• عربي
  • Fr
  • Es
No Result
View All Result
European Eye on Radicalization
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Who We Are
      • Editorial board and staff
      • Contributors
    • Vision
  • Analysis
  • Opinion Pieces
    • EER Editorials
    • Contributors’ Opinions
  • Reports
  • Reading Radicalization
  • Events
    • EER Events
    • Events EER attends
  • Interviews
  • Videos
  • Contact
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Who We Are
      • Editorial board and staff
      • Contributors
    • Vision
  • Analysis
  • Opinion Pieces
    • EER Editorials
    • Contributors’ Opinions
  • Reports
  • Reading Radicalization
  • Events
    • EER Events
    • Events EER attends
  • Interviews
  • Videos
  • Contact
No Result
View All Result
European Eye on Radicalization
No Result
View All Result
Home Opinion Pieces Contributors’ Opinions

Polarizing Leaders Make Countries Vulnerable to Radicalization

24 October 2019
in Contributors’ Opinions, Opinion Pieces
Polarizing Leaders Make Countries Vulnerable to Radicalization

Republican Presidential Candidate Donald J. Trump speaks during the final day of the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, Thursday, July 21, 2016. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

493
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Grant Gambling, writer and podcaster from St. Louis, Missouri

 

American public life continues to be disrupted by controversies over identity politics. These fault-lines within a polity are the raw material for radicals to use for recruitment and other nefarious purposes. The inflaming of such divisions also provides a polarized environment that gives opportunities to nefarious external actors, who can exacerbate these differences to weaken and even destroy states. This problem does not only affect America. While it is Russia and China that mainly threaten the U.S. in this respect, the Middle East experiences this challenge mostly from Iran, which instrumentalizes minority populations to destabilize governments across the region.

Controversy in the U.S. was stoked, yet again, by President Donald Trump, whose tweets over the summer were, first, directed at “The Squad”—four female Democratic congressmen of colour whom Trump told to “go back” home—and subsequently at Maryland Democrat, Congressman Elijah Cummings, also a person of colour. Not content with referring to Cummings’ district of Baltimore as a “rodent infested mess”, Trump came back a second time to mock Cummings for having his home broken into. It is not as if Cummings’ district is without problems, but whatever satisfaction was momentarily gained by shaming his countryman in this way, it ultimately redounds against the President.

Why?

Because the President of the United States represents Baltimore just as much, if not more, than the person elected to represent that district of the city. The Commander-in-Chief represents Baltimore, and every other inch of American soil, with its 330 million inhabitants, to more than seven billion people across the planet.

Words might not offer a viable solution to fix a troubled city like Baltimore, nor any others like it—Detroit, Flint, San Francisco, or Denver—but it would be better if words were not used that create barriers to the cooperation necessary to begin to find a solution. By playing with racial identity, Trump is radicalizing situations that could otherwise be settled with compromise. A political solution is possible when the argument is about what people want; a solution is not possible once the argument becomes about who people are.

Trump is opening up an old gap in American society that is not only domestically damaging. Hostile foreign states can use the race wedge to pulverize American society. Tragically, the institution that should pacify the situation—the American media—is incapable of doing so because its incentives are so misaligned, centered around getting attention and therefore profit.

The racialized framing of events has been damaging even to Trump himself. The White House, for example, has made serious strides in criminal justice reform, retroactively lifting maximum sentencing for drug offenders that were disproportionately targeting black communities. Trump is unable to gain as much credit for this as he otherwise would because the prevailing narrative is that he is antagonistic to the black community.

These controversies go well beyond the media spectacle. Exploiting these kinds of grievances and the communities afflicted with them is not a new concept for foreign adversaries like Russia, China, or Iran; all have been doing it for decades. All three of these regimes use the suffering of aggrieved locals to influence their own agendas.

Russia’s interference in America’s 2016 Election could never have had any effect were there not already a radicalized situation in American politics. Iran doesn’t have the same kind of reach as China or Russia in America, but it has been expanding its subversive cyber-capacity in the West and its destabilizing activities in the Middle East against the Gulf countries and others, have likewise been expanding recently. Not to mention these kinds of dynamics are precisely what Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State seek out to expand their global influence. There is no need for the leader of the free world to serve it up on a platter like this and shine a light on it.

Theorizing that Trump is intentionally driving polarization and pushing people into the arms of radicals perhaps gives the president too much credit. Part of the problem is that Trump remains unaware of the power that his words have from the office he holds; the smallest phrase, however ill-conceived, now has an impact on the entire world, whether he intends it or not.

This current Republican Party is nostalgic for Ronald Reagan, who saw America as the shining city on the hill. But the present-day Republicans do not want to represent all parts of this metaphorical city. It can’t work that way. Reagan’s message was based on the Gospel of Matthew, 5:14, “You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden.” The very next verse says, “Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house.” “Everyone in the house” would include Baltimore.

The “light” Reagan was referring to wasn’t meant to be used to shame or dehumanize people, which is something that does radicalize, but rather provide those communities the light to help them turn their situation around. Leaders who fail to govern for all segments of their populations are doing their enemies’ work for them.

 

 

 

European Eye on Radicalization aims to publish a diversity of perspectives and as such does not endorse the opinions expressed by contributors. The views expressed in this article represent the author alone.

Related Posts

The Election in Lebanon and Building a Common Front Against Hezbollah
Contributors’ Opinions

The Election in Lebanon and Building a Common Front Against Hezbollah

26 May 2022
US Buffalo Shooting: The Depressing Predictability of Far-Right Terrorism and How to Stop It
Contributors’ Opinions

US Buffalo Shooting: The Depressing Predictability of Far-Right Terrorism and How to Stop It

23 May 2022
What New Leadership in the U.A.E. Means for Regional Counter-Extremism
EER Editorials

What New Leadership in the U.A.E. Means for Regional Counter-Extremism

21 May 2022
Sweden’s Qur’an Burnings Amidst the Scourge of Ethnic Nationalism
Contributors’ Opinions

Sweden’s Qur’an Burnings Amidst the Scourge of Ethnic Nationalism

16 May 2022
Will Biden Repeat Obama’s Mistakes With Iran?
Contributors’ Opinions

Will Biden Repeat Obama’s Mistakes With Iran?

13 May 2022
The International Community Must Help Egypt Against Rising Terrorism and Economic Shocks From the Russia-Ukraine War
EER Editorials

The International Community Must Help Egypt Against Rising Terrorism and Economic Shocks From the Russia-Ukraine War

12 May 2022

Latest from Twitter

Popular

Muslim Brotherhood and Khomeinism in Italy: The Told and the Untold

6 May 2022
Islamist Extremism and Jihadism in Latin America: A Longstanding and Underestimated Phenomenon

Islamist Extremism and Jihadism in Latin America: A Longstanding and Underestimated Phenomenon

14 April 2022

Russia, Afghanistan, and the Islamic State Threat to Central Asia

9 March 2022
Islamist Organizations in the United Kingdom: From the Rushdie Affair to Present Day

Islamist Organizations in the United Kingdom: From the Rushdie Affair to Present Day

17 January 2022
Becoming Ansar Allah: How the Islamic Revolution Conquered Yemen

Becoming Ansar Allah: How the Islamic Revolution Conquered Yemen

24 March 2021
Reflections on the ‘Islamic’ Dimension of Conflicts in the East and in France

Reflections on the ‘Islamic’ Dimension of Conflicts in the East and in France

24 May 2022

© 2018 EER - Copyright © European Eye on Radicalization.

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Who We Are
      • Editorial board and staff
      • Contributors
    • Vision
  • Analysis
  • Opinion Pieces
    • EER Editorials
    • Contributors’ Opinions
  • Reports
  • Reading Radicalization
  • Events
    • EER Events
    • Events EER attends
  • Interviews
  • Videos
  • Contact
  • عربي
  • Fr
  • Es

© 2018 EER - Copyright © European Eye on Radicalization.

This website uses cookies. By continuing to use this website you are giving consent to cookies being used. Visit our Privacy and Cookie Policy.