More stories

  • in

    Is Donald Trump a bully or bold protector? That depends on whom you ask | Arlie Hochschild

    It’s said that to every man with a hammer, the world looks like a nail. So it is, too, that to every bully, a conflict looks like a brawl, a debate looks like a shouting match and even a pandemic an occasion to “bully” the truth. And so it has proved with the president of the United States.As children, I would guess that both Donald Trump and Joe Biden were bullied, Trump by his demanding father and Biden by schoolmates for his stutter. If so, the two have dealt with their shared challenge in nearly opposite ways, with great consequences for the people each has become and for the nation faced with a choice between them.Most polls suggest that Biden will win the election, although none has really probed the effect of bullying in the recent TV debate – Trump’s doing it or Biden’s inadequate handling of it; nor the effect of Trump’s bluster since. But with the citizenry so stressed – by Covid-19, job losses, fires, floods, urban unrest and more – it’s important to ask what voters are looking for in a leader. Do some Americans actually want a bully?Many studies have shown that Republicans yearn for a “strong leader”, a “fighter”, and this may make them hesitant to condemn bullying. I came to know Sharon Galicia, a lively single mum and medical insurance saleswoman from Louisiana, while researching my 2016 book about the American right, Strangers in Their Own Land. “The man liberals see as an arrogant bully,” she told me, “conservatives see as Rocky Balboa.”Many good-hearted blue-collar voters with American flag decals on their pickups tune into Trump on a frequency that secular liberals cannot hear. Where most liberals hear bullying, Trump supporters hear: “I’m your guy. I do all I do for you and I deliver.” Where liberals hear an interrupter, many conservatives hear, when Trump speaks: “My enemies – the deep state, whistleblowers, impeachment-seekers, the mainstream media, the Democrats, Covid-19 critics – bully me. I suffer for you. Stand by me as I bully back.”A good leader also needs to be able to face and admit the existence of a national threat, as Biden hasTo bully someone is to seek to harm, intimidate or coerce another who’s perceived as vulnerable. As the National Center Against Bullying elaborates, there are many types of bullying. Reviewing them, we, especially liberals, can recall times when Trump has exemplified nearly all of them. There is physical bullying – tripping, kicking, hitting; remember his calls in 2016 to oust Black Lives Matter demonstrators in the “old-fashioned way” (with a show of fist in palm). There is verbal bullying – name-calling (Sleepy Joe, Crooked Hillary, Little Mario). There is mockery by imitation. Recall his laughing imitation of a disabled reporter, palsied arms and hands shaking. Then there is social bullying – showing contempt for someone’s social reputation (think of the Gold Star parents, Khizr and Ghazala Khan, ridiculed for the silence of the grieving mother).The wider consequences of this approach are huge. The way Trump works is to promote violence and then pose as the law-and-order answer to that violence. In the near absence of any other ways of managing social unrest arising from the death of George Floyd, and a steady refusal to disavow armed white supremacists, he has been “fanning the flames of hate”, in Biden’s words, and “recklessly encouraging violence” in Oregon and Michigan (where extremists plotted to kidnap the governor). “Stand back and stand by,” Trump told the Proud Boys, a militant far-right group, a phrase it soon emblazoned on its logo. Trump thus helps bring on the storm, then hands out Trump-branded umbrellas.When he ominously declares that the only fair election is one in which he himself wins, many fear that he plans to bully his way into a second term even while talking freely of a third. So, many now ask where the bullying stops and what it might take to stop it.With Biden, where do we look for evidence of strength to combat the president? As a child, he recalls when his father lost his job, money got tight and he was sent to live with grandparents. When his first wife and 13-month-old daughter died in a car accident, and, much later, his grown son Beau died of brain cancer, a steely but not-unfeeling resilience showed through again. Now that America is enduring a series of hits to its health, economy and soul, it may be just such resilience we need.But beyond resilience, a good leader also needs to be able to face and admit the existence of a national threat, as Biden has done. Although early in declaring himself a commander in the war on Covid-19, Trump did not fully face or tell his troops when or how the “enemy” was arriving. He said it might disappear “like magic”. He spoke before maskless crowds, routinely refused to wear one himself and, in one of his 128 debate interruptions, mocked Biden for the size of his mask. He encouraged citizens to flout their (Democratic) governors’ orders about precautions, as if there were no enemy at hand and as if it were a sissy thing to imagine that one existed. He issued too few boots and guns and, indeed, aimed his own fire at medical advisers.In short, and to continue with the martial imagery, Trump told troops to leave the battlefield while missiles whistled through the air. And some have recently hit home. Twenty lawmakers and 120 Capitol Hill workers, including 40 members of the US Capitol police, have been diagnosed with Covid-19. One staff member for a Republican congressman has died of Covid. But as if bullying did the trick, Trump stands by his statement to the American people: “Don’t be afraid of Covid.”As the nation faces the enormous challenges ahead – jobs, climate change, automation, racial justice, drug addiction, Covid-19 – the truth is that the bully’s hammer causes many more problems than it solves. Bullies do not solve such problems. Leaders do.• Arlie Hochschild is professor emerita in sociology at the University of California, Berkeley, and the author of Strangers in Their Own Land: Anger and Mourning on the American Right More

