An unprecedented US presidential debate took place last week between incumbent Joseph Biden and former president Donald Trump.
Through this 70-year-old ritual, among other ways, the US presents itself to the world as the paragon of democracy, transparency and fair competition. It is not just a debate between two individuals who enjoy a consensus of support among the main political groupings. It is also a retrospective of the march of American history from its founding fathers in the revolution through the Civil War. That led to three constitutional amendments, followed by the Jim Crow laws that effectively violated them before the revolutionary 1960s flung open the gates to full freedom and equality, not just for women, Blacks and other ethnic minorities, but also for the LGBTQ spectrum. The consequent expansion and stabilisation of the democratic transition made it possible for deep differences to express themselves in debates. Those, in turn, presented the American electorate with a lengthy menu of choices regarding the problems, issues and dilemmas of concern to the American public at any particular point in time. The presumption was that, deep though the disagreements ran, there was an overwhelming consensus on the rules of the democratic game in which differences would be expressed in the ballot box. The results would then give the victor the chance to pursue their policies during a presidential term and, if they failed, the opposition could have a go in the next electoral round.
This is the theory but, of course, the ideal has never been seen in its purest form. Often the business of manufacturing the president would overshadow political substance. Ideas would remain vague or invisible amid the televised glitz and fanfare. Nevertheless, the traditions remained strong enough to convey a positive image of US democracy. That has not been the case for a while.
In fact the current presidential campaigns represent the third stage of a break with the system and its conventions. The first stage occurred in the 2015 campaigns, which culminated in the marathons within and between the Democratic and Republican parties and their candidates, Hillary Clinton and the business tycoon Donald Trump. The second occurred four years ago, when the incumbent Trump faced the Democratic contender, Biden, who had served as vice president under Barack Obama. The common denominator in all three cases is Trump. He has been driving American historians to pronounce negative prognoses on the system that brought him to power, which he began to undermine.
The Biden-Trump debate testified to this. It took place before the Democratic and Republican conventions met and affirmed their candidacies. Neither debate participant laid out their electoral platform, which would help clarify the choices available to the public. To avert applause and shouting and minimise Trump’s name-calling, interruptions, and other stunts he uses when playing to the gallery, there was no live audience. In effect, therefore, this was a showdown between individuals who are far from the picture of physical and mental health they might be. Biden betrays his 81 years through slurred speech, poor motor control and memory lapses. At 78, Trump, who has never been good at self-control in televised debates, entered this one as a convicted felon on 34 counts, while a list of further prosecutions awaits him. So the crisis for democracy, here, is the American public’s evident inability to produce candidates physically and mentally fit to assume the burdens of the most powerful presidential office in the world.
Still, the spectacle sent tremors through the US and conjured up images from the recent annals of US democracy. Accepting the results of the ballot box is a cornerstone of the electoral process. Without it, the process becomes a football match in which the loser refuses to accept loss and accuses the referees of rigging the game. Yet Trump refused to state unequivocally that he would accept the results of this year’s elections, reiterating his allegation that the Democrats falsified the election results in 2020, in which Biden won. He also characterised the storming of Capitol Hill on 6 January 2021 to prevent Congress from ratifying the Electoral College vote as a form of patriotic zeal. He then pledged that, if elected, he would pardon many of those convicted of crimes related to that incident, delivering a slap in the face to the US judicial authority in the process. Amazingly, the more Trump is tried and convicted on charges related to harassment, degrading the office of the presidency, retaining confidential documents, and insulting the incumbent president, the more campaign contributions, sympathy and applause he receives — and the closer the US inches towards civil war. That is the crux of the current rift in US democracy.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 4 July, 2024 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
Short link: