Dear followers, I’ve always thought of ‘A Writer of History’ as a blog featuring the reading and writing of historical fiction. But in today’s new world, a world upended by the US election, we are all ‘writers of history’, history that will be reflected on in future novels deemed historical fiction fifty or more years hence. In that spirit, I’ve written today’s post which is my interpretation of a recent, thoughtful article by Ben Rhodes, former deputy national security adviser under President Obama titled I Study Guys Like Trump. There’s a Reason They Keep Winning.
My world imploded on November 5th, 2024. Everything I and many others both inside and outside the United States was repudiated. (For clarity, I’m a Canadian.) We were shocked, stunned, frantic with worry, depressed. “How could this be?” we asked ourselves. “How could so many people reject the values we hold dear?”
Some of you may know that I love diagrams and charts to illustrate ideas. After reading Ben Rhodes’ article for the second time, I decided to create a diagram to represent his thoughts on the forces affecting the electorates of America and other nations around the world.
Let me quote from the article itself in which Ben reflects on what went wrong. (I hope he approves.)
“I would never claim to have all the answers to what went wrong, but I do worry that Democrats walked into the trap of defending the very institutions – the “establishment” – that most Americans distrust. As a party interested in competent techocracy, we lost touch with the anger people feel at government. As a party that prizes data, we seized on indicators of growth and job creation as proof that the economy was booming, even though people felt crushed by rising costs. As a part motivated by social justice, we let revulsion at white Christian nationalism bait us into identity politics on their terms … As a party committed to American leadership of a “rules-based international order,” we defended a national security enterprise that has failed repeatedly in the 21st century, and made ourselves hypocrites through unconditional military support for Israel’s bombardment in Gaza.”
By the way, Ben Rhodes latest book is After the Fall: The Rise of Authoritarianism in the World We’ve Made.
As I said, I’m trying to understand. Your thoughts are welcome, but please remember the spirit of understanding at the heart of this post.
FOR MORE ON READING & WRITING HISTORICAL FICTION FOLLOW A WRITER OF HISTORY. There’s a SUBSCRIBE function on the right hand side of the page.
M.K. Tod writes historical fiction. Her latest novel THAT WAS THEN is a contemporary thriller. Mary’s other novels, THE ADMIRAL’S WIFE, PARIS IN RUINS, TIME AND REGRET, LIES TOLD IN SILENCE and UNRAVELLED are available from Amazon, Nook, Kobo, Google Play and iTunes. She can be contacted on Facebook, Twitter and Goodreads or on her website www.mktod.com.
36 Responses
I’ve read his article, and I love your graphic summarizing it. My frustration with it is that it still offers no answers. Yes, people fall prey to strong-man answers when they feel pain, but how do we move beyond that? Can we — humans — move beyond that? Or do we need a few more million years of evolution first?
Hi Tema .. perhaps we need a serious shock to move beyond it?
Dear Mary, Since I’m still processing my U.S. election shock, I’m going to diverge onto a related topic. I thought of you and your wonderful book PARIS IN RUINS while touring the current stunning exhibit of Impressionist art at Washington, D.C.’s National Gallery. The exhibit places side by side paintings from the “establishment” Paris Salon of 1874 with those of a 1874 Paris exhibit of the emerging, and then-reviled, Impressionist movement of Monet, Cézanne, Morisot and others. Out of the disaster of Napoleon III, out of the ashes of Paris, out of the suffering of civil war, beauty rises. Creativity soars. The culture gains a new perspective. Call me if you make it D.C. to see it (ends January 19 and it’s not traveling elsewhere). Hugs, Margaret
https://www.nga.gov/exhibitions/2024/paris-1874-impressionist-moment.html
Hi Margaret .. so kind of you to think of me and to draw this exhibit to my attention. I have a partial manuscript written that takes the story forward from Paris In Ruins and involves several impressionist painters. If I can get out of this election-induced slump, I will get back to it!! Sending best wishes.
Thanks, M.K. Lots to think about here. I appreciate your diagram and your highlighting Ben Rhodes’s assessment of how we got here. Honestly, I’m still feeling an immense amount of grief at all the lost possibilities, particularly around the issue of climate change. I hope that a way forward presents itself, an effective way to address what are very real threats to the planet.
