Did Trump’s Trial Actually End?

President Donald Trump’s trial may be finished from a legal and constitutional perspective, but from the political side, it is far from over. Anyone who has followed or follows the facts of the U.S. domestic scene in the years since Trump took office will know that the domestic socio-political schism in America is among the largest schisms that this country has ever witnessed.

As one recalls, from the moment that the current president took office, there were clashes in American streets between Trump’s supporters and his opponents. These incidents were remarkable and uncommon phenomena. But in our view, there wasn’t much data available to anyone following domestic U.S. events from the outside. Much of this has been revealed during the last three years while Trump has been in office.

Among the main points of information that have become clear are the way that Trump has managed U.S. foreign policy, his position on domestic and global economic affairs, his populist discourse and his negative views on immigration and minorities. This marks a shift from the stated principles of U.S. policy and toward more pragmatic and utilitarian policies that are presented directly and without any hesitation, and far from the common, if not official considerations of U.S. policy, whether the country has been run by Republicans or Democrats.

This does not mean that the stated ideals of U.S. foreign policy, such as defense of freedom, democracy, and humanitarian principles, were actually practiced before Trump took office. It is well known that whether the U.S. was governed by Democrats or Republicans, it has been U.S. policy to basically care for its own interests. Many of those interests bear the stamp of aggression based on strength. But there was always an attempt to offset this, in a relative way at least, with some stated ideal principles. All that Trump has done is be more clear and frank, running more strongly against these principles, and directing greater focus on benefits and interests in his speeches.

What does it mean that on the one hand, a portion of the American people is responding to a more populist and more utilitarian discourse and is less concerned with humanitarian principles?

This is a large and important transformation, and may mark a turning point in U.S. history. It is not possible to separate this transformation from the current global developments that the United States is facing, such as economic competition from countries like China, whose economy rivals that of the U.S., or military and political challenges from countries like Russia.

That a populist and utilitarian discourse is acceptable to a not insignificant segment of American society indicates at its root that global U.S. hegemony today is less assured than it was in previous decades. This is what drives the U.S. to a policy of confrontation and to belittling the importance of world peace, the challenges of climate change that threaten the world, or to the humanitarian and democratic values which have long been pillars of its global discourse.

But on the other hand, matters are not so simple. This transformation has faced, and is facing, a strong reaction from dissenters who make up another large segment of American society which is consistently led by Democrats politically, but whose social and moral reality is much larger. Today the foundations of the American nation, such as freedom, democracy and humanitarianism, are facing unprecedented challenges. However, these foundations have already fallen away over the past decades. They have been neglected in actual U.S. policy through military interventions in all corners of the world and U.S. support for dictators purely to preserve its own interests. What is new today is a qualitative transformation of these foundations in such a way as to not only ignore the foundations themselves but to ignore even the formulas and relative formal considerations which were previously taken into account.

Therefore, what will happen this year—particularly in the coming U.S. election, which will be in reality, a critical event—is a popular “sequel” to Trump’s trial. This “sequel” will not be a legal or constitutional trial but rather a social and moral one. Its implications will have great consequences for both American society domestically and for U.S. foreign policy, which will affect most of the world in varying degrees.