Trump is not Brexit

Trump won the elections. Okay. If I were an American citizen I would have voted for Clinton and I would be sad. As a European I find the issue a lot more complex (see later), but my views are much closer to Clinton than to Trump so I am disappointed.

But I think that all this outrage that is going over the internet about Trump winning is not appropriate. Lot of people are saying that this is the end of the world, that it is a historical tragedy and so on. It got even more intense reactions than the Brexit! Which is a sad thing because the Brexit is really a historical event and most likely a sad one. Of course it is always easier to direct hatred against a single person like Trump, than against an abstract motion like Brexit.





First, let's make something clear. Just because you don't want something to happen that does not justify labeling it as a historical disaster and whatnot.
That's childish.
Furthermore it is arrogant.

Yes, it is arrogant. Because what is implied here is that you are so sure about what you perceive to be right(eous) that you treat anything you disagree with as a crime against humanity itself. Now that's arrogance and zealotry.
Yes, I know, the whole political correctness - social justice movement is advocating that type of attitude, but it doesn't make that right.

So just because you prefered Hilary does not entitle you to label Trumps election  as a crime against humanity.

When should we really be abhorred by a certain decision? Well, I see two types of reason. Either the consequences are so dire that they justify such a judgement OR the way that decision was reached was so outrageous that it justifies such a judgement.
People are shouting all over the internet about both, but I don't believe that they are correct in either case.

As for the 'tragic' consequences of Trump being elected:

This is just another election in the US which follows the usual pattern of a republican succeeding a democrat and vica versa. The US still has strong checks and counterweights system, no policies or decisions have been embraced by these elections. No dice has been cast.
You could say that the whole personality of Trump makes him more likely to make mistakes than Clinton. Probably you are right. But simply saying that probably Clinton would have been a better president by her more moderate virtue does not justify treating Trump as a historical tragedy. There are no clearly cut consequences in sight that would justify this outrage about Trump.

(As for US foreign policy I think that Hillary is actually much more frightening if you recall that she was foreign "minister"between 2009-2013 and the Arab Spring happened in 2011 which quickly turned into the Syrian and Libyan civil wars - the greatest humanitarian disaster since the 2nd World War, destabilized the whole region and energized European right wing populism, eroding democractic values in the EU and trust in the EU. Brexit would not have been possible without the Syrian Civil War).

So let's talk about what's the real issue here, the way this result was reached.

Many people say that this is the victory of demagoguery, hate-mongering and the victory of a political culture that is proud to ignore facts. I think this is true at least to a certain degree. But this stands true for the other side as well. In the last few years I read quite a few articles about how divided the US became and how both sides simply hear what they prefer to hear, how they both demonize the other and such.
And I seen evidence of this sad state of affairs on the liberal side too. So 'progressives' and liberals might mourn the passing of rational discourse but they did more than their fair share of work in digging that grave.I mean come on, identity politics got to the point where they declared that critical discussion of identity politics is an offense by itself - that's grandmaster level on having a closed mind.

So you cannot be outraged about Trumps victory for the reason that it is the victory of hate-mongering and ignorance, because the victory of Clinton would have been the same.

But let's be a bit more lenient with ourselves. Keeping an open mind is a difficult task. It is not the first time in history that debates became irrational and the division deeply entrenched. But there is a backup system for these kind of situations built into the American political system: the two-party system and the routine of presidency going back and forth between the two parties every 8 years. (During the last 60 years only a single term broke that pattern).

Many people labeled Trump's victory as a "Backlash". That is true, but that "backlash" is actually the best virtue of any parliamentary democracy.

This back and forth ensures that only those policies stay which have a wide-support. It forces people to find compromises.
You know what is funny about compromises? That everyone will tell you that it is a wise thing to find a compromise, but then no one likes to make one. Because a compromise means that you both do indeed give up something that is important to you.
You may be able to enact less changes but those will have a large consensus behind them. Policies might be slower this way but with several iterations you have a much better chance at getting it right then simply staying with your first idea and being adamant about it.

We Hungarians have quite an experience how it feels when half of the population thinks that they are infallible, they want to make no compromise  and they have found the means to impose their will upon the rest to the utmost extreme and there is no visible end to this situation. Let me tell you: it is not good.

So people should realize that it is a good news that the back and forth of the American political system still works. Even if many people are dissatisfied with it at the moment. It might even be a great blessing for the 'progressives'.

Why?
Because it gives a reason to pause, do a bit of soul searching and self-criticism and to improve upon your own ideas.
Let's face it, the political correctness movement ended up demonizing and antagonizing white males in general blaming there for almost every social problem. For a movement that wanted to be inclusive and just, there is a lot of space to improve there.

So I do think that this back and forth between parties is a good thing on the long run, even if it has some price tags attached to it. And that's why I think that Trump's victory is very different than Brexit.
Trump's victory is the sign that the balances and checks of the US still works. On the other hand Brexit is the failure of that.

The English parliamentary system is based on the idea that the parliament makes all the important decisions, where all decisions must be accepted by two houses of well informed MPs. There is very good reason that the decision about leaving the EU was given to the parliament and not to a direct democracy. This system kept England the paragon of sane and rational decision making for many centuries.
The Brexit referendum as a binding decision is unconstitutional. It is against not only the letter of the law, but the intention of the law. These kind of questions were not intented to be decided by a referendum for the very reasons that happened there: demagougery run so high that two days after the brexiters achieved 52% they admitted that most of their propaganda were lies.
Everyone said before the referendum that it won't be legally binding, because a referendum has no authority to decide that issue. Yet now Theresa May tries to push it through without the parliament, and judges who are trying to enforce the constitution are labeled as "enemies of the people".

It is quite evident that the checks and counterweights of the English system are under a severe attack, with a very narrow 52-48 vote labeled as the "will of the people" that is supposed to overrule all constitutional rules.

That's why Trump is very different from Brexit. Both could be wrong decisions, and both decisions are reached by demagougery, but Trump is a decision made in the spirit of a healthy checks and counterweights while Brexit is a decision that undermines the system of checks and counterweights.

That's why Brexit is a historical tragedy and the election of Trump is not.