Suppose former U.S. President Donald Trump wins the election in November …
If such a hypothesis had been put forward just over three years ago, the U.S. would have laughed it off as inconceivable, reeling as it still was from the shock of the Jan. 6 Capitol attack in 2021. Back then, Trump supporters — who one could classify as far-right (although we cannot sum up the left-right distinction in American politics purely in economic terms) and who had fully bought into the conspiracy theory that Trump had won the 2020 election but fallen victim to election fraud — were apoplectic over Biden “usurping” the White House.
Conversely, the American left, which includes some Democrats and many emerging voices that have lost faith in the mainstream Democratic Party, and which considers itself the champion of democratic values and institutions, sees the Capitol attack as proof positive of Trumpian ideology having led to moral turpitude within the Republican Party. On Jan. 13, 2021, the House of Representatives voted 232-197 to impeach Trump, but with 57 members of the Senate voting to convict and 43 voting to acquit a month later, the necessary two-thirds majority was not reached, resulting in a failure to find Trump guilty. Some Republican members of Congress later distanced themselves from Trump or responded to him evasively to divert attention. At the time, it looked like it was game over for Trump.
Why Has Support for Trump Risen Rather than Fallen over the Past Few Years?
More than two years ago, polls by Reuters/Ipsos and others showed that President Joe Biden’s disapproval ratings were beginning to outstrip his approval ratings. This was not because of Republican supporters, among whom anti-Biden sentiment had always been high; rather, it was because Biden was gradually losing the support of swing voters and those who otherwise leaned Democratic.
A Gallup poll early last December showed that Biden’s approval rating was hovering near the lowest level it had reached since he took office, at about 39% — the worst performance early in an election year in recent memory of any incumbent U.S. president seeking reelection. A New York Times poll at the end of last year showed that out of the six major battleground states, five (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada and Pennsylvania) favored Trump, with Biden ahead of his rival only in Wisconsin, by 2%.
With the support of minorities, conservative white males, and other groups, Biden defeated Trump in these six states in 2020. The 2024 election, however, could see these voters switch to supporting Trump or a third-party independent candidate.
Turning again to the Republican caucuses, Trump won more than half the votes in the state of Iowa, forcing Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, once regarded as “more Trump than Trump,” to drop out of the race. A week later, Trump won the New Hampshire primary with 55% of the vote compared to his sole remaining opponent, Nikki Haley, who took 43%, making Trump the nonincumbent president with the highest number of votes in a Republican primary in that state in the last 70 years.
South Carolina, where Haley served as governor for six years, will hold its primaries on Feb. 24, and if Trump wins more votes than Haley, it will basically mean Haley’s 2024 presidential aspirations will have fizzled out.
Trump’s return to the White House is no longer a distant dream, but a real possibility: His victory in the Republican primaries is almost beyond doubt, and he is more likely to win this year’s election than Biden. This commentator puts the odds at between 55% and 45%.
To the great surprise of many a political commentator, the assorted trials, media ridicule, social media bans and post-Jan. 6 loss of supporters Trump has faced do not seem to have overly fazed him. But it is the surprise evinced by these “experts” that is perhaps the most surprising. After establishment elite Hillary Clinton’s 2016 defeat at the hands of Trump, surely the American system’s mainstream cannot still be oblivious to the bare facts of psychological truth, as reflected in the bipolar “parallel universes” being torn apart today.
In 2020, I wrote an article titled “Who’s Afraid of Trump?” Looking back at it more than three years later, it confirmed that we should not underestimate the stubbornness of human nature, nor ignore the power of anger.
Manufactured Contradictions between Ourselves and the Enemy Are at the Heart of Politics
As renowned psychologist Joshua Greene has pointed out in his book, “Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason, and the Gap Between Us and Them,” humans are always trying to establish the internal solidarity of “Us” by setting up and competing with an imaginary enemy, “Them,” and it is only in this way, through “crisis discourse,” that we can promote intragroup cooperation. Without the existential contradictions brought about by this external enemy, there would be no need for internal consistency.
In his analysis of the relationship between the regime and the people, German political theorist Carl Schmitt emphasized the “state of exception” and defined the “sovereign” as the one with the absolute power to decide on it. Philosopher Giorgio Agamben’s book “State of Exception” argues that seemingly democratic and mature regimes like those of the U.S., the U.K. and European countries govern by “states of exception” — both in their infinite expansion and amplification of the definition of terrorism, and in using the war on terror as justification for the suppression of dissent, for digital surveillance and regulation, and for the exploitation of people in body and in mind.
The author is an assistant professor at the University of Hong Kong’s Department of Philosophy and a research fellow at its Centre on Contemporary China and the World.
Editor’s note: This article concludes with Part 2 tomorrow.
經歷了司法制度審判、媒體冷嘲熱諷、社交媒體禁言、不少支持者在暴動事件後與特朗普割席……種種消極負面因素對他來說似乎並沒有產生太大影響,令一眾政治評論員大跌眼鏡。然而,這些「專家」表現出的驚訝,也許才是最令人驚奇的地方。經歷了2016年體制菁英表表者希拉莉敗在特朗普手上的一幕,難道美國體制主流依然對現今兩極「平行宇宙」撕裂所反映出的基本心理現實(the bare facts of psychological truth)視若無睹嗎?
正如著名心理學家葛林(Joshua Greene)曾經在Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason, and the Gap Between Us and Them一書中提出,人類總是嘗試透過樹立並抗衡一個假想敵「他們」(Them),從而確立「我們」(Us)的內部團結,方能以所謂的危機論述促進群體內部合作。沒有這個外在敵人帶來的存在性矛盾,便沒有內部保持一致的必要性。
在剖析政權與人民的關係時,理論家施密特(Carl Schmitt)強調「例外狀態」(State of Exception),並將「主權者」設定為具備定奪「例外狀態」的絕對權力者。哲學家阿甘本(Giorgio Agamben)的State of Exception一書指出,看似民主的發達英美歐政權,正透過「例外狀態」進行管治──通過把恐怖主義的定義無限擴充與放大,以反恐戰爭作為打壓異己、數碼監察與調控、魚肉民眾身體與思想的手段。
反之,特朗普的支持者則因強大頑強的「抵抗」論述與「受迫害」幻想,選擇生活在一個統一(雖然不符現實)的平行時空之中,繼續深信特朗普確是2020年大選的真正贏家、有關新冠病毒與疫苗的陰謀論、奧巴馬「不是在美國出生」等虛假論述,並通過法國社會心理學家勒龐(Gustave le Bon)所說的群體「磁性影響」與「催眠」,讓他們活在自信的憤怒及對現狀無限放大恐懼之中。特朗普支持者的內部團結並沒有隨着時間流逝而減弱,更在他們「領主」面對重重障礙下不斷加強。每一道針對特朗普的控罪、每一次社交平台對其審查,皆有助鞏固這些支持者的鬥志。