The Age of Trump

[TitanTiger 20,708]

The Age of Trump

ELIOT A. COHEN

At stake is something far more precious than the future of the Republican Party.

How on earth did this happen? Some, like Robert Kagan, think it is solely the result of a prolonged self-poisoning of the Republican Party. A number of shrewd writers—David Frum, Tucker Carlson, Ben Domenech, Charles Murray, and Joel Kotkin being among the best—have probed deeper. Not surprisingly, they are all some flavor of conservative. On the liberal (or, as they say now, progressive) end of the spectrum the reaction has been chiefly one of smugness (“well, that’s what the Republicans are, we knew it all along”), schadenfreude (“pass the popcorn”), and chicken-counting (“now we can get a head start on Hillary’s first Inaugural”). Their insouciance will be stripped away if Trump becomes the nominee and turns his cunning, ferocity, and charm on an inept, boring politician trailing scandals as old as dubious investments with a 1,000 percent return and as fresh as a homebrew email server. He might lose. He might, however, very well tear her to pieces. Clearly, he relishes the prospect, because he despises the politicians he has bought over the years.

The conservative analysts offer a number of arguments—a shifting class structure, liberal overreach in social policy, existential anxiety about the advent of a robot-driven economy, the stagnation since the Great Recession, and more. They note (as most liberal commentators have yet to do) Trump’s formidable political skills, including a visceral instinct for detecting and exploiting vulnerability that has been the hallmark of many an authoritarian ruler. These insights are all to the point, but they do not capture one key element.

Moral rot.

Politicians have, since ancient Greece, lied, pandered, and whored. They have taken bribes, connived, and perjured themselves. But in recent times—in the United States, at any rate—there has never been any politician quite as openly debased and debauched as Donald Trump. Truman and Nixon could be vulgar, but they kept the cuss words for private use. Presidents have chewed out journalists, but which of them would have suggested that an elegant and intelligent woman asking a reasonable question was dripping menstrual blood? LBJ, Kennedy, and Clinton could all treat women as commodities to be used for their pleasure, but none went on the radio with the likes of Howard Stern to discuss the women they had bedded and the finer points of their anatomies. All politicians like the sound of their own names, but Roosevelt named the greatest dam in the United States after his defeated predecessor, Herbert Hoover. Can one doubt what Trump would have christened it?

That otherwise sober people do not find Trump’s insults and insane demands outrageous (Mexico will have to pay for a wall! Japan will have to pay for protection!) says something about a larger moral and cultural collapse. His language is the language of the comments sections of once-great newspapers. Their editors know that the online versions of their publications attract the vicious, the bigoted, and the foulmouthed. But they keep those comments sections going in the hope of getting eyeballs on the page.

Winston Churchill