Many thanks, Pat. Climate change is a huge issue. I’m currently reading ‘Not the End of the World’ by Hannah Richie. She has some interesting thoughts and perspectives on the topic. A glimmer of hope.
Thanks for posting this. There are many insightful responses and reactions to the implosion of many worlds as a result of that election. Many Canadians as well as our Mexican neighbors are undoubtedly (like many Americans) scratching heads and wringing hands. I can only imagine the levels of disappointment and distress from our NATO allies. The questions, many of them, remain. How will we respond to these developments? Fortunately some of my countrymen are like you and me – students of history. There will be many monitoring and responding (and opposing as needs will arise) to this human inclination that tends to crop up in times of great change and uncertainty. I will be waiting to see where The Atlantic’s thoughtful podcast Autocracy in America will be going after this election. Stay tuned, everyone. This is our country too.
Many thanks for adding your voice, Barb.
Mary, as storytellers, you and I know that the easiest way to create sympathy for a hero is to create a villain, and the more dastardly the better. One of the persistent features of politics is that conservatives tend to argue from principle and liberals from sympathy. Thus when conservatives seek to create a villain, it is usually based on ideas: liberals, the left, communist, etc. When liberals seek to create a villain, it is usually someone who is or can be painted as an oppressor of some sort: the rich (Trump, Elon Musk, etc.) being the usual and most obvious target.
When you are telling a story to an electorate, you want the villains to be the few and the heroes to be the many. After all, you are trolling for votes, so you want most people too feel you are on their side. For a long time, liberals handled this well, villainizing the rich few and expressing sympathy for the poor many. But that has changed over the last several years. The message of the left now demonizes the many while expressing sympathy for the few. And the few that they express sympathy for are not always the most sympathetic characters in the eyes of ordinary people.
And people are not only turned off when they themselves are demonized. They are turned off when people they love are demonized. There was an element of the Harris campaign that clearly expected and expressed that women should turn against their husbands and vote for Harris. This was an elementary blunder. After all, the women to whom that appeal was made have husbands that they love, and sons that they love, and they were not going to vote for an anti-male agenda.
The left forgot the basic rule that in an election, where you are trying to attract as many votes as possible, you must present yourself as standing with the many against the few. They instead stood with the few against the many, and when the many, predictably, did not vote for them, they doubled down on their mistake and abused them all the more.
I suspect that you and I differ on several points of policy, but it was not policy that created this result, it was storytelling, which was competent, if not compelling, on the right, but catastrophically ill-judged on the left.
Interesting analysis, Mark. Not sure I agree with your interpretation though. The Democrats were still supporting the many (the middle class and poor) vs the few (the super-rich). But they were unable to convince the many that the Republicans were the party that ACTUALLY supports the elites. And advising women that they needn’t feel constrained to vote as their husbands wanted isn’t the same as doing something that targets their husbands. But what the Republicans did understand — and I’m not sure that ethically the Democrats can bring themselves to emulate — is that by scapegoating minority groups (e.g. immigrants, LGBT+) you can win support of the masses, particularly in times of great change. And I don’t know what is or would have been an effective approach to combat that before it is too late.
Actually, this highlights another aspect of the Democrats storytelling failure. The claim that they were the friends of the middle class and the poor rang hollow when it was plain that it was the mainstream elite that formed the core of the party and that far more billionaires were on the Democrat’s side. Trump’s evisceration of Hillary Clinton on tax policy in 2016 destroyed that narrative and the Democrats have done nothing to mend that impression since. And, of course, Trump talks the old union line of tariffs to protect American jobs. It’s an idiotic economic policy and, as a Canadian, I devoutly hope Trump does not implement it. But it is classic union thinking.
The other aspect of the Democrats storytelling failure is that they overdid the demonization of Trump to such a degree that people ceased to believe them, and started to doubt their sincerity. After all, they had already had four years of Trump and the sky had not fallen. And the attempt to paint Trump as authoritarian while they themselves were taking a page out of the authoritarian playbook by attempting to jail their political opponents on trumped up charges (Putin’s playbook 101) was as absurd as it was grotesque. They forgot the first rule of propaganda: don’t turn your opponents into martyrs. And Trump is a master of placing the martyr’s crown upon is own head.
