Parallel worlds

Brian YS Wong October 31, 2024 22:36

There is one election in the world that has the eyes of all trained on it.

This election is neither – strictly speaking – a directly democratic one; nor is it one in which the vast majority of the world’s denizens get to vote. Indeed, even for many residing in the country for which the elections are held, they do not, as a matter of fact or political convenience, get to vote.

Yet this election remains the most influential and portentous in our frenetic world – and has been that way for over six decades. The US Presidential Elections are endowed with the mandate of selecting for the next four years not only the leader of the country, but also the proverbial “Free World”, and – in many ways still – global politics at large. For all the grievances and vociferous protests from countries in other corners of the world, the US remains the financially and military hegemonic player in the post-Cold War global order; ignore its prowess and capacity at one’s own peril.

But the United States are by no means “united”. Indeed, political polarisation stands at a relative height – perhaps unseen since the dying days of the Civil War. Fundamental fissures have emerged, turning immutable characteristics into the bases for political mobilisation and organisation. Party politics has seen the weaponisation of race, gender, sexual orientation, immigrant status, religion, and beyond as means of dividing the population – reinforcing preexisting cleavages and axes of stratification in a society where the tethering to a common social fabric and contract is increasingly tenuous.

Whilst conjectures and prophecies of civil warfare are often hyperbolised and rooted in spurious projections, one thing is clear: America is deeply, fundamentally ill.

A particular facet that merits more attention – and is oft neglected in existing discourse – is the fundamental ‘fact-sensitive polarisation’ that is tearing the country apart. Throughout vast swathes of the 20th century, Democrats and Republicans used to share fundamental commonalities and points of agreement over climate change (that there is an anthropogenic element to it), America’s role in the world (that it must serve as an ostensible leader of the “Free World”, whatever that means), or, indeed, basic facts of science and public health. Vaccine skepticism was never a partisan issue – let alone something that would become baked into the consciousness and platform of one of the two dominant parties in the country. speculations over politicians’ personal lives never boiled over into blatantly vulgar and uncouth remarks disparaging the ethnicity, religion, or gender of said politicians. Politics had been civil – even if hypocritical.

But the world America inhabits today has vastly shifted – with the advent of social media platforms, digital and communication technologies, and a fundamental denigration of mainstream sources of news and analysis. I have written elsewhere of the undying zealotry with which many have embraced the post-modernist complex at its worst – the utter repudiation and wholesale rejection of objective rationality, in favour of privileging the subjective, e.g. “How I feel”, “How I think”, “Who I am”. And the undergirding grail to this all is the cold, naked truth: that individuals of different stripes and colours are increasingly propelled by a deeply seated fear of the Other – fear of cognitive dissonance, fear of dissent, and fear of being told that they are wrong. In wanting to feel constantly reassured and convinced of our being correct, we have become captive hostages of our hubris. To ignore challenging, countervailing views has become the default modus operandi in a world filled with cacophony and acrimony.

It is no exaggeration to say that “Make America Great Again” fanatics inhabit a wholly parallel reality to “Liberals for Kamala”. What the former construes to be a blatant invasion of their religious conceptions of the ideal family, manifests as a liberatory form of sexual expression to the latter.

What the former takes as a dangerous lie propagated by the so-called metropolitan elite and mainstream establishment, is construed as scientific and unquestionable facts by the latter – i.e. climate change. From the pandemic to gun control, from abortion to trans rights and bathrooms, the two nebulous, amorphous blocs quite simply cannot agree on what the facts are – let alone their opinions. Perhaps China presents the odd topic where both sides can see eye-to-eye, and that is why China-bashing is in vogue today.

To tackle head-on this crisis, this pandemic of mistrust, requires time. It will take time for wounds to heal, for some to come to the awakening that this status quo is untenable. Yet time is insufficient. Indeed, time is trivial. In the very long run, we’re all dead. Time could also lead to the fomenting of existing divides, the exacerbation of pre-existing antagonism and contradictions, and fundamentally stymy the prospects for reconciliation and mutual understanding. Time is of an essence, but we will need more than it.

What is perhaps needed – in the case of the US – is for the present polarisation to reach a breaking point, a fundamental eruption so drastic and monumental that few could foresee its intensity and magnitude, with symbolic shock so seismic that the leading donors and backers of both parties would have no choice but to agree on how to manage and restrain their disagreements, as they come to realise the follies of their ways.

Or, alternatively, as a (perhaps overly) optimistic friend of mine would put it: perhaps much of the vitriol and resentment, and the outrageous anti-fact assertions and allegations we see in the news today, are merely the product of the election news cycle. Come January, all would be well again in DC (“Are you sure?”, I probed) – and the rest of the country shall follow. Polarisation in the US, he submits, is largely confined to the political arena – even if it does seep into attitudes and beliefs that individuals hold of matters of public concern; after all, 95% Americans couldn’t care less, so long as their jobs pay and their families are kept sufficiently well-fed.

“What of inflation?” No answer. I can only hope he is right.

Brian YS Wong

Assistant Professor, HKU