Three Political Divides in the age of Trump

The three fundamental political divides in our society could be called: the classic, the class, and the cultural-moral.

The classic economic divide between Democrats and Republicans involves the economic interests of labor vs. capital and the role of the state in the free market, a tension intrinsic to developed, late industrial societies. This does not have to be a viciously polarizing divide, but has traditionally been relatively friendly: not so much a battle-to-the-death as an amiable if competitive softball game at an  family picnic. By the 1940s the radical socialist elements (now reemerging in new shapes) in the labor movement were defeated by pro-capitalist, pro-democracy, anti-communist, largely Catholic forces. For example, I can't recall anything terribly negative spoken about President Eisenhower in my staunchly Democratic family in the 1950s. Later in that century, during my 25 years at UPS, mostly in management, I enjoyed an easy collaboration with union shop stewards: we were equally committed to implementing "the contract" and we all came from the same source, the ranks of hourly, union workers. I was a pro-union supervisor and the union leaders were (deep down, if covertly) pro-company. The issues around this divide are economical and regulatory: minimum wage, capital gains tax, health care, safety and environmental regulations and so forth. Being material and economic, these are inherently susceptible to compromise: if I want a $10 minimum wage and you a $20, we can compromise at $15.

With regard to this classic divide, I position myself as a slightly-left-leaning moderate. I retain the values of my family background: sympathy for the underdogs, for labor, and for a robust but limited government. At the same time, experience has given me keener understanding of the dysfunctions of big government and the benefits of free enterprise. I am roughly equal in my respect for the deficiencies and advantages of the expansive state and corporation. What they share is a malignant compulsion to grow like a cancer, beyond human, sober and rational dimensions. If there is a single must-read book on economics it would be the marvelous Small is Beautiful in which Schumaher argues for a modest, limited and human scale to technology and institutions. Beyond that we should study the work of Ivan Illich and Jacques Ellul along with a smattering of the agrarian Wendell Berry and the Christian anarchists Dorothy Day and Peter Maurin. Together they are antidotes to the "gigantism" common to the Democratic and Republican parties that since World War II have lost any  sense of subsidiarity.

The  second, new class divide is much more severe and polarizing: that between the winners and losers in the new economy. For example, in 1950-70 the vigorous economy granted rich benefits to industrial, union workers: a UAW or Teamster worker might live close to and quite similar to a doctor or a lawyer. But the post-industrial, high-tech, information economy has seen a diminished union movement and a chasm between new upper and lower classes. On the one hand, the more educated, competent (meritocracy), and privileged develop marketable managerial or technical skills and use connections to advance; meanwhile, an emergent underclass is trapped in a web of bad education,  under-employment,  and , even worse, a deteriorating family and faith network. And so we find ourselves with two classes (I am not talking about the "1 %"): the winners are educated, cosmopolitan, mobile, more liberal; they are often but not always secular; they advocate sexual freedom even as they benefit, almost unconsciously, from a relatively intact marriage-family pattern. The underclass is destroyed by broken family structure, lack of medical coverage, under-employment, a fractured marriage-family system, broken communities, and a residual faith but a falling away from Church.  This divide, of course, explains the emergence of Trump!

I myself view this chasm with alarm from my own stable position in the upper tier since I benefit from good education, a rich middle class network of connections, and a steady income. I see the two sides of the coin, the material/economic and the cultural/spiritual: the first is the loss of jobs, benefits and opportunities; the second the decomposition of families and communities due to loss of faith, Church and an ethos of chastity and fidelity. Clearly, the primary cause of poverty is the single mother, struggling to raise children without a partner. As a moral conservative, I estimate that the moral/cultural causes are responsible for the most of our poverty. However, the economic also plays a roll. In this regard, I have small, but limited confidence in the proposed solutions from right and left: a prosperous economy will trickle-down benefits including jobs even as a stable safety network (especially health care) will help many. I have really no trust that the erratic, incoherent tweet-policy of Trump will help.

The most important of the three divides is the cultural-moral: in the wake of the Culture Revolution: traditionalists resist the emergent hegemony of:  liberation of sexuality from marriage, fertility, commitment and family; deconstruction of the Mystery of masculinity/femininity; an unrestrained Frankenstein-like explosion of technology; and a genocide of the unborn, marginalized and powerless. This is total and absolute divide: there is no compromise between "reproductive rights" and the life of the tiny One. This is Culture War, always and everywhere.

Here lies, in my view, the widest moral divide our nation has ever faced.  We now face two religions, two nations...entirely contradictory and incompatible. In the brutal fratricide over slavery, it is known that almost every soldier, North and South, carried a bible; under the immense difference, there was a shared Christianity. Slavery itself is not inherently evil in the manner of murder of the innocent. Our prison system is essentially a form of enslavement: the criminal loses personal rights and is under the control of the state. He becomes a slave of the state. No one wants to entirely do away with prisons! One of the origins of slavery was something similar. A hostile enemy attacks to destroy your people; you defeat them; you have three options for the surviving soldiers: free them to attack you again; kill them all; or enslave them. Clearly, the moral high ground is slavery. But killing of the innocent and powerless is inherently evil: never, ever allowable under any circumstances.

Into this chaos steps the surprising, ironic, puzzling and contradictory figure of Donald Trump. With an uncanny, unconscious and lucky touch, he has brought together an alliance between old-school Republicans, the alienated underclass, and moral conservatives.

Regarding the classical divide, he is clearly Republican,  the epitome of capitalism as power, arrogance, and privilege. His tax cut shows this: it benefits the affluent in stereotypical trickle-down fashion. And yet, paradoxically, he announces himself as champion of the working man; the one "chosen"  to bring back industrial jobs; a friend of expansive government and huge debt and deficits; and the tariff-master, indifferent to free trade.

With regard to the second, the class divide, he is even more contradictory: he arouses the fury of his base against the privileged elite even as he is himself the embodiment of that class. Despite the inappropriateness of his person, he is a demagogic genius in arousing the passions of resentment, jealousy, fear and contempt in his base.

The greatest irony, however, is his role as champion of the unborn and the traditional ethos of the marriage and the family. In his personal life, he is a true child of the Sexual Revolution: in a class with Harvey Weinstein, Bill Clinton, Jeffrey Epstein and the out-sized villains of the Me-Too Movement. But his presidential politics have been absolutely steadfast and (in my opinion) sincere in his commitment to the moral right. And so he retains the (reluctant) loyalty of many Evangelicals and conservative Catholics. He may have two or three fingers reaching out from the flames of hell, into purgatory and towards heaven! He is not entirely a hopeless case; but prayers to St. Jude (patron of the hopeless) are in order!