For a closely divided United States, a coin toss would have sufficed

Thank goodness the spectacle is finally over. The strange and often absurd election drama in the so-called greatest nation on Earth has come to an end – for now.

In China, the quantitative mechanism of elections isn’t a big deal. It would be wrong to say it’s not there; China does have elections, though only at the lowest local levels. This, I almost want to say after the undignified spectacle in the US, is a genuine blessing.

The US election was a true media event, staged like a Marvel blockbuster: an endgame. It perfectly fed the media’s hunger for conflict – if constitutional democracy didn’t exist, they’d have to invent it just for them. It was good vs evil, an old white man vs a younger woman of black and South Asian descent, a convicted criminal vs a successful prosecutor, a fight between, if you will, a “constitution terminator” and a “democracy protector”.

It was a clash between a highly disciplined, ambitious, cautious climber who sought to avoid every mistake, and a cocky, street-smart, “authentic” trust-fund kid. The speeches were empty, pathetic, emotional – a celebration of the most trivial forms of communication. What struck me was that the ruling party campaigned with “A New Way Forward”, a wonderful paradox befitting the paradox of democracy itself: vote for the same party to make a change.

Americans were offered little more than two sides of the same coin. Were there real alternatives? Not really, despite the best efforts of the political parties to position themselves as offering a genuine contrast. The candidates, with their stark differences, gave the illusion of choice. Jacques Ellul captured this dynamic decades ago in his book on propaganda: Donald Trump and Kamala Harris weren’t fighting each other; they were trying to capture the voter.

Essentially, both parties want the same thing. They aim to enhance the economic situation for Americans and manage migration. Both acknowledge the importance of social security and publicly oppose drastic cuts to essential services. Their positions are similar on Israel, fracking, China – you name it. Only the abortion issue holds any real weight; the rest is little more than ideological window dressing.

  

​Read More