And I think the worst part of it all was that a number of them started to believe the stories they were telling, which is always fatal in a propaganda campaign. They fell into the trap of justifying undemocratic acts to save democracy, again, the very thing they were trying to pin on Trump. It made all the rest of the name calling ring hollow, though the name-calling had become so over the top already that it perhaps did not need the help to sound hollow.
I think perhaps that what also happened was that people began to realize what the Democrats still have not realized, that Trump does not state policy positions, he states bargaining positions. Canadians should understand this, since last time out he started by describing NAFTA as the worst trade deal ever and ended up signing a mildly tweaked version of the same deal that up here, at least, we call NAFTA Two. Once you understand this, Trump sounds a lot less intemperate than he otherwise seems. And is seems that Trump suckered the Democrats into running an intemperate campaign while his own, despite occasional lapses, was more temperate than his last two. It was the Democrats who sounded wild-eyed and deranged in this campaign, not Trump. A failure of storytelling on a grand scale.
To be clear, I am of the party of Mercutio. I say, a plague on both your houses. There are aspects of both party’s platforms that I find bizarre and abhorrent. But if I were running a writing workshop for their two campaigns, I would give the Republicans a B+ and the Democrats an F.
Thanks for commenting, Mark. Not sure how you can justify your comment: “And the attempt to paint Trump as authoritarian while they themselves were taking a page out of the authoritarian playbook by attempting to jail their political opponents on trumped up charges”. What source were you reading?
Thanks for weighing in, Tema. Scapegoating is a well-known tactic of authoritarians. Unfortunately, the Democrats chose the wrong election strategy. I hope they can regroup and choose more wisely and effectively for the midterms and beyond.
I would have thought the villain – Donald Trump – was pretty clear. But clearly not.
I think that is exactly the issue with the Democrat’s storytelling. They assumed that it was clear that Donald Trump was a villain. They assumed everyone agreed with them. They assumed that if they put him on trial that people would see it as a justified prosecution of a villain, not a totalitarian attempt to silence a political opponent. But they also told more than half the population that they were villains, that they were racist, sexist, transphobic, etc. The result should have been obvious. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. They rehabilitated Trump with their own rhetoric. And putting him on trial while at the same time calling him an authoritarian, was particularly stupid. No matter if one thinks the charges justified, they would have been much better served to let him fade from the public consciousness. Instead, they shone a spotlight on him. And Trump knows just what to do when someone puts a spotlight on him.
Of all the post-mortems I have seen, I think this interview with Brianna Wu sums it up the best. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6fR0bhZJi0
To be clear, again, my attitude to this is a plague on both their houses. It is the storytelling that I am commenting on. I’m not taking a side.
Thanks for clarifying, Mark. Storytelling is a good way to frame the situation. My reaction could have been more positive!!
The line you highlighted from Ben Rhodes’ article, “Democrats walked into the trap of defending the very institutions – the “establishment” – that most Americans distrust” might just get to the bottom of what went wrong. I hadn’t thought about it in those terms, but I think it explains at least part of why the election went so far to the right. The belief among half the electorate that it is only a fair election if “my side” wins is frightening. If we don’t all trust the voting process, how long can our democracy survive? I am sad for Ukraine; NATO; public education in our country; the “dreamers” who will be rounded up and deported to countries they don’t remember; all of us who are not white males; and the loss of respect for humanity, science, and our planet. I am profoundly sad for the many things we lost on November 5. At the age of 71, I’m trying not to lose hope. I won’t be here in 50 years to see if historical novelists can make any sense of what has happened.
Many thanks, Janet. I too am profoundly sad and worried. Just look at the appointments that are being made!
Here is how now the system in the US works: The A-Team and the B-Team
Selections are held…
Republicans=Capitalism’s A-Team are selected….and removes regulations, legal protections, outsources jobs, cuts social safety net, such as it is, etc. which screws the population until it begins to feel it…
Selections are held…
Democrats=Capitalism’s B-Team is selected….aka, see, the system works!
…blunts some of the more obvious measures by the A-Team, doesn’t address the underlying issues–keeps for profit health care but enables health care for a somewhat larger segment of the population (ACA), reduces somewhat egregious costs of pharmaceuticals.
