The Humanitarian Hole in ‘America First’ Policy

I recently watched Laura Ingram interview, Donald Trump. In general, I have become supportive of his efforts to thwart the globalist agenda that is currently underway. Obama helped forward it; Trump is helping to undercut it. But as I watched this interview with Ingram and Trump what became clear to me is a serious hole in Trump’s vision about the world. I’ll use the question that bubbled up in the interview, and then apply that to another example of the same kind. Ingram asked Trump about the “humanitarian” issues present in China; in particular, the persecution, the killing and/or jailing of Christians (and other perceived dissidents to the Chinese government; i.e. the Muslim population in China). Trump attempted to turn that part of the interview back to the ‘tremendous’ trade deals he has been making with China; ones that he argues will greatly benefit the US in the short and long terms. Ingram wouldn’t let that slide so easily, but each time she pressed him on that he kept turning back to the ‘amazing’ trade deal he has been brokering with China. Laura asked Trump why he couldn’t focus on both; she brought up Reagan. He acknowledged that Reagan did have more of a focus on humanitarian issues, but he then said: ‘but Reagan wasn’t making trade deals.’

Now, to Trump’s critics (at least the Christian ones) none of the above is lost on them; in fact, it serves as the primary impetus for their animus towards Trump’s character. It is very troubling to me that Trump cannot see what’s really going on in China with the outright persecution of Chinese Christians and other minorities. Indeed, as he also noted: ‘it is a seriously complex’ morass. But this is where the ‘America first’ policy falls vastly short. It is true that we have enough problems right here at home to occupy our attention spans for centuries, and never ending. But this is why POTUS’s have cabinets; this is why POTUS’s have delegates, and a Secretary of State. In other words, if we are going to focus on America first while ignoring the genocided plights of masses of people in China, for example, then what does America first really mean? What will the social programs and aide we construct in America look like if they are shaped in the vacuum created by shunning the plight of the rest of the world? True, America isn’t the Savior of the world; Jesus is! But as an American Christian it is my job to bear witness to our leaders of what the sanctity of life looks like. It doesn’t look like greenbacks; it looks like the broken and downtrodden of all nationalities and races in the greater world order.

Our government, if she is still the lone ‘superpower’ that many claims she is, has the resource and ‘capital’ to come to the aide of the broken of the world; particularly in China and Mexico! Trump could build into his ‘trade deals’ conditions that require that China, in particular, treats Christians and other minority people groups with dignity and respect. He could leverage ‘our strength’ in such a way that the sanctity of life is made the premium rather than a lesser or even non-issue. What good is it to make trade deals if we sell our souls in the process? Are we to think that living off the slave-labor of the Chinese, Mexicans, and others in the world is what being prosperous looks like? At the end of the day such economic policy is nihilist; it only focuses on the ‘bottom line’ as if financial health and wealth is the standard by which a people are judged. I think for Trump that is the metric he uses; it makes sense that he would largely surround himself with “evangelicals” like Paula White (his spiritual advisor) who is fully committed to the prosperity gospel. This is Trump’s gospel too, and it needs to be challenged!

Here is the real rub for me: out of the alternatives Trump is still better; and that should say something. I don’t expect the sort of equity I am referring to to come to this earth until Christ comes. But if ‘I am as He is’ (cf. I Jn 4.17) then I’d be living in utter dissonance if I did not acknowledge some of these serious problems with Trump. This post has been focusing on the negatives of Trump; there are positives (even as that comes to the sanctity of life). He needs better Christian sages around him. White et al. will only lead Trump towards his natural impulses, and that’s not good for any of us; we all need such impulses to be placed at the foot of the cross of Jesus Christ.