Salvatore Fevola
Reflection 1 of 5
Trump May Have America, But the City is Still Ours
Author: David Wallace-Wells
In this emotional article, David Wallace-Wells sets up the tumultuous madhouse that New York is, through the depiction of the city after Trump had been elected. Focusing on the negative shock that most New Yorkers (over 80% of us) felt during the election night, he presents the city as if our bubble unexpectedly popped despite our belief in the power of our “technocratic liberalism.” Yet in the madness that ensued after Trump’s “coronation,” people showed their unity making sure their fellow New Yorkers knew they would be there for them. Through the setting he created, Wells comes to the conclusion that despite Trump being office, the city will stay in the hands of the people living there and wont be changed by a shift in the person occupying the presidents seat.
Well’s article is important for its power in reminding people that New Yorkers aren’t push overs and can resist changes, but at the same time I have an critique for his approach. Well’s seems to be invoking too much emotion in the article, by expanding on the sadness that Trump’s election had caused and how he is a menace to the diversity and liberalism present in New York; however I feel that he could take a more individualistic approach on the experiences of people who couldn’t care less and didn’t miss a beat after the election. The article feels more like a hit piece on Trump than on the bolstering of New York pride. He mentions one of the beautiful things about the city when he says, “We know this city is, ultimately, ungovernable — that it’s too unruly, that it’s at its best when it’s unruly…” New York is, as he describes, a “bubble” in the sense that it feels like a separate country from America. Within the paragraph he mentions a few of the rules New York decides on its own behalf, showing the beauty of our government and Federalism. Through the approach of individualism and that New York probably wont be harmed by a new Leader, he could have quelled a lot more of the fears of a Trump presidency rather than resonating the fears within people. There’s a beautiful description of the role of president that fits this narrative and it goes something like this: The constitution was made so that when an idiot is elected as the president he cant ruin the country too much.
The city will always be ours, and a presidential election can’t change that.
Questions:
- Why do we give so much power to the Executive Branch of Government, to the point where we are afraid of someone ruining our lives as a result of being elected?
- Can someone actually take away the diversity and strength of New York? How would someone be able to?
- Why did people vote for Trump in other states? Can literally all his voters be racists/xenophobes/etc or is it possible that people in other states experience different things from New Yorkers?
- What differences would be made if Hillary Clinton was elected for presidency instead of Trump? Would the “red-states” have reacted like New York?