Must NOT EVER address CLASS. Talking about CLASS in the USA would be so Marxist/socialist/Left/progressive/by those who only hate OUR capitalism. Must denounce critics (like Bernie Sanders) as dangerous “extremists/radicals,” refocuses instead on race/gender conflicts (for eg. trans-whoever, historical navel-gazing …)
Selectorate notices that nothing substantial has really changed in their lives and/or that things have gone ‘worse’…unchecked in-migration, stagnant wages, general price gouging, rise in rents, food, increase in homelessness, crime, etc.
Selection is held…see, the system works!
The A-Team is selected –announces ‘…and now something completely different’ (deporting 11 million people, dismantling public health, imposing tariffs, eliminating regulations, stacking courts, cutting social safety net, such as it is, building private prisons, dragging drag queens out of libraries…
But wait until mid-terms!
Rinse, repeat….
BTW, the Democratic Party hasn’t done anything really ‘radical’ since the New Deal and the Great Society.
(Yes, I am a historian..)
Thanks, Hana … it’s not looking good right now.
In the’spirit of understanding,’ i’ll express my view which is perhaps not yours. Yet, a reply is welcomed, so here i go.
Elections coming every four years gives the American people a chance to affect their lives and the future in what they hope for their children.
Policies that were formed by deceiving the public and not explained to the public in press conferences do not build trust for those governing.
Open border: the govermnent denied factual and real problems, all the while silently collecting thousands of people from 7 or more countries by flying them to our soil, housing them in hotels,
promising welfare and health freebies that our own citizens struggle to get.
Where has that funding gone? To non citizens who haven’t contributed to our way of life.
Why trust a governmwnt that has lied, deceived, and not taken the time to meet in person with workers, farmers, parents.
Sending billions of dollars to aid a war we have no business aiding puts blood on our hands. Yet, the money keeps going there.
Lastly, and the most sensitive of issues, i respectfully bring to this reply. If, having a choice for abortion, which is called a right these days, is important, there’s the option of moving to a state that offers that liberty. Thereby being amongst people who think like you do. One person’s version of ‘reproductive rights’ is another person’s version of a right to kill. This could never be said with out causing someone to say, I’ve not been understanding.
Yet, with this intent, I’ve stated in less than academic style, the reasons that there may be unhappiness at the results of our election.
New leaders coming in, dont have a red carpet. They must debate, understand and find ways for the most common solution. So, never fear. Come another four years, there’ll be another election and the chance of our society to again,
speak up.
But to claim to be victims, to put the blame on others as though they made victims, is not complementary. Not getting your way is self evident.
With a closer look, it’s plain that people are coming back to respect themselves, unborn children, and value honesty and courage.
R Molder
Thanks for your reply. We can both watch what Donald Trump and the Republicans do now with four years of relatively unconstrained power. I pray that there will still be a fair and free election process in place.
What Janetsm said.
There is no difference between them all Donald trump ,Joe Biden and j d Vance are all interrelated via British royalty as is every president and not use historically . The same families killed Abraham Lincoln and James Garfield to name but to. All of the judges and witnesses were royalty related as was John Wilkes booth. The booths knew his name was going to be used to hide the real killer from the box below at fords theatre John Thompson ford ,Laura Keene , the Harris’ Todd’s rathmores and judge Joseph holt and John armor Bingham were all royalty related. I have all of the genealogy including the fact that all of the above knew booth was alive and where when claiming he was dead. They knew he was not at fords theatre . I have also the relationships of the booths family to royalty. The real killer was an ancestor of the bush presidents who like George Washington were related to princess Diana Spencer as was judge John armor Bingham of the conspirators trial .
Having all of the genealogy connecting them I could re write history with multiple books.
?????
I thought this was an insightful analysis by an independent journalist who tries to be extremely balanced: https://tarahenley.substack.com/p/weekend-reads-12-reasons-why-trump
Here is a summary of the 12 reasons: Kamala Harris was a weak candidate; Kamala Harris was selected in an anti-democratic way; The Democrats covered up President Biden’s ailing health; Kamala Harris ran a weak campaign; Kamala Harris is associated with an unpopular border policy; Many Americans are struggling under the weight of a cost-of-living crisis, a housing crisis, and an opioid crisis; The Democrats have abandoned the working class, a large swath of the electorate; The Democrats veered too far left on cultural issues in 2020, and are out of step with the American people; The Democrats labelled masculinity as “toxic,” while Donald Trump acknowledged men’s struggles; Donald Trump understands the power of independent media; Donald Trump is anti-war, and so, increasingly, is the American public; The Democrats are increasingly pro-censorship, and are aligned with political correctness — and it turns out the American people do not particularly like being told what to say or think.
I think you’ve summed it up very well indeed. Simple. Not hard to grasp. We were skunked by the notion that “we are better than they are.” Look at all the good things we’ve done for you and will keep doing for you.” But this time it didn’t fly. I sure believe our positions on social issues are more beneficial to almost all of us. I believe in our justice system. I’m totally turned off by Christian Nationalism and anti-secularism on the part of so many “leaders” on the Right. I understand the threat of isolationism. I am gobsmacked by the fact that so many Americans don’t seem to care that Trump is a threat to our Democratic institutions, the the balancing act of a two party system of qualified participants. But who is qualified? And Trump is showing us that HE is qualified but everyone else? Well, not so much. And so many people just don’t seem to care that global warming is THE most comprehensively massive threat to all of us, no matter the political affiliation. Trump is all “Drill Baby Drill.” Boy is it hard to translate that into a threat to the person who looks for a tax break and cheaper gas at the pump. I see the Trump phalanx as a socio-political plague of locusts. They’ll strip everything they can devour to the core, then, eventually, die away. After a time new shoots will grow. But will the world wait for the new shoots or will we have shot ourselves in the national foot and go limping along with a shell of a government for years to come? Asking people to “wake up” when so many prefer to roll over and sleep through the next 4 years is like starting the week out in a job that just seems a dead end. So, environmental protections? FDA? FTC? DOJ, well, the new combo acronym seems to be DJT.
Thanks, Gerry. You put the situation – ie: the choice – in clear terms.
Thanks, Gina. What would you advise the Democrats to do?
That’s for having the courage to address the catastrophe that has overwhelmed us. Lucky you, being Canadian. The break-up of America into three different states might be the best solution for all. New England certainly has more in common with Canada than the old Confederacy or the Wild West of the plains. California, of course, would do far better on its own.
Thanks for adding your voice, Helena. I do wonder whether there could be a breakup of the country. Sounds far-fetched but I’m sure there are precedents and there certainly is a stark division from a geographical perspective.
Thanks for taking this on! As many have mentioned, many people in the U.S. and elsewhere struggle economically, and the easiest response is to blame whoever is in power. Numerous choices and events have brought us to this point. One that should receive more attention is Rupert Murdoch’s influence, building Fox News into the source so many trust for news. For more about news sources, I’d point to an article by Jennifer Rubin in the Washington Post this morning: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/11/12/disinformation-threat-democracy/
Thanks for your comment, CLR. I believe the correct term for Fox News is Fox Entertainment. Or perhaps Fox Propaganda. Or perhaps Fox lawsuit loser?
In the immortal words of the immortal John Lennon: “Power to the people, power to the people, right on!”
The best is yet to come.
Thanks for your comment … yes, power to the people. I hope that power will still be there for the next election.
It’s fairly obvious to anyone who has the ability to see the handwriting on the wall. It’s not written in invisible ink, damn it! Trump has set out to destroy the America so many of us have come to rely upon as a government of laws and the separation of powers. Well, Trump wants to tear this down. He plans to install high ranking members of armed services, homeland security, health and human services, department of justice, CIA, Pentagon, and many more – all basically committed to Tump and Constitution be damned. So, yes, Trump is out to destroy the America we have come to rely upon as our home. Guess what? If he succeeds in making these appointments stick? Well, he’s stuck it to the country and to each and every one of us who aren’t living in the glow of his aura. Basically, if you voted for Trump? You voted to destroy the goose that has laid your golden egg. If you think I’m wrong? Well, just look at the people he has put forward for positions to lead DOJ and Homeland Security, CIA and Department of Defense. Do you feel safe now? Really?