  • in

    A new study shows more Americans are dropping acid. Why? | John Semley

    In 1995, Jerry Garcia, singer/guitarist of the Grateful Dead and a figure almost singularly associated with America’s psychedelic subculture, died. Then something weird happened: a nationwide downturn in LSD consumption. It was no coincidence. As the author Jesse Jarnow notes in Heads: A Biography of Psychedelic America, for decades the Grateful Dead’s expansive, coast-to-coast live concert infrastructure was “the distribution network for LSD”. No Jerry meant no Dead tours, which meant, for many, no LSD. Garcia’s death effectively signalled the end of the Psychedelic Sixties.But now, drugs like LSD and psilocybin (the active ingredient in magic mushrooms) are enjoying a vogue. They’re finding second lives as clinical tools in the pharmacological battle against depression and anxiety. They’re also being illicitly gobbled in sub-hallucinogenic “micro-doses” as daily supplements, reportedly boosting energy and creativity. In November, Oregonians will vote on whether to legalize psilocybin therapy statewide. And a new study in the July issue of the international journal Drug and Alcohol Dependence reports that LSD use increased 56% between 2015 and 2018 (including a rather massive 223% increase among people aged 35 to 49). It’s all part of what’s being termed the “psychedelic renaissance”.This revival is curious. It doesn’t seem to be about restoring the bygone heyday of hippie-era psychedelic culture, as renaissance art of the 14th century turned back to the glories of antiquity. For some, the sun setting on this subculture was just as well. The concept of “the sixties” – with its long hair and wide-eyed, pupil-dilated idealism – has sometimes proved an impediment. Michael Pollan, whose bestseller How To Change Your Mind popularized the current resurgence, notes that the very word psychedelic “carries a lot of countercultural baggage”. Mind-expansion, we’re being told, may be beneficial – but please leave the tie-dye shirts and frilly vests and marching teddy bear bumper stickers in the past. More

  • in

    The Fight review – a walk-and-talk with the activists tackling Trump

    The title is apt for a documentary about the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), who got their always combative existence stepped up a notch with the election of Donald Trump in 2016. Now they found themselves fighting with the White House itself. This film features an Aaron Sorkin-style walk-and-talk tour around the ACLU offices in Brooklyn, New York, with its array of talented lawyers and heroic idealists.It concentrates on four cases fought by them: the right of a migrant to an abortion, the right of transgender people to serve in the military, the right of migrants not to be separated from their children, and the right of US residents not to answer a new census question about whether they are US citizens. This apparently innocuous query was cunningly designed to reduce the ostensible population size (and federal aid budgets while creating space for tax cuts etc) as migrants fearfully decline to answer.It also, insidiously, is intended to start a media row on this very point and crank up a value-for-money Kulturkampf against the alien outsider, a census question costing so much less than a wall. It should also be said – and this film could and should have said it – that the grotesque policy of separating migrants from their children was specifically designed to create a spasm of horror in the media (and the ACLU) for its deterrent effect, certainly, but mostly, yet again, to provide raw material for the Fox News Theatre of Cruelty.This film is a lively and watchable account of the full-tilt battle being fought by the ACLU, with its chief lawyer, Lee Gelernt, at the helm, a man addicted to Diet Coke and stress, at one point heading to emotional meltdown as he realises he doesn’t know where or how to plug in his smartphone charger. The film’s structural flaw is that it doesn’t quite know how to handle the most controversial moment in ACLU history: sticking toughly to the principle of free speech for all, it defended the right of racist Charlottesville protesters to rally in 2017, an event that led to a fatality. Maybe the whole film should have been about that one case. Well, the census-question case gives this its rousing finale. It creates, however, a possibly misleading impression of victory.• The Fight is available on digital platforms from 31 July. More

  • in

    Now, more than ever, America must make water a human right | Bernie Sanders and Brenda Lawrence

    Clean water should be an American human right, not a government profit machine When it comes to water infrastructure, America’s challenges resemble those of a developing country. It’s time for that to change ‘Before the coronavirus pandemic hit, nearly 14m households were unable to afford their water bills.’ Illustration: Erre Gálvez/The Guardian How can it […] More