We are on the verge of the most dangerous election in history

In just a few days, on November 3rd, the US presidential elections will take place, the most dangerous in history, and not only for the United States, but for everybody on the planet.

That vote, that by now has been going on for several weeks, confronts two septuagenarians, is largely defined by technology, social networks or search engines, which already influence the electorate much more than television, newspapers or radio. With Twitter, the chronicler of Donald Trump’s presidency; and Facebook, now turned into a sinister echo chamber that benefits conservatives to worrisome limits, it won’t be the candidates’ programs that really influences the outcome next Tuesday, but rather the decisions that social networks make regarding their management of information. In a polarized environment in which the voters of one of the candidates have renounced all objectivity and even interest in what their candidate is proposing, there are not only doubts about the result itself, but how that candidate reacts when the results are published. Decisions such as not accepting campaign advertising or making sure they are not used as vehicles for disinformation will also be decisive for the future.

It is paradoxical that in a country with the democratic tradition of the United States, we are talking about scenarios in which the possibility of a real coup d’état is not even ruled out: even if the polls give Joe Biden lead, we should remember that a landslide victory for the Democratic candidate would allow Donald Trump to begin to poison the social networks by questioning the results, with his pushy (and well-armed) followers taking to the streets. The only reason Trump couldn’t stage a coup is because he has no influence over the police, the armed forces or the FBI or the CIA, which he has insulted and belittled on numerous occasions during his tenure.

The current occupant of the White House has undermined US democracy by his systematic disinformation campaign over the last four years: many Americans now question their democracy, science, institutions like the CDC which are fundamental in a pandemic, their compatriots, or anyone who does not wear a red baseball cap. The conspirators and deniers who in many other countries seem to us to be in a minority and almost grotesque, are now legion in the United States, and we know who to thank. But beyond the terrifying prospect of Trump refusing to go gracefully, there is the question of what a second term would mean for the planet: a death sentence.

In fact, we are facing a situation similar to that of four years ago: Joe Biden may not excite many, but his plans for energy reform could radically change the role of the United States in the fight against the climate emergency, in addition to building a credible economic scenario that could generate a rapid and viable recovery. Even if you’re not thrilled about the former Veep, thinking about the alternative to him not winning should generate real fear in you, whether you’re a US citizen or not.

Four years ago, I woke up in a hotel where I was going to give a conference to find the news that Donald Trump, against all odds, had won the election. I rubbed my eyes until they were saw, exchanged my breakfast coffee for a herbal tea, and wrote about the dreadful omens the victory brought. Now, four years later and with the US about to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, I have been able to prove that I was not wrong at all, but moreover, I find that we are once again in an unpleasantly similar situation. Let us hope that, in what are the most dangerous elections in all recent history and that affect everybody on the planet, US voters know what they must do.

_________

(En español, aquí)