Responding to a Friend’s Comments on the US Elections — and Purpose


[WARNING: Tough piece to read. I will transit across macro views and micro views and use different lenses at will. Read slowly.]

It is impressive how American media defines much of the conversation once every four years through the US elections. At times, the worst and most acerbic sides of people who I do call friends emerge. I try my best to stay away from the topic during election seasons.

I am Singaporean. So will my perspectives.

Trade

Singapore, being a trade-dependent nation, always looks out for her interests in trade. The FTA she signed with the United States comes to mind. I was aghast at how much cost of living has gone up in various South-East Asian countries. Some items cost more in these countries than in Singapore, such as apples. Import tariffs are responsible for much of this mark-up (hence why FTAs are so important to Singapore, since we import so much). Younger voters in the US deserted the Democratic Party in large part, due to the cost of living. It will indeed be a tough ride for many incumbents who, too, will find governments’ inability to rein in imported inflation.

Geopolitical Division and Electoral Survival

Concerns extend beyond cost of living. There are palpable geopolitical divisions. The Italian and Hungary Prime Ministers have had effusive congratulations for Trump, whereas the French and Germans have expressed greater concerns.

But it is the Canadian congratulatory message that proved most interesting. Trudeau mentioned how the “Canadians and the U.S. have the world’s most successful partnership”. However, during Trump’s first term, Trudeau and Trump traded barbs extensively over the renegotiation of NAFTA. The reality is that exit polls for Trudeau suggests a drubbing.

The red shift is palpable. In almost all demographics, Trump gained significantly. The Republicans have retained the Senate and will likely retain the House too. The Supreme Court judges are more pro-Republican as well. All these pave to fewer obstacles for Trump to pass the legislative agenda he so wishes to pass.

Lessons?

We can draw some lessons from the American elections, however.

First, amidst the red shift lies real concerns about bread and butter issues. Pragmatic concerns continue to define Singapore politics. Voters will vote depending on whether they perceive said politician will represent them. It is perhaps useful to remember that one must first be able to survive before being able to fight for rights given our turbulent economic and geopolitical situation (a slightly more point-blank way of contextualising Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs)

The comments of others on US elections also teach us about people.

US elections somehow bring out a great enthusiasm for people to speak their mind. Despite the domestic political forces within the US not being directly relevant to us, many have used US elections as a proxy to which they share their biases, viewpoints and beliefs which are fundamental to them.

Beliefs and Its Disagreements

To be fair, beliefs are important. We should confidently answer questions such as, “What are the three most important values you will teach your children?” These questions help make clear some fundamental beliefs we stand by. These are beliefs because they may not have any rational basis in them. And because they are fundamental, we will tend to defend them far beyond what we will normally do simply because they form a backbone of what defines us.

But one has to be careful not to be carried away defending positions of a distant entity. We can do worse by invoking our own beliefs as being morally superior to others with the veneer of wanting to help “others see the light”. We can choose to let our friendships die on better hills than that of the US elections.

The “Fire” in One’s Eyes

But what hill is worth dying on? Surely there are causes worth fighting for. And this made me recount a post years ago when I read the book “When Breath Becomes Air” (this book is worth such a read that I think I might re-read it). The one-sentence problem statement that summarises this book is as follows:

What do you do when the future, no longer a ladder toward your goals in life, flattens out into a perpetual present?

Perhaps a more stark way of putting the question is as follows: suppose you have been told that you may one day, just vanish. What would you do for yourself, and for those who you care about?

This read gripped me. I thought of how such extrema could be motivating; another parallel can be drawn from “Sun Tzu’s Art of War” where Sun Tzu describes “death ground” or “deadly ground” (pardon the terrible translation). With no escape, soldiers fight to the death.

But it is also in such circumstances that we squeeze out what we truly believe in — the “fire” that shines through our eyes as causes we believe are worth fighting for. (Just be careful not to copy the belief lock, stock and barrel; we just need to copy the mentality that there may be no tomorrow, so that we fuel ourselves with motivation to fight the best fight we can today.)

My Own Beliefs?

From a personal lens, it is about doing as much justice to my own abilities. And from a Singaporean lens, it is about providing the next generation, hopefully through inspiring them on what we can do, to continue beating the odds of history. Small city states do not have great odds, but having dealt such cards, we play them the best way we can.

And if it means being the most effective country in providing bread and butter needs today so we can survive to fight the next day, why not? That, in itself, is a noble cause: simply to prove a point that Singapore is, and will continue to net the economic growth necessary to feed her people and provide a good enough life for her people to then gain access to other freedoms: freedom to think about shaping society and refining it.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

one × 4 =