Shameful! Press backs Theresa May’s pragmatic response to Donald Trump
< < Go Back
The Guardian’s editorial about Donald Trump’s latest illiberal act refers to the poem by Martin Niemöller about the way in which Germans in the 1930s turned a blind eye to Nazi outrages.
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out —
Because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out —
Because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out —
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak for me.
In other words, pragmatism played into Hitler’s hands. As the Guardian notes, the reality of what Americans have done in electing Trump as their president “is only beginning to hit home.”
Day after day he is signing away human rights with executive orders. The latest is the ban on Syrian refugees and people from seven predominantly Muslim nations from entering the United States: “a cruel, stupid and bigoted act, designed to hurt and divide.”
The Guardian, with Theresa May’s embarrassing endorsement of Trump’s election in mind, argues that nations proclaiming themselves to be Trump’s ally risk being implicated as supporters of his policies.
It asks: “Will anti-Trump Republicans stand up for law, justice and order, or will they bow the knee? Will Democrats mount an effective opposition?”
But its main question is aimed at May and her government, scorning her pragmatism: “She has been played for a sucker… She is deceiving herself if she thinks she can control Mr Trump… A line has been crossed in Washington.
“The public gets it. Sir Mo [Farah] gets it. The prime minister needs to get it too… Britain must not be, or be seen as, a lackey of possibly the worst leader the US has ever elected.”
I may be only one day away from this blog’s demise, but I’m mighty proud of working for the Guardian when I read those words. But what of the rest of the UK national press reaction to Trump’s immigration ban?
Here’s the pragmatic Daily Telegraph; the Sun; and the Daily Express.
Clearly, “British interests”, most obviously over trade because of Brexit, are the overriding concern for the pragmatists.
The Daily Mirror, at least, was having none of it: “The prime minister should inform the maverick US president that he is not welcome on a state visit, so no banquet with the Queen until he drops the grotesque bigotry.
“This crisis is a severe test of May’s pledge to be a ‘candid friend’ after the PM shamefully dodged, three times, criticising a policy that is light on evidence but heavy on prejudice.” Precisely. Principle counts more than pragmatism.
More From The Guardian: