Waking up the morning of November 8th, to the new of Donald Trump's re-election as U.S President - I sighed. There was none of the shock or disappointment of his initial election eight years earlier, or the anger and incredulity of 6th January 2021, where Trump's emboldened supporters stormed the U.S Capitol building for the most ridiculous coup d'état attempt.
No, instead, there was a grim sense of inevitability about the most divisive figure in modern global politics becoming the most powerful man in the world for a second time.
Trump's election is symbolic. For this is a man who, since his formal intention to run for President in 2015 - has thrived on propelling division and hatred. Some of his many moments include questioning the legitimacy of Obama's birth certificate, making policy announcements on social media, and telling people to drink bleach to protect against COVID-19.
It comes at a time where society seems at a crossroads, as social media misinformation ravages, and political sides are beginning to drift further apart. Returning such a hateful and controversial figure to power suggests that the politics of division are winning. How we counter this could play a pivotal role in shaping the world for generations.
The Democrats will be picking the bones out of this damaging defeat for the foreseeable future. Kamala Harris' platform largely centred on bringing hope back to politics, despite her predecessor Joe Biden's mixed term in office. Yet they were hamstrung by weakening unity within the party and its voters, primarily as a result of Israel's genocide in Gaza. In either case, a stronger stance risked dividing the party further.
It's worth touching on the electoral college, and broader first-past-the-post voting system that seems so archaic and can lead to some unbalanced and possibly unfair results. Granted, it wouldn’t have made a difference in this election, but you can see why people would distrust politics with a system that rewards arbitrary points and lines as opposed to each vote counting for itself.
A final key division from the U.S election was an interesting gender split in voting amongst 18-29 year olds, or Gen Z. 56% of men in this age group voted for Trump, while 58% of young women voted for Harris. Traditionally, younger voters have always been more progressive, so the rise in support for Trump amongst young men is a concern.
That gender voting division is not just present in the US though. In the UK general election in July, twice as many young women voted for the Green party than men, whilst young men (12%) were more likely to vote Reform than young women (6%). Surveys show similar trends in Germany and Poland, while further east, South Korea is experiencing increased gender polarisation.
These trends are perhaps the sign that gender is being weaponised as a tool of division amongst young people, whose exposure to social media makes us particularly susceptible to misinformation. When an algorithm is dictating what content you see, your political viewpoint will undoubtedly become warped because it suggests content you like and hides content you disagree with. Either way, this stark division is different to generational splits we would expect in most elections.
In the American case, those alarm bells start ringing further when you point to the countless sexist and misogynistic remarks made by the incoming President. How many of those young men believe that is ok? We can only speculate, but the sad reality is there will be more, in the same way Trump will probably brandish similar comments about people of colour.
It seems that these growing views - anecdotally that I am beginning to see among peers - are a result of power changes. Society has changed a lot in the last couple of generations, and in particular, women have significantly more agency than 50 or 60 years ago. Again, I can only speculate, but it feels like young men's backlash against progressive politics stems from the belief that this agency is an attack on their rights.
We have seen the same discourse from many white people, where immigration is the source of anger, because they are supposedly "taking our jobs" and "stealing a living". Backlash against support for previously-oppressed groups is growing, such as mistrust in Diversity, Equality and Inclusion (DEI) programmes.
Yet this is division stoked up by those with power. Trump, his sudden-sidekick Elon Musk, and Nigel Farage are key proponents of this, feeding off anger and uncertainty to pit people against each other. Musk's radical change towards populist rhetoric is particularly dangerous, given his influence over X, formerly Twitter. These self-proclaimed "anti-elites", are in themselves powerful elites peddling dangerous narratives that will either line their pockets, feed their massive egos, or both. Fighting against diversity is only the vehicle that gets them there.
The buzzword at the centre of the culture wars fuelled by these elites is "woke". To them and an army of right-wing supporters, it seems wokeness is an umbrella term for everything too politically-correct, where sanctimonious liberals shout "you can't say that anymore" and attacks them for being reasonable. My sympathy is limited.
Anyway, that word, woke. I back it. In fact, I love it. I want to be woke.
Because to me, woke is something completely different than what culture-war warriors try to make it. The Cambridge dictionary definition puts it as "aware, especially of social problems like racism and inequality". I might be wrong.. but isn't being aware a good thing?
Jokes aside, awareness/wokeness is possibly the most important trait to countering the impact of a divisive society. Being aware of socio-political, or cultural things is to be able to empathise with people, even if we haven't experienced what they have. The abortion debate is a suitable example - if someone tells you that's how they feel, or that's what they want to do, who are you to tell them they're wrong? You can waste time and anger on it, sure, and try to stop it happening, but that is just projecting your own opinion. It is a selfish desire for someone else to agree with you and your values.
Here's the thing - it's ok to be wrong. It sounds so simple, right? But in political discourse and debate, we all double down on our opinions when faced with someone conflicting. Social media doesn't help, allowing us to bury our heads further in an echo chamber
Instead, we would do well to welcome those conversations that challenge our ways of thinking. We don’t have to be so welded to ideas or ways of thinking that we can’t change our minds. Sometimes you get some new information or a different perspective, and though it might make your opinion “wrong”, it’s great to refine how you see the world.
Wokeness embodies humility that we are lacking as a society, because its principle is actively try and make yourself more aware of the world around you. Conspiracy theorists are actually a good example of this.
Take, for example, flat earthers. They believe irrefutably that the Earth isn’t round, and they know they’re a minority but steadfastly stick to those views. In their minds, they are aware - or woke. Or those who believe Bill Gates and Big Pharma control the world’s governments. They are convinced that people can’t fit the puzzle together in the way they have. They’re the woke, aware ones trying to convince people of a horror that needs to be rectified.
So “wokeness”, it can go both ways. In those extreme examples, people may not change their minds, but strip away all the politically-charged nonsense, and being woke is to hold your values dear. It is understanding that we are all learning from each other every day, in political and non-political ways.
Divisive politics is so depressing because it is the antithesis to that unity. It pits us against each other to fuel populist rhetoric that does nothing but stoke even more distrust. The gender example mentioned is a pertinent one - because the world needs both a mix of men and women to function (more than just quite literally).
We cannot let that division fester further by doubling down and refusing to engage with people who disagree with us. None of us are perfect. Instead, maybe it's time to listen to people and their experiences, find common ground and challenge your own worldview. Would that woke be so bad?
Comments
Post a Comment