Fracturing political parties, loss of faith in the efficacy of government, gridlock. The Weimar Republic failed for many reasons unique to its place in the history of Germany, but many of its problems reflect on the current situation in the United States. The breaking point for the Weimar government came several years before the appointment of Hitler to the office of Chancellor when Chancellors, in order to break the gridlock in the Reichstag began ruling by fiat. The country came under the rule of dictators before Hitler. Gridlock is the destroyer of democracy, it is the fatal flaw in democratic government. Western Europe in the 1920’s and 30’s provides at least 3 clear examples of the danger to democratic governments caused by gridlock. Spain in the 1930’s, France in the 20’s and 30’s and, of course, Germany.

The United States has been in a prolonged political crisis since at least the Presidential election of 2000. The problems have accelerated since 2006. The fundamental problems of a changing economy, which has seen the destruction of high-paying, stable jobs that did not require substantial education, has driven much political dissatisfaction in this country. The extensive gerrymandering leading to a more politically extreme House of Representatives has not helped, nor the proliferation of lobbying to aid increasingly expensive and prolonged political campaigns. Additionally, the democratization of news media fostered by the Internet which has allowed people to listen to politically affirming news and commentary to the exclusion of generally agreed upon facts and opinions has widened the gulf between people of differing political persuasions.

The true problem in the country is the gulf between what many conservatives and liberals believe. It seems that now, more than any time in recent memory, that one side completely rejects the view of the other. The problem with this is that in addition to politically polarizing legislation facing intractable resistance, more mundane affairs and non-partisan issues become casualties of gridlock. A host of problems that are facing the United States right now and in the near future are being swept under the rug. There has been no comprehensive strategy to deal with cybersecurity for American corporations which face enormous long term problems from the theft of their intellectual property, which makes them vulnerable to foreign competition and represents a theft of billions of dollars of research and development. There is no comprehensive strategy for updating American infrastructure and coming to terms with our many legacy institutions. Medicare and social security are economically unsound and will eventually fail or suck up too much of the national budget and, finally, there is no plan to deal with $19 trillion in debt.  The absurdities of the rise of Donald Trump are the least of the problems facing the nation, and in the long view, it is not the Donald Trumps, but the mundanities of proper governance that are a threat to the Republic.

Beginning in the 1870’s there was general discontent among farmers that the economic policies of the United States government was stacked against them. They protested and lobbied for years, and even had an influential champion in William Jennings Bryan. Reforms were passed slowly in state legislatures and in the federal government but many of their problems were ignored, swept aside by the corrupted politicians of the Gilded Age who were enthralled by wealthy industrialists. For 60 years the populist and socialist movements were stymied though they were brought to public consciousness by the progressives and muckrakers. The dam didn’t burst until the upheaval of the Great Depression. Under dire circumstances that directly threatened the stability and long term viability of the United States government. Even with the massive reforms and regulations put in place by the federal government under Roosevelt when he took office with a liberal majority in Congress, there began to be aggressive pushback by conservatives. It is notable that Roosevelt did not pass any significant domestic legislation after 1937. Change in favor of people as opposed to entrenched businesses comes slowly in the United States.

The current populist cord struck by Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump is profoundly ironic. Bernie Sanders proposes socialist positions which are well established in Europe, but they have not broken the power of enormous conglomerates there. If anything, the governments of Europe are more closely aligned to large corporations than in the United States. The true irony of his positions really have to do with how little he could actually accomplish as president of the United States to realize his policy positions. A Sanders presidency would be a prescription for certain gridlock, maybe worse than some of the other candidates would see. The irony for Sanders is the same irony that has pervaded the Obama presidency. His two major pieces of domestic legislation, somewhat like Roosevelt’s, were passed early in his first term and he has been blocked at every turn since then. While promising the prospect of change and unity, Obama’s presidency has brought gridlock and division (much of it not directly his fault). Sanders supporters desperately want significant social and economic change, but electing him President would guarantee that there would be none.

Donald Trump proposes wildly unrealistic policy positions and changes them frequently. His firmest base of supporters are those who believe that they have been ignored and lied to by the Republican Party. That they should believe a candidate who promises things that are even more improbable than Conservative republicans have promised is indeed a terrible irony. The supporters of the two populists should know that by supporting those two candidates they are deluding themselves into thinking that they will bring the changes they wish to see.

It is interesting to note that in an election year where the democrats are fielding such an unpopular and weak candidate as Hillary Clinton that one would expect voter turnout to be very low for democrats in the general election. If Donald Trump becomes the republican nominee, and he probably will at this point, I believe he will increase opposition voter turnout. The effect of Donald Trump becoming the republic nominee will almost guarantee the election of Hillary Clinton because Trump has stirred such opposition from normally uninvested or uninterested voters. If the Republicans could have fielded a centrist he would have a very good chance of winning the presidency.