For anyone with even a vague sense of history, one of the most perplexing things about the current age of populism is how it has normalised the absurd.

Brexit, for example, continues to be described by large numbers of people as a legitimate and positive expression of political advancement, while those with an eye on the future know that economics textbooks read by our grandchildren will characterise it as an egregious act of national self-immolation.

Similarly, the success of extreme right parties in France, Austria, Hungary, and Poland are likely to be portrayed in history books in terms similar to the rise of nationalism that swept much of Europe in the 1930s.

Perhaps the most difficult thing for future generations to get their heads around, will be why Americans elected a tangerine manblob criminal as president of the world’s most powerful nation not once, but twice.

Read more

History may be littered with examples of rulers who were mad, bad or both. The emperor, Caligula, appointed his horse as a consul; Ivan the Terrible murdered his son in a fit of pique; and George III spent his final years running around Kew Palace in his jammies, with a pencil stuffed up each nostril, shouting “wibble”.

At least the people of ancient Rome, Tsarist Russia and 18th century England had the excuse of never having voted for these characters.

Times are far from certain. Just as the rise of European fascism followed the collapse of the imperial order and a global economic depression, the current wave of populism is a response to the aftermaths of a series of generational catastrophes, including the 2008 financial crash and the global pandemic.

In the relative sanity of Scotland, we have the small consolation of knowing that an ocean separates us from a country where many Republicans believe the state is secretly controlled by a cabal of baby-eating Democrats, operating from the basement of a pizza restaurant opposite the White House.

However, future generations may be perplexed to learn that, even in this country, some nominally respectable voices appeared to be seduced by the notion that Donald Trump’s re-election, far from being an historical glitch, was actually desirable for global prosperity and security.

Students reading such outlying nonsense are more likely to do so in psychology rather than history classes, because anyone who believes a Trump presidency will be anything other than disastrous for those outside of the US, clearly needs their head examined.

Many sane Americans voted for Trump because they believe that he is more likely to improve their standard of living than Kamala Harris. That is a perfectly understandable – most people in all countries vote based on their own financial self-interest – if misguided position.

Despite claiming to have presided over the most successful economy in US history during his first term, the reality – as with everything Trump says – is different.

His administration's tax cuts for individuals and corporations, protectionist trade measures and responses to the Covid pandemic, led to substantial increases in federal spending and the federal budget deficit, significantly expanding the national debt.

Despite inheriting a positive economic climate from President Obama, with near-full employment and improving household income and wealth, Trump’s policies contributed to worsening income inequality and a rise in the number of uninsured Americans by the time he left office.

Donald Trump makes his way to the 4th tee at Trump International Golf Links & Hotel in Doonbeg, Co. Clare, during a visit to Ireland (Image: Brian Lawless) His term as president coincided with the end of the longest economic expansion in US history – a 128-month period that ended in February 2020, when Covid plunged the US into a recession, causing unemployment to soar to levels mirroring the Great Depression.

When he left office in 2020, the US had 3million fewer jobs than when he assumed the presidency, making him the only modern president to preside over a smaller workforce.

While this was partly due to the pandemic, before its outbreak he had presided over a near 50% increase in the federal budget deficit, with the country’s debt-to-GDP ratio hitting a post-Second World War high.

Politicians of all shades, and in all countries, like to claim credit for prosperity and to blame other factors when things go wrong. The reality is that governments have very little influence on the performance of the economy, unless they take radical measures like slashing corporation tax or scrapping reams of regulations.

Even if they do, the time lag between them acting and the impact of those measures being felt in people’s pockets, is generally longer than an electoral term so, unless they are re-elected, their successor is more likely to reap the rewards than them.

Trump doesn’t have benefit of being a consecutive, two-term president, and so the chances are his second term will end with the same disappointment for voters as his first.

Meanwhile for those outside the US, who fear the catastrophic effects of a new Trump presidency globally – on the war in Ukraine, in the Middle East, for the future of NATO, and for global free trade – time is likely to be their saviour.

There is little a US president can do in four years, even domestically, that cannot be frustrated by political opposition and legal challenges.

With Republicans controlling both the Senate and the House of Representatives, the most effective opposition to polarising policies, like the planned mass deportation of immigrants and the reversal of environmental measures, is likely to come from action taken in the courts, at state level.

Read more

And while Trump can rely on a sympathetic Supreme Court, the wheels of justice turn so slowly that he is likely to be dictating his memoirs and topping up his fake tan in Mar-a-lago by the time any case reaches that stage.

Internationally, his professed intention of imposing 20% tariffs on imports into the US is likely to be met by strong resistance, including lengthy appeals through the World Trade Organisation.

Similarly, just as he overstated his power to influence developments in the Middle East during his first term, his intervention in Ukraine is unlikely to be decisive.

Lack of US financial support may significantly hamper that country’s ability to fight the ongoing war with Russia, but the most likely outcome will be to force other NATO members to up their contributions, at least for the next four years, rather than a capitulation by President Zelensky.

It can be tempting to view last week’s US election as an era-defining, even apocalyptic, development that will change lives and the world forever but, in historical terms, it is more likely to be seen as a blip that self-corrected over time.

Carlos Alba is a journalist, author, and PR consultant at Carlos Alba Media. His latest novel, There’s a Problem with Dad, explores the issue of undiagnosed autism among older people