Do you believe in punishment for abortion?
The answer
is… there has to be some form of punishment.
For the woman?
Yes
What punishment?
I have not
determined what the punishment would be.
Why not?
Because I
haven’t determined it.
I don’t think
we can learn anything much about Trump’s views on abortion from his recent
interview with Chris Mathews, because he has no views on abortion. It’s just one
of those things he’s supposed to be against while he’s running for office. As
for his attitude to women, the interview reinforces what we already know, that
he doesn’t think much about them except so far as they serve or fail to serve
his needs. The most revealing thing about this exchange is what it tells us
about the role of President as Trump imagines it. He sees himself, like a
medieval king or a Roman emperor, autonomously determining punishments.
I happen to
be re-watching the BBC/HBO series Rome.
Ten years on, the parallels with the contemporary American political scene are striking.
In episode 2 (written by the series creator Bruno Heller) the young Octavius is asked by a
conservative centurion why things in Rome have to change. He says, ‘Because the
Roman people are suffering, because slaves have taken all the work, because
nobles have taken all the land and the streets are full of the homeless.’
Replace Romans with Americans, slaves with sweatshop workers and other
underpaid offshore employees, and nobles with the one percent, and you have the
problem that is attracting voters to both Trump and Sanders in unexpected
numbers.
Sanders offers an analysis of the issues and an approach
towards a solution. Trump, an armchair Caesar, offers only himself. Having
crucified or put to the sword many aspiring executives in Reality-TV land and
conquered vast swathes of real estate, and being now rich with the spoils of
business, he crosses the Rubicon into presidential politics.
The priests who preside over the sacred rites are bribed or dazzled
into overlooking his past blasphemies. The senators and nobles, a self-serving
crew who pay lip-service to the ideals of the Republic, see Trump for what he
is – a would-be tyrant who is stirring up the populace against them. Of course
the tyranny he offers is not significantly different from their own, but,
expressed more nakedly and in cruder terms, it threatens the stability on which
their power depends.
They look around for a Pompey, a veteran of old campaigns,
to defeat the upstart. Romney is on hand to call Trump a fraud and a conman.
McCain lends his weight to the attack. But these are yesterday’s men,
has-beens. Their legions are demoralised and disloyal. In desperation, the
senators plot to assassinate the dictator on the Convention floor.
Anticipating civil disturbance, the Cleveland police are
already equipping themselves with additional riot gear. Let’s hope it’s only
the Republican Party that is plunged into civil war and that they limit their
weapons to tweets, blogs and hostile briefings. Meanwhile we can expect Trump
to continue issuing decrees from the imperial throne of his imagination.
What about the guy that gets her pregnant –
is he responsible under the law?
I would say…
no.
