After it was a land for everyone… Has America become a personal project in the era of Trump? | policy

Writer Thomas Friedman believes that US President Donald Trump is using his position to serve his personal and political interests, even though the United States was built on written documents, including the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights.

In his corner in the New York Times, the writer recalled some of the lyrics of the song by American singer Woody Guthrie, “This Land is for All of Us,” which is one of the most famous patriotic songs in the United States and expresses the idea that the country belongs to all its citizens, using it as a symbol of the basic idea that he wants to defend, which is that America is based on participation and common citizenship, not on monopolizing power or dividing society.

Friedman spoke about a celebration held on the occasion of the 250th anniversary of the independence of the United States, during which hundreds of people from diverse backgrounds gathered at the “Planet World” Museum in Washington and sang together the famous Woody Guthrie song, noting that “this atmosphere embodied the spirit of national unity that he hopes will prevail in the country.”

Friedman then cited press coverage that described the July 4 celebration as turning into a political rally for Trump rather than a national celebration, as the president focused on attacking the Democratic Party, raising fears of his political opponents, and repeating accusations related to communism, in addition to calls to tighten voting laws.

Then he compared the two images, noting that Trump’s celebration presents a different version of the song, as if its words became “This land is my land,” indicating his belief that Trump deals with power as a means to achieve his personal interests rather than as a responsibility towards all citizens.

The writer pointed out that this behavior is not new, but rather represents a consistent pattern in Trump’s political style. According to his opinion, he has never tried to be a president for all Americans, but has always focused on addressing his supporters only, relying on a discourse based on dividing society into two opposing camps, instead of searching for points of agreement among citizens.

Financial aspect

The article then moved to the financial aspect, which is the part that the writer considers the most important, and cited a report stating that about a million people bought a digital currency bearing Trump’s name and incurred losses estimated at about $3.81 billion until the end of June, while Trump himself – according to his financial disclosures – achieved large profits from these projects, in addition to huge revenues from his other commercial activities.

He also points out that Trump himself promoted the digital currency via social media, calling on people to buy it and join his “private community,” which the writer considers a factor that increases his political and moral responsibility for the losses incurred by investors.

These numbers give the issue – according to the writer – a new political dimension, as it is no longer just general accusations of abuse of office, but rather has become linked to specific numbers and losses suffered by real people, many of whom are supporters of Trump themselves. Then he wondered: If Trump had been able to retain the loyalty of his supporters despite all the previous controversy, would this loyalty continue if they were convinced that they themselves were among those financially affected?

Friedman warned Democrats of the need to focus in the upcoming elections on two political messages, the first of which is to expose Trump’s exploitation of his position for personal gain, and the second to present themselves as a party working to reunite Americans.

Friedman concluded that the desire for national unity has become an important political force, citing opinion polls indicating that a large percentage of Americans no longer consider themselves affiliated with either of the two major parties.

The article concluded by referring to a speech given by former President Barack Obama, in which he called for resistance to the polarization and anger fueled by social media and algorithms, and stressed the importance of democracy, civic engagement, mutual respect, and the belief that the future of the United States must be based on cooperation, not division.

In the end, Friedman called on the Democratic Party to avoid being drawn into angry or extremist reactions, and instead focus on convincing voters that Trump has harmed the country and benefited personally, while the goal should be to reunite Americans.