It may or not have been Plato who said it first, but I like it
anyway: 'As empty vessels make the loudest sound, so they that have the least
wit are the greatest babblers.'
If it isn't already, I suggest it should be inscribed in gold
lettering over the entrance to the White House. After all, it is the home -- at
least for now -- of the US's undisputed Babbler-in-Chief.
I have, belatedly, learnt to stop worrying so much about his
babblings, because I have come to the conclusion that they have little or no
significance beyond signalling the emptiness of the vessel from which they
emanate. (I am well aware of the risks of tempting fate, but I still think the
point is worth making.)
Pride of place in the Babblers' Hall of Fame came just a couple
of days ago when, as the New York Times
headline put it: 'Trump Makes Puzzling Claim That Rising Stock Market Erases
Debt.' The story's first line said it all: 'President Trump suggested on
Wednesday evening that a soaring stock market might be “in a sense” reducing
the national debt, a statement that is not true, in any sense.'
As for the much-heralded wall along the border with Mexico?
Babble. The repeal of Obamacare? More babble. (His latest attempt, by cutting
off government subsidies to health insurers, faces immediate challenge in the
courts.) The 'total destruction' of North Korea? Babble, babble. (Thank
goodness.)
Over the past few days, we've had threats to revoke the
broadcasting licences of TV networks such as NBC (the babbler doesn't have the
power to do that), and the staggeringly inane remark that 'It’s frankly
disgusting the way the press is able to write whatever they want to write.'
(I'd love to be the White House aide who draws his attention to the first
amendment to the US constitution: 'Congress shall make no law ... abridging the
freedom of speech or of the press ...)
So I'm not exactly surprised that, according to a hair-raising
account in Vanity Fair, the president
'seems to be increasingly unfocused and consumed by dark moods', largely
because he hasn't been able to do any of the things he wants to do.
Those of us who are terrified by the prospect of him actually
achieving any of his policy objectives have some reason to be thankful. But
that is not the same as being complacent -- one thing he can do is launch a
nuclear attack, and there have been several reports suggesting that he
sometimes seems to be itching to do just that.
According to Vanity Fair, 'One
former official even speculated that [White House chief of staff John] Kelly
and Secretary of Defense James Mattis have discussed what they would do in the
event Trump ordered a nuclear first strike.' The question being, of course,
would they be able to stop him?
None of this is meant to suggest that the Trump presidency has
had no impact anywhere. According to the New York Times, the Environmental Protection Agency, which under its
Trump-appointed director has adopted a policy of doing as little as possible to
protect the environment, has 'moved to undo, delay or otherwise block more than
30 environmental rules, a regulatory rollback larger in scope than any other
over so short a time in the agency’s 47-year history.'
And even without a border wall, the number of illegal immigrants
caught trying to get into the US from Mexico has dropped by 20% compared to
last year. Mind you, this is in large part the continuation of a
well-established trend: when I was last in Mexico four years ago, there were
already more migrants crossing south from the US into Mexico, because of
economic stagnation north of the border, than there were crossing in the
opposite direction.
The truth is that when the babbling emanates from the White
House, it can sometimes have an impact even if it is not translated into
executive action. It makes a noise, and people adjust their behaviour
accordingly. The number of refugees being admitted from Muslim-majority
countries has fallen, for example, even though the president's 'Muslim travel
ban' has remained largely frozen by court rulings.
It also has an obvious impact on the way the rest of the world
regards the US. The president is its symbol, and if the president is an
incoherent babbler with only the most tenuous grasp of reality, well, that's
not great news for the nation's global reputation or its ability to protect its
national interests.
Which brings us to the Iran nuclear deal, which at the time of
writing, President Trump is reported to be preparing to 'decertify'. But again,
it is perfectly possible that whatever he says (remember 'the worst deal ever
negotiated'?), it may amount to little more than yet more babbling.
All the other signatories to the agreement -- Russia, China, France,
Germany, the UK, and the European Union -- are determined to make it stick. How
Iran might react to more Trump babble, however, remains an open question. As
does the reaction from Kim Jong-un in Pyongyang.
The US secretary of state Rex Tillerson is reported to have
called Trump 'a (expletive deleted) moron' after a meeting in which the
president apparently suggested that the US should increase its nuclear arsenal
ten-fold. So in future, when Tillerson seeks to reassure nervous allies abroad,
I suggest he simply tells them that the Babbler-in-Chief is babbling again, and
they should take no notice.
It might make them -- and us -- feel just a little bit safer. Or
not.
Hello Robin,
ReplyDeleteI have been listening to you for years and have always enjoyed your gritty realism.
One area of change you didn't mention is the lack of funding of scientific research in the U.S. since the change of power. Famously few scientists are natural public communicators and resent time lobbying their cause. So if you are looking for a subject to explore, the scientific political funding interface and its ramifications in the U.S. U.K vs China et al could do with your help.
Thanks
Tony Barraclough
Dear Robin,
ReplyDeleteAn invaluable but true summary of Trumpland
Ashok