in the country’s history. In this same sense, we will have to wait before knowing what in Trump’s campaign discourse was demagogy and what was meant to become policies that could seriously disadvantage women and minorities in the US – and those who are non-white and/or non-Christian.
On human and civil rights
The last years of struggle, debate, and politics in the US have evidenced the shortcomings of several of its institutions. Although significant improvements have been made, such as when the Supreme Court ruled that bans on same-sex marriage are unconstitutional, other injustices remain only topics of public debate and foci of social and political activism. For women, these include restrictions to their reproductive rights, the condoning of rape culture, and the failure to be provided parental leave and equal pay. For people of color, these include denial of police brutality as well as the continuation of disproportionate sentencing and imprisonment. Attempts to debate and reform these and other policies, for example, those concerning immigration and refugee asylum, have repeatedly failed. The Trump presidential campaign and the President-elect himself have provided abundant examples of homophobic, misogynistic, racist, xenophobic, and intolerant discourse. It should then come as no surprise that the electoral results in the US – bearing a striking resemblance to what happened after the UK Brexit referendum – have led to a rise in harassment and violence against minorities and immigrants.
The profound fear of which campaign promises the Trump administration will follow through on and in which terms is the very reason why whoever, conservative or liberal, who condemns discourses and acts of hatred should unite and defend against them. The protests that have sprung up throughout the country are a way to do so, but no matter the anger or disappointment of protestors, they cannot be marred by violence and confrontation. Beyond protests, civil society should rely upon the various well-developed and resourceful non-governmental organizations and social movements to find a tightly knit community from within which to work toward defending human and civil rights – not only today, but as well in the years to come. The US has often served as an example for these struggles in other countries. For this reason, women, minorities, and their allies in the US can call upon a vast transnational network to support and assist them in adapting to and confronting the difficulties of political and institutional deadlocks.
On global politics
Similarly to the unexpected twists in the policies of the Obama administration, we will require time to understand what of the Trump campaign’s foreign policy will be actualized. There is much to be concerned about regarding policy proposals that are characterized by stalwart insularity and disengagement from political, economic, and military alliances and strategies nurtured since the end of World War II. The Republican Party either disdains or entirely ignores a number of matters that are presently of global concern (i.e., climate change, the ongoing crisis of refugees, the rights of women and minorities). The Trump campaign has also introduced additional disdains and insularities to the US political landscape (i.e., tolerance of authoritarian politics, sympathies with far-right extremism, mistrust of immigration and globalization). And yet, there are now standpoints within these political camps that could signal (although for reasons entirely different from those of Sanders, for example) the end of certain threats to citizen and consumer rights – such as those posed by the free trade agreements strongly lobbied by the Obama administration. There must be bipartisan efforts to discover other matters that offer political synergy.
Those countries that wish to convince the Trump administration that commitment to these international efforts is worthwhile will have to promptly develop new strategies of diplomacy and engagement. Ultimately, it will also depend on the Trump administration to measure and deter