Trump vs. Harris: Critical choice for America's democratic future

An article by Financial Times presents a stark dichotomy between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, emphasizing the profound implications of the 2024 election for both the US and global stability. It argues that Trump's candidacy poses a direct threat to democratic norms, suggesting his presidency could lead to significant upheaval, while Harris represents a continuation of established democratic values.

The piece highlights Trump's claims about the 2020 election being "stolen" as a central theme of his campaign, framing it as a repudiation of the peaceful transfer of power, a foundational element of American democracy. His intention to pardon individuals involved in the January 6 Capitol insurrection is portrayed as an endorsement of political violence and extremism.

In contrast, Harris is depicted as a candidate focused on a more conventional political agenda, albeit one that lacks the fervor or clarity of a defined platform. The opinion piece acknowledges her struggles but emphasizes her commitment to democratic norms and the rule of law, painting her as a stabilizing force amid Trump's radical propositions.

The analysis delves into the economic ramifications of Trump's proposals, particularly his protectionist trade policies, which could lead to a global trade war. It argues that his tariffs would primarily hurt American consumers and could hinder US economic growth. Furthermore, the potential undermining of the Federal Reserve's independence is presented as a risk that could destabilize the U.S. dollar's status as the world’s reserve currency.

The piece warns of the potential geopolitical consequences of a Trump presidency, such as deteriorating relationships with traditional allies and emboldening authoritarian regimes. It suggests that Trump's foreign policy could lead to a withdrawal from global engagements and disrupt established alliances, notably NATO, which could have lasting impacts on global security and democratic governance.

The article posits that Harris’s agenda, though less exhilarating, promotes stability and continuity. It points to her commitment to reproductive rights and a transition to renewable energy as significant and positive aspects of her platform. These policies are framed as not only beneficial for domestic policy but also as aligned with broader global interests.

A recurring theme is the value of stability in governance. The piece argues that while Harris's approach may seem mundane, it contrasts sharply with the chaos and uncertainty associated with Trump. The author implies that stability is often underappreciated, especially in a time when democratic norms are under threat.

In conclusion, the opinion piece urges the American electorate to consider the long-term implications of their choice in the upcoming election. It frames the decision as not merely about policy differences but as a fundamental choice between upholding democratic values or embracing a potentially destabilizing and autocratic future.

The analysis resonates with fears about the erosion of democracy and the need for a cautious approach to leadership in tumultuous times, ultimately advocating for a careful consideration of the candidates’ broader implications for both the US and the international community.

By Vafa Guliyeva