Trumponomics and the Schism in America’s Collective Consciousness

The term schism refers to a division or division of opinion. In recent years, this division has grown significantly among the American populace, particularly in the context of political beliefs and leadership under former President Donald Trump.

Previous administrations did little to address this schism, and certain policies of President Barack Obama either amplified it or drew further polarization. However, Trump's approach marked a departure from the status quo. By acknowledging that both sides of the schism are wrong and that violence for any reason is unacceptable, Trump brought a refreshing perspective to the discourse.

The Influence of Trump on the Schism

It's crucial to recognize that Trump did not expand the schism; rather, he took the first step by breaking the mold of presidential rhetoric. By refraining from taking a side and calling both sides equally wrong, he aimed to foster a more balanced perspective. The challenge now lies in the hands of the populace – whether we choose to continue the polarization or work towards healing the divides.

The presence of division can be seen as a symptom rather than a cause. Trump's initial platform did contain some genuine attempts at compromise, particularly as seen in his earlier writings. Nevertheless, over time, his administration became increasingly entangled in partisan issues, deviating from its original vision.

The Role of Advisors and Compromise Attempts

It's possible that Trump's advisors initially underestimated the complexity of creating a new political consensus. Their efforts in this regard were not as careful or thorough as they might have been. There was a notable lack of genuine effort from the campaign in addressing certain issues, such as immigration. A left-of-center writer noted the scarcity of voices advocating for impartial immigration reform, often overshadowed by the narrative of the opposition.

Rarely were any of the publications or individuals working on immigration reform contacted by the campaign. This lack of engagement reflects a broader issue within the political landscape – a dearth of attempts to forge a greater political consensus.

The Broader Concern

The real concern should not be focused on the political affiliations in the White House. Whether a Democrat or a Republican occupies the position of president, the need for a political consensus remains. A candidate like Hillary Clinton could have been equally ineffective at fostering unity, while Bernie Sanders, though offering some improvement, may not have been sufficient to fully address the issue.

As arguments against Trump's contributions to the schism are made, it is important to reiterate that the schism was present before his presidency. It is up to all citizens to decide whether to continue perpetuating division or to work towards a more unified national consciousness.

The dialogue needs to evolve beyond partisan rhetoric and towards constructive solutions. We must demand more from our leaders, who should not only acknowledge the issues but also take concrete steps towards unity and compromise.