The Red pill or the Blue pill?

The Red pill or the Blue pill? A review of the latest Sabanci seminar held by International Relations and Diplomacy Club's (IRDC) on the U.S Presidential Elections for 2016

By: Mohammad Mohsin Hussain / Political Science, Masters Student

With the U.S entering a new political phase in a few days, the atmosphere is tense both at home and abroad, as many wonder as to which candidate will win the most powerful seat in the country; that being the seat in the oval office. Since both remaining candidates, namely Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton represent two very different ‘Americas’ in ideological terms, whomsoever of these wins the presidency will determine the future of the world order as we know (or don’t know) it. To represent the tension in analogous terms; selecting either candidate would be akin to choosing between either the red pill or the blue pill from the Matrix; a choice that is, understandably, difficult to make.

Last week, this very ‘tension’ contextualized in the U.S presidential elections was highlighted, discussed and debated at a panel hosted between professors’ Ersin Kalaycıoğlu, Emre Erol and Emre Hatipoğlu, who being experts in their field (i.e. political science) were able to offer their rich understanding of the topic at hand.

The panel was commenced by Ersin Hocam, who first discussed the U.S political system, imparting to his audience information about how these elections were held. Additionally, Ersin Hocam also provided quantitative and qualitative research, trying to account for the narrowing down of the U.S election to two extremes; the liberal yet corrupt Hillary and the republican non-politician Donald Trump. By sensitizing the audience to how each ideological camp (i.e. liberal and republican) viewed each other’s candidate, Ersin Hocam highlighted how political party and the individual candidate were considered by their supporters.

Afterwards, Emre Erol offered his insights into Trump’s foreign policy goals, arguing that Trump viewed the world in transactional terms; for Trump, the world could be bought and sold to the highest bidder, thereby implying that any country who wanted the U.S’ help would only receive said help if they were able to pay U.S for it. Building up on Emre Erol’s views, Emre Hatipoglu discussed the uncertainty in which future of the U.S and the world was enshrouded; we could not tell what would happen if either candidate came to power, because we were yet to see how the game would play out with either candidate’s presidency in the longer run.

Depending on which pill the U.S citizens take, the future of both U.S politics and international politics will be affected by the choice.