The unthinkable has happened

Once seen as too absurd, Trump has triumphed

WITH the withdrawal of the last serious opponent, Donald Trump has moved from being the likely nominee to the presumptive Republican nominee in the most unexpected US presidential race in modern memory.

It’s an amazing result that nobody, not even Mr Trump, predicted.

He has, in fact, lived up to this name; he has trumped a catalogue of contenders, any one of whom could claim to be better personifications of the spirit of the Republican Party.

His victory is a victory for a horrible proposition: rather than try to incorporate Hispanics into the party, Mr Trump’s winning argument was to do precisely the opposite: violently reject that idea in favour of mobilising older, working-class white men with jingoist promises of making the US great again.

In the process, he has espoused an absurd notion of building a wall spanning the 3,200km border with Mexico, and called on Americans to “resist the false song of globalism”.

There is no pretty way to say this; for the US, for the world and for Africa, the selection of a racist clown as a presidential candidate is a calamity. To make matters worse, Mr Trump faces a Democratic candidate in Hillary Clinton whose campaign has failed to live up to expectations, and is noticeably vulnerable.

There seems an outside chance now that by virtue of a weird set of circumstances, a dangerous buffoon might hold the highest office in the world’s most powerful country.

Except, of course, that Mr Trump’s victory is actually not that freakish. As the Financial Times has pointed out, Europe is now full of nationalist outliers who found surprising support. In the recent Austrian presidential poll, the Freedom Party’s Norbert Hofer won a resounding victory, drawing celebration from French rightwinger Marine le Pen. Rightwing, anti-immigration, populist parties are now dotted all over Europe and are gaining significant, but not overwhelming, support.

And of course, SA is no exception. The characteristics of the Economic Freedom Fighters are by no means the same, but the overlap is conspicuous. The leaders of these groups all seem to have a gift for publicity, a hankering for outrage, combined with a brash rejection of political niceties. They pose as interlopers storming the walls of conventionality to smite smug elites.

What lies behind their success is a toxic mixture of distrust of tired political systems and tempestuous global change. It’s no accident that these leaders find their best support among globalisation’s biggest losers: all over the developed world, bluecollar manufacturing jobs have immigrated to Asia, and what is left is a cauldron of anger and bitterness.

Yet, it’s important not to ignore the fact that theirs is not the only story. In some ways, it is the backlash to the larger picture rather than the picture itself. For 15 years, the pollster

Blue-collar manufacturing jobs have immigrated to Asia … what is left is a cauldron of anger and bitterness

Globe Scan has been asking between 14 and 18 countries’ residents whether they identify more as “global” or as “national” citizens. For the first time this year, more than half of the respondents said they considered themselves more global than national citizens.

The pattern is unmistakable; in developing countries such as Nigeria, India, China and Peru, almost two-thirds of respondents said they were more global than national.

The numbers drop precipitously in developed countries, particularly Russia and Germany, and to a lesser extent, the US. But overall, internationalism is gradually increasing, perhaps fostered by huge increases in global travel, easier and cheaper communication, and the influence of international companies and brands.

For most people, globalisation offers opportunity, and precisely for that reason, it’s easy to forget that for some, it constitutes misery.