

The political gaffe phenomenon is only worsening, and the Trump administration has had a hard time focusing on issues that actually matter. These issues have deepened the divide in American society, but also prove that the diverse, conflicted and inconsistent United States is the true United States. These types of conflicts are common phenomena in U.S. political history, and although they always have a significant impact, they rarely affect the core of the American political system. The international community should be aware that the United States, which is always engaged in verbal disputes, has many characteristics such as pluralism and checks and balances. By understanding this, it will be easier to respond to American words and actions.

The author is a professor at the Center for American Studies at Fudan University.


这届美国政府上台以来,“打嘴炮”成了美国内政外交中最显著的现象之一。本来,“打嘴炮”是现代政治的一个正常现象,其他国家也都难免。但美国这届政府的“嘴炮”打得却是与众不同:

一是,政府高层亲自上阵。在多数国家的多数情况下,打嘴炮的往往是少数中下级官员,如新闻发言人等。高层政治人物则要有自己的职业规范和形象要求,是不能亲自下场干这种活儿的。但这届美国政府从总统到国务卿不仅亲自下场,还乐此不疲。

二是,从内政打到外交。在多数情况下,嘴炮现象往往发生在内政领域。在外交领域,由于文化差异和传播媒介的问题,嘴炮往往很难打起来。但这届美国政府不一样,不仅与中国,与自己的盟国也没有少打嘴炮。

三是,用词低劣。一般来说,在国家层面,无论内政还是外交,都是代表国家的,往往强调语言使用的适度和得体,很少使用市井生活的词汇。但美国这届政府的高层成员往往都强调语言的“传播效率”,用语只怕不低,不怕不高。一些令人难以置信的用语和说话方式甚至在最高级别“对话”中出现。

总体来看,嘴炮政治其实是美国高级政治低级化、低俗化的一种体现,主要是由以下原因导致的:

首先,美国政治、社会矛盾激化,难以通过正常渠道解决。在任何一个国家,矛盾与冲突都不可怕,可怕的是持续如此长的时间不能解决,不能缓和。传统上,美国政治也会有嘴炮政治现象,但主要集中体现在竞选时期。大选一结束,对立各派又会自动向中间靠拢,弥合因选举而扩大的社会裂痕。

尤其美国总统,当选以后一般会很快调整姿态,从竞选状态向执政状态过渡,从代表政党利益的总统候选人,转变成代表全体美国公民的美国总统。但这一次,这一传统机制失灵了。总统特朗普执政已经3年多,一直没有实现这种个人身份转换,他与反对者之间的激烈冲突不仅没有缓和,还有恶化趋势。这说明,美国的政治和社会矛盾确实严重,传统的政治机制和习惯,已经难以正常运转了。

其次,精英政治传统受到民粹主义冲击,“政治正确”的过滤功能失效。人们今天看到一些极端言论,在美国社会中都是长期存在的。但在过去,这些声音在政治运行过程中会被逐级过滤,越往上走,就会越符合美国“政治正确”的要求。但现在,强大的民粹主义浪潮冲破了这一层层隐形政治过滤网。

再者,就是新媒体打破了传统媒体对话语偏好的垄断。在传统媒体主导的时代,媒体语言的使用是被精英垄断的。这些媒体精英的政治观点与政治精英未必一致,但对话语选择的偏好与政治精英类似,甚至一致。现在,社交媒体和自媒体等对美国舆论的影响越来越大,政治规范性话语与民众生活话语之间的界限被打破。高级政治语言与低级生活语言之间的区分也被模糊了。

美国的嘴炮政治现象,虽然暴露了美国政治、社会生活中的很多问题,但某种程度上也说明美国政治的一些基本功能仍然存在。

其一,美国政治的分权制衡机制仍然有效。美国的嘴炮政治现象集中体现在特朗普总统与反特朗普群体之间的语言冲突,在国内和国际层面都差不多。但从推特等社交媒体也寻求对总统言论进行“证伪”,说明嘴炮政治现象没有突破美国的政治传统,仍体现为舆论对权力的监督关系。

其二,美国政治矛盾仍然是在低级政治范围内展开。美国嘴炮政治的议题范围虽然宽泛,但主要集中在低级政治领域和民生领域,几乎没有人去触及美国的基本政治制度问题。对美国的宪法、三权分立的政体以及私有财产权等核心部分,各方都不去触及。这说明美国围绕这些领域的政治共识仍然存在。美国的“政治正确”虽然规范不了各方的语言偏好和方式选择,但仍可以规范议题的选择。不仅嘴炮政治如此,就连现在美国闹势正烈的街头暴力事件,也仍然被自动局限在传统政治框架之内,仍然是“茶壶里的风暴”。

因此,嘴炮政治现象呈现愈演愈烈之势,美国行政当局长期难以把主要精力放在该干的事情上,这些问题确实体现出美国社会的深刻矛盾,但也表明一个多元、相互冲突、不集中的美国才是真正的美国。这种层面的冲突与矛盾是美国政治历史上经常出现的现象,每次都会有重大影响,但也很少触动美国政治体制的核心。国际社会应该认识到,热衷打口水仗的美国,内部还有多元、制衡等多重因素和特征,把握了这一点或能更好地应对美方言行。(作者是复旦大学美国研究中心教授)
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Germany: The Tariffs Have Side Effects — For the US Too*

Mexico: The Network of Intellectuals and Artists in Defense of Venezuela and President Nicholás Maduro

Australia: Australia Boosts Corporate Law Enforcement as America Goes Soft

Israel: From the Cities of America to John Bolton: Trump’s Vendetta Campaign against Opponents Reaches New Heights

Topics

Austria: The EU Must Recognize That a Tariff Deal with Trump Is Hardly Worth Anything

Mexico: The Network of Intellectuals and Artists in Defense of Venezuela and President Nicholás Maduro

Hong Kong: Cordial Cross-Strait Relations Will Spare Taiwan Trump’s Demands, Says Paul Kuoboug Chang

Germany: The Tariffs Have Side Effects — For the US Too*

Ireland: We Must Stand Up to Trump on Climate. The Alternative Is Too Bleak To Contemplate

Canada: Carney Takes Us Backward with Americans on Trade

Thailand: Appeasing China Won’t Help Counter Trump

Related Articles

Germany: The Tariffs Have Side Effects — For the US Too*

Ireland: We Must Stand Up to Trump on Climate. The Alternative Is Too Bleak To Contemplate

Canada: Carney Takes Us Backward with Americans on Trade

Thailand: Appeasing China Won’t Help Counter Trump