Pundits, analysts and opinion makers are a confounded and confused lot nowadays. They are simply unable to digest the "fact" that "bigoted" demagogue like Donald Trump has become the Republican nominee for the President of the United States. Even worse, highly respected pollsters like Nate Silver of Five Thirty Eight seem to think that Trump actually has a fair chance of beating Hillary Clinton and becoming President of America. Liberals are aghast. And why not? Ever since Trump announced he will run in 2015, he has issued public tirades against Muslims, Mexicans, other Hispanics, women, immigrants and many more. It seems inconceivable that the same voters who created history by electing Barrack Obama as the first black President of America would opt for a divisive, prejudiced and arguably dangerous demagogue like Trump.
Pundits were equally shocked and dismayed when citizens of United Kingdom voted to move out of the European Union. Not many know, or are interested in Philippines. But in a recent election there, voters elected Roberto Durtete, another loud demagogue who made even more outrageous statements than Trump. In fact, credible sources say that since he has been President, police and security forces have killed more than 400 drugs dealers and peddlers without even a semblance of a trial. Durtete had vowed to kill drug offenders and the average citizen is cheering and egging him on.
Coming back to Trump, what makes such a seemingly outrageous person become a serious candidate? And why is that his opponent Hillary Clinton is so disliked by the average American despite her seemingly impeccable credentials and intelligence? Pundits will go on arguing: but the simple reason is that average citizens are sick and tired of a "system" that has been gamed and captured by the elites and the elitists. For millions of American voters, Hillary and her husband former President Bill Clinton have become the visible symbols of the worst excesses of this elitism. In the United States, the rich have actually got richer while the poor are getting poorer. For close to five decades, the poor in America felt they had a chance. More and more if them see that window of opportunity closing down. And they blame elitists, including the mainstream media for this mess. In fact, anger against elitists and mainstream media has become a dangerous global phenomenon that threatens to encourage the rise of more demagogues and autocrats who feed on fear and prejudice.
But the "system" is clearly failing. Just one example will indicate how badly. A recent study conducted in the United States "proved" statistically that the highest paid CEOs were actually the worst performers in terms of shareholder returns. This is what fastco exist writes (the study has been highlighted across media platforms): "MSCI, a corporate governance research group, analyzed the pay of 800 CEOs at 429 publicly traded U.S. companies over a 10-year period up to 2014. It included both base pay and stock option payouts. Then it looked at total shareholder returns over that time, including stock price growth and dividends. If you invested $100 in the companies run by the best-paid 20% of CEOs, you would have seen a total return of $265. If you had invested $100 in the companies run by the worst-paid 20% of CEOs, you would have got back $367."
Call it crony capitalism or elitism or whatever: the system has been gamed and rigged. As Raghuram Rajan, who will soon leave his job as RBI governor, effectively said in a book about 10 years ago: the biggest challenge that liberals face is that of saving capitalism from "capitalists". The world surely will become more fear driven, more prejudiced and more inward looking if they fail this challenge. So far, it doesn't look like the liberals are even bothered to take up the real challenge.
