Visit of the US Ambassador at Charles University ****************************************************************************************** * Visit of the US Ambassador at Charles University ****************************************************************************************** On November 15th, 2016, United States Ambassador to the Czech Republic Mr. Andrew Schapiro to a packed hall of students in the Charles University Law Building. The impressive turnou event was somewhat unsurprising, given that the main focus of the Ambassador's lecture was Presidential election. Mr. Schapiro's attitude to the outcome of the election was, purport hope and collaborative spirit: while admitting that he himself landed on the Democrat side political fence, and was thus hoping for a different outcome, the Ambassador emphasised th everyone in the American political system to assist and collaborate with Donald Trump, so remain a "beacon of freedom and democracy" for the world. Mr. Schapiro presented accepting and supporting President Trump as the only truly democrat keeping with the will of the electoral majority. Although this stance is one that many obs taken, it is not immune to criticism. In short, what the Ambassador and others like him ar normalisation of Donald Trump's presidency: while basically turning a blind eye to troubli the Republican candidate's campaign, they place faith in the checks and balances that exis for example, an unpredictable President from causing an excessive shock to the system and status quo. Herein lies the crux of the issue: the position outlined by Mr. Schapiro is conservative, as they are seem suitable enough, and gradual change is expected to bring about improvemen However, the mere existence of a President-elect Trump is a strong signal that the status reaching a breaking point. Large swathes of the population believe the current system is c touch with their needs: they see Washington as a swamp of corruption and greed, filled wit politicians who are deep in the pockets of lobbyists and corporate backers. During the primaries the dissatisfaction with the establishment found, among left-leaning champion in Bernie Sanders, a progressive with a quasi-socialist political background (alm on the centre-stage of US politics) who for much of his political career was unaligned wit party. However, the Democratic Party put its weight behind a candidate that, in the establ was a surefire winner. Sanders, seen by many as possibly too old, and certainly too ideali “strong” candidate, lost the race with Hillary Clinton, who in early summer seemed set to to the Oval Office. Despite her troubles with the private email server, Clinton was highly experienced in poli diplomacy, while also being the first female presidential candidate, all of which made the establishment believe that nothing could stand in her way. Meanwhile, the Republican Party be imploding, courtesy of the “Trump phenomena” (as the new leader of the free world has l campaign). During the primaries, the field of 17 candidates was slowly whittled down, and while obser entertained, amused, and at times disgusted by Donald Trump’s unique campaign and controve no one believed he would ever win the nomination. Until he did. Throughout the summer, Tru didn’t change: he didn’t stop making offensive and hazardous statements (of which many pla the boundaries of reality), he never sought to appear presidential, nor did he put forward meaningful policy plan, building his campaign around three slogans: build a wall, lock her swamp. Xenophobia drove the first promise, and, though Hillary Clinton might have done better to less bluntly, a significant number of Trump supporters do respond passionately to a xenoph message, and thus his popular support was strengthened. The second promise was of a petty against his opponent, suggesting the deployment of a prosecutor dedicated to putting Clint for her “crookedness”. Hillary Clinton’s guilt in the email case, however, was never really significant to the Tr Crooked Hillary was crooked because, like so many others, she’d been in Washington for dec shady deals and not truly working for the people. With this same distaste for careerist po fundamental importance of “drain the swamp”: Trump could use this promise successfully bec newcomer to politics, and could thus claim that he would give Washington a breath of fresh it of the corruption that left his supporters so disenchanted. In every election in the pa political and diplomatic experience was an insurmountable obstacle to candidates, but in 2 a wave of anti-establishment feeling that nullified the significance of his inexperience, allowed him to say and do whatever he wanted. On November 15th, 2016, the Oxford English Dictionary revealed its word of the year: post- still quite uncommon, it is of great use in analyzing the ‘Trump phenomena’. Adam Curtis, documentary film maker, released his most recent work in October 2016, a feature titled Hy in it, he suggests that we are living in a post-truth world, where the political, social a system that purported to be able to provide prosperity and stability to everyone (in the l beginning to show its cracks. The intertitles in one of the trailers for the documentary p Curtis’s position: “We live in a world where the powerful deceive us. We know they lie. Th they lie. They don’t care. We say we care, but we do nothing. And nothing ever changes.” In the documentary itself, Curtis examines the creation of this post-truth world throughou years, and suggests that politics in many parts of the world is undergoing a fundamental c the example of the impact on Russian politics of Vladislav Surkov, who as an advisor to Pu a mode of political activity whereby the ruling powers engage in seemingly random or contr without giving any real explanation of their motive. Thus the opposition is left in confus unable to act successfully. Peter Pomerantsev has described the stage of Russian politics theatre”, and Adam Curtis is not the only one to see a connection between Surkov’s manipul and certain aspects of Donald Trump’s campaign. In recent years, it has become apparent that members of the public experience news and pol their own personal bubble. By acquiring information through social media and search engine algorithms designed to give each individual user exactly what he or she likes and wants to closing ourselves off from what many people in our democracies are thinking, simply becaus think like us. The ground for debate is being eroded. Donald Trump realized this, and took By speaking in straightforward terms, detailing simple narratives of the moral struggle be wrong, Trump appealed to the heartstrings of many Americans, and thus negated the importan rational debate. Thus his opponents, and the media, used to a completely different dynamic action, were helpless to intervene, and while they scornfully mocked Trump the power of th disappeared. It didn’t matter if Trump made offensive statements, or even if he seemed to truth: the post-truth electorate would have its victory. Along with discussing the election, Ambassador Schapiro talked about the future of US-Czec emphasizing the importance of continued economic, military and diplomatic cooperation betw Republic and the United States. While stressing how he did not intend to sound condescendi explained how it is still America’s duty, as the leader of the free world, to assist and c Central Europe so that they might progress and become strong enough to resist “dangerous” The Ambassador seemed confident that America remains a powerful force for good in the worl should be to spread freedom and democracy to the farthest corners of the globe. The events months, however, suggest that the time may have come for the United States to take a step the issues of structural inequality that plague its own political, social and economic sys in the 20th century, worked hard to spread (and often impose) its system of beliefs on nat the world; now, in 2016, that same system is showing serious, deeply ingrained flaws, and time for US diplomats to start to question whether their country is indeed a beacon the wh follow. Donald Trump’s win is a revolution in a system where revolution seemed impossible, a revol appeasement and condescension from the powerful, and many believe we are on the cusp of so paradigm shift at the core of our political systems. Brexit seems to have been driven by t as Trump’s win, much like the rise of populist, alt-right movements in the rest of Europe. before the referendum in the UK, infamously claimed that “Britain has had enough of expert understood that the reign of fact and truth seems to be coming to an end. In this post-tru consequences of the events of 2016, much like the Trump presidency itself, are nigh imposs The slope of nationalist and populist rhetoric is a slippery one, and our treatment of imm refugees bears a worrying resemblance to the de-humanisation the Jews suffered in 1920s an In England, America’s little sister, they called immigrants “cockroaches”. Perhaps drawing with pre-World War II totalitarian regimes is premature, or uncalled for, but the rise of sexism, xenophobia and isolationism we are witnessing all over the world should never be s underestimate. Patrick Bracelli is a Third Year student of Politics and East European Studies at Universi history, and enjoys the study of music, literature and film, and of the social application his journalism skills.