The public library (formally Capital Area District Library) in Lansing, MI, with the nuclear shelter sign.
I am not an American citizen, but a U.S. visa holder. For this reason I would not normally write to influence a U.S. election. But this election is exceptional.
In an age of nuclear weapons, the primary task of any U.S. president is to make sure we all stay alive. It has been like this since the 1950s, since the Cold War led to heavy nuclear armament. The public library in downtown Lansing (MI), the city where I live, still has the signs of a nuclear shelter. Those Cold War shelters were useless, they would not have saved anyone, but at least they gave people the feeling that there was something they could do even if this wasn't really true.
The task of the U.S. president is not only to keep U.S. citizens alive, but to keep us all alive. When I write "all", I mean "all", not just Americans, but all people across the world. Which is why I feel justified in writing. There were moments during the Cold War when all people alive at the time came very close to dying. The 1963 Cuba crisis was one, but there were times in the early 1980 as well. Not all U.S. presidents (or the leaders of other countries with nuclear weapons) were equally responsible in their handling of nuclear security. It is something to consider very seriously during an election.
Both candidates may have flaws on the security front. It may be true, as some people say, that Mrs. Clinton's suggestion of a no-fly zone in Syria poses a risk. Mr. Trump, however, does not have any significant knowledge or experience of relations between states, nor does he even show a willingness to learn or to accept advice. But states are not companies. If a company goes bankrupt, it can be restructured. With countries it is very different: you have to be careful all the time. And from nuclear war, God forbid, there is no return. I believe it would be reckless in the extreme to vote for Mr. Trump. Mrs. Clinton has extensive experience as Secretary of State. The likelihood that she knows how far she can go with Russia or China is so much better than Mr. Trump's.
In a democracy, all are responsible. That is the whole idea of democracy. As a European I know that democracies can fail. The U.S. may be the oldest democracy but it can also fail. Votes do have consequences. If you look at a map of who voted for Hitler in 1930s Germany, you see the highest numbers in the provinces east of Berlin. Those provinces are now not even part of Germany any more: they have become part of Poland. All Germans who lived there were expelled by the Soviets at the end of the Second World War. These people were left with nothing. When they voted in 1932 they may not have thought it'd make a huge difference to their lives, but it sure did.
It may feel all right to vote for someone who promises an alternative when things are bad. I feel some sympathy for Trump supporters because I believe it is mostly a protest movement of not-so-rich people for whom the system isn't working and who want an alternative. I also feel that the institutions that should guide and warn them, such as schools, news media, political parties and churches, have pretty much failed them for all sorts of reasons. But going by emotions is never the best way to responsible action. Voting is a way of taking responsibility. Americans, please vote responsibly and the world will thank you for it.