Publisher's Note — February 8, 2017, 1:19 pm

Trump the Maleficent

The vocational training of American real estate tycoons is strict and pitiless.

A version of this column originally ran in Le Devoir on February 6, 2017. Translated from the French by John Cullen.

As a young tenant in Manhattan in the 1970s, I rented an apartment in a large Beaux-Arts building—once elegant, but by then dilapidated—whose wealthy owner, Joseph Heller, was an object of mockery because of what was considered a very peculiar habit. Every weekend, Mr. Heller would appear in the basement, unaccompanied, to empty the coin receptacles in the washing machines and dryers.

It may be that he didn’t trust the old black man, the amiable Abraham, who managed the building. But I’m more inclined to believe that such behavior is coded in the DNA of New York real-estate tycoons—penny-pinchers, first and foremost—and that’s what I think about when I consider the maleficent Donald Trump, now installed in the White House. I’m quite familiar with the milieu, since my billionaire grandfather (also a Manhattan real-estate tycoon) played the same role—the miser—throughout my childhood and afterward, when he disinherited my father. Unlike Trump, who began his business career with a considerable inheritance from his father and grandfather, my grandfather was a self-made man. When it comes to the formation of this category of businessman, however, beginnings matter little; the training, strict and pitiless, is the same for all. According to Trump’s biographer David Cay Johnston, Fred Trump, father of Donald, wasn’t easy on his children: “The boys were assigned to sweep out storage rooms, empty coins from basement washers and dryers, make minor repairs under the supervision of maintenance crews, and, as they got a little older, collect rents.” Another biographer, Michael D’Antonio, reports that there was a certain “art to rent collecting, which, when done in person, required a step to the side whenever a door was opened just in case someone was armed with, say, a bucket of hot water.” This harsh on-the-job training explains more than anything else Trump’s deep-seated maliciousness and his belligerent campaign against everybody, all the time: life as war. Fred Jr., Donald’s older brother, didn’t survive that war; he died an alcoholic at the age of forty-three. D’Antonio relates how Trump Sr., “an enormously wealthy man who nevertheless picked up nails at his building sites,” had severely criticized his heir for having had new windows installed, instead of reusing the old ones, in an aged building that was undergoing renovation.

Donald was better at learning his profession’s cruel catechism. When he demolished the Bonwit Teller department store on Fifth Avenue to make way for the construction of Trump Tower, he hired more than two hundred undocumented Polish immigrants to do work that would normally have been performed by American workers, who were unionized and much better paid. Trump then stiffed the Poles—who were without papers, vulnerable, and therefore could easily be underpaid—and finally agreed to a settlement only after a suit brought by the victims had been litigated for sixteen years. It’s true that he ended up having to pay a sum of money, but in real-estate psychology, he who drags things out wins. In spite of the bad publicity and the lawyers’ fees, in the long run Trump doubtless came out ahead. And even if he didn’t manage to pull in more cash in the final accounting, he could still enjoy the keen pleasure characteristic of his species: “I made ’em bleed, the bastards!”

Dragging things out, and thus frustrating one’s adversaries, was also among my grandfather’s preferred tactics. From his base in his hotel on Singer Island in Florida, he’d invite a potential buyer or seller to visit him there in order to settle the final details of an almost done deal. If the guest had to come from far away—California, for example—he’d arrive tired from the long trip. The following day, my grandfather would let it be known that he was unavailable (illness, scheduling error, emergency elsewhere), and therefore the visitor would have to face a choice: to leave without the contract he’d come for, or to stay and wait for his counterpart to return. In many cases, the irritated, not to say humiliated, visitor would give in and lower his price or raise his offer. Such a victory, achieved by grinding down his opponent, was a source of great joy for my grandfather.

I imagine that Trump experienced the same feeling of euphoria last month during his “negotiations” with the Mexican president, Enrique Peña Nieto. Having planned a trip to Washington for the supposed purpose of revising NAFTA, Peña Nieto was first forced to undergo humiliation. When Trump announced his intention to build a border wall to stop illegal immigrants (who, like the illegal Poles who earlier demolished Bonwit Teller for Trump, come to the United States in search of badly paid jobs) and that Mexico, which is itself a cheap labor colony for American businesses, will pay for it, Peña Nieto, a simple politician unfamiliar with the rules of the real-estate game, protested. Then Trump doubled down: if Mexico refuses to pay for the wall, he tweeted, the meeting had better be canceled. Peña Nieto hesitated, but the next day, to save face, he officially canceled the meeting. Trump’s response: in order to cover the costs of the wall, he says, he’s going to impose a 20 percent tariff on Mexican exports to the United States. Which leader will end up lowering his price? And who will be the happy beneficiary?

Help support our ongoing coverage of Donald Trump by subscribing to Harper’s Magazine today!

Share
Single Page

More from John R. MacArthur:

Publisher's Note November 10, 2017, 5:29 pm

Industrial Tourism

NAFTA is an investment contract that protects American and Canadian goods and interests against Mexican expropriation, regulation, and pestering by local authorities.

Publisher's Note October 5, 2017, 11:31 am

A Sad Heritage

Publisher's Note August 11, 2017, 5:34 pm

Le Chagrin

“Could I not avoid Trump and his bullshit, not even by crossing the Atlantic Ocean?”

Get access to 167 years of
Harper’s for only $45.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

December 2017

Document of Barbarism

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Destroyer of Worlds

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Crossing Guards

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“I am Here Only for Working”

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Dear Rose

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Year of The Frog

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
Destroyer of Worlds·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In February 1947, Harper’s Magazine published Henry L. Stimson’s “The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb.” As secretary of war, Stimson had served as the chief military adviser to President Truman, and recommended the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The terms of his unrepentant apologia, an excerpt of which appears on page 35, are now familiar to us: the risk of a dud made a demonstration too risky; the human cost of a land invasion would be too high; nothing short of the bomb’s awesome lethality would compel Japan to surrender. The bomb was the only option. Seventy years later, we find his reasoning unconvincing. Entirely aside from the destruction of the blasts themselves, the decision thrust the world irrevocably into a high-stakes arms race — in which, as Stimson took care to warn, the technology would proliferate, evolve, and quite possibly lead to the end of modern civilization. The first half of that forecast has long since come to pass, and the second feels as plausible as ever. Increasingly, the atmosphere seems to reflect the anxious days of the Cold War, albeit with more juvenile insults and more colorful threats. Terms once consigned to the history books — “madman theory,” “brinkmanship” — have returned to the news cycle with frightening regularity. In the pages that follow, seven writers and experts survey the current nuclear landscape. Our hope is to call attention to the bomb’s ever-present menace and point our way toward a world in which it finally ceases to exist.

Illustration by Darrel Rees. Source photographs: Kim Jong-un © ITAR-TASS Photo Agency/Alamy Stock Photo; Donald Trump © Yuri Gripas/Reuters/Newscom
Article
Crossing Guards·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Ambassador Bridge arcs over the Detroit River, connecting Detroit to Windsor, Ontario, the southernmost city in Canada. Driving in from the Canadian side, where I grew up, is like viewing a panorama of the Motor City’s rise and fall, visible on either side of the bridge’s turquoise steel stanchions. On the right are the tubular glass towers of the Renaissance Center, headquarters of General Motors, and Michigan Central Station, the rail terminal that closed in 1988. On the left is a rusted industrial corridor — fuel tanks, docks, abandoned warehouses. I have taken this route all my life, but one morning this spring, I crossed for the first time in a truck.

Illustration by Richard Mia
Article
“I am Here Only for Working”·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

But the exercise of labor is the worker’s own life-activity, the manifestation of his own life. . . . He works in order to live. He does not even reckon labor as part of his life, it is rather a sacrifice of his life.

— Karl Marx

Photograph from the United Arab Emirates by the author. This page: Ruwais Mall
Article
The Year of The Frog·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

To look at him, Sweet Macho was a beautiful horse, lean and strong with muscles that twitched beneath his shining black coat. A former racehorse, he carried himself with ceremony, prancing the field behind our house as though it were the winner’s circle. When he approached us that day at the edge of the yard, his eyes shone with what might’ve looked like intelligence but was actually a form of insanity. Not that there was any telling our mother’s boyfriend this — he fancied himself a cowboy.

“Horse 1,” by Nine Francois. Courtesy the artist and AgavePrint, Austin, Texas
Article
Dead Ball Situation·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

What We Think About When We Think About Soccer, by Simon Critchley. Penguin Books. 224 pages. $20.

Begin, as Wallace Stevens didn’t quite say, with the idea of it. I so like the idea of Simon Critchley, whose books offer philosophical takes on a variety of subjects: Stevens, David Bowie, suicide, humor, and now football — or soccer, as the US edition has it. (As a matter of principle I shall refer to this sport throughout as football.) “All of us are mysteriously affected by our names,” decides one of Milan Kundera’s characters in Immortality, and I like Critchley because his name would seem to have put him at a vocational disadvantage compared with Martin Heidegger, Søren Kierkegaard, or even, in the Anglophone world, A. J. Ayer or Richard Rorty. (How different philosophy might look today if someone called Nobby Stiles had been appointed as the Wykeham Professor of Logic.)

Tostão, No. 9, and Pelé, No. 10, celebrate Carlos Alberto’s final goal for Brazil in the World Cup final against Italy on June 21, 1970, Mexico City © Heidtmann/picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images

Factor by which single Americans who use emoji are more likely than other single Americans to be sexually active:

1.85

Brontosaurus was restored as a genus, and cannibalism was reported in tyrannosaurine dinosaurs.

Moore said he did not “generally” date teenage girls, and it was reported that in the 1970s Moore had been banned from his local mall and YMCA for bothering teenage girls.

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

Report — From the June 2013 issue

How to Make Your Own AR-15

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

By

"Gun owners have long been the hypochondriacs of American politics. Over the past twenty years, the gun-rights movement has won just about every battle it has fought; states have passed at least a hundred laws loosening gun restrictions since President Obama took office. Yet the National Rifle Association has continued to insist that government confiscation of privately owned firearms is nigh. The NRA’s alarmism helped maintain an active membership, but the strategy was risky: sooner or later, gun guys might have realized that they’d been had. Then came the shootings at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, and at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, followed swiftly by the nightmare the NRA had been promising for decades: a dedicated push at every level of government for new gun laws. The gun-rights movement was now that most insufferable of species: a hypochondriac taken suddenly, seriously ill."

Subscribe Today