Emma's blog

The Speaker, Mr Trump and the law

Mr Trump is floundering as US President. He attacks anyone who blocks him: women, Mexicans, Muslims, his own party, the media and now the judiciary.  Whether groping, shutting out or insulting, his mode appears to be aggression to all but those who submit.

It is hardly surprising that our Prime Minister tried to befriend him, since Brexit means a good trade deal with the US is vital. But at what cost? Will Donald misread the UK invitation as general support, and be encouraged to continue his obnoxious style of politics? There is a risk that he may do just that.

If the Speaker’s announcement this week – that he wouldn’t allow Mr Trump to speak in the Houses of Parliament – is seen in that context, maybe his action was wise? Mr Speaker made it plain that it is not Trump’s policies he disagrees with, it is his mode of operation: sexist, racist and compromising the independence of the judiciary. Although connected, the Speaker highlighted process not policy.

Arguably the lying in this new style of politics is not as serious as his assumption that he is above the law. When Donald told stories about groping women, he was boasting about committing crimes and then dismissed it as mere locker-room talk. Rebecca Solnit describes him as patriarchy unbuttoned. Why was talk of assault not more embarrassing to him? Perhaps because his form of narcissism means he sees himself as bigger than social norms, conventions and even the law. 

The big question for me is can Donald Trump learn to do politics in a way that avoids the abuse of power, i.e., is legal and respectful of others. If our Speaker has given him a jolt and made him think twice about what he is doing, then he will be doing the whole world a service. I can appreciate why he thought it was worth a try.

A crisis of knowledge

“The internet will never be an important source of information in education”, I mused to a university colleague in the early 1990s when one of my students wrote an essay on the environment using dodgy sources from the web. I got that seriously wrong. But we do face a crisis of knowledge in politics.

Look at what we has been presented as if it were truth this year. Crazy promises and threats by Brexiteers and Remainers, wild accusations of rigging the US election by Trump, and last week the Daily Mail claiming that the court ruling on Article 50 was an example of the judges as ‘enemies of the people’. In a bid to undermine opponents, journalists collude with politicians to do politics, trying to influence public opinion to their side through attacks on whoever disagrees with them. Contrast this with the measured reporting by public broadcasters – BBC, ITV, Channel 4 – and the more thoughtful journalists, politicians or commenters or reports by Parliament who manage to convey the full range of views. Take this House of Commons library blog which makes it clear that the High Court ruling was about the relationship between Parliament and government and which has the power to trigger Article 50. This is written by a constitution expert.

Politicians have been rude about experts recently, again presumably to undermine those that disagree with them. Since experts do often disagree, relying on them doesn’t and can’t mean believing them all but we should surely take seriously what they say. Judges are in a different league. The rule of law depends on us taking not just their views, but their authority seriously as well. The undermining of experts, expertise and institutions that make democracy work – judiciary and Parliament for example – is making our political world increasingly unstable.

This fast and febrile new political world is fuelled by the Wild West of social media. It is addictive, exciting and potentially violent to democracy. Since regulation of social media is even more challenging than constraining the press without compromising its freedom, we have to up our game in citizenship education. It has been taught in schools but in a shallow way, resting on the assumption that the point is to inculcate civic values. It sounds OK but it’s not. It is not up to the government, or schools, to shape children’s values: we will all have different ideas about what they should be. But they should be given the opportunity to learn about and debate the significance of political institutions, processes (including political communication) and decision-making. Above all, we all need to develop better skills at navigating the battlefields of knowledge and the best way is to start when we are as young as possible.  


Subscribe to RSS - Emma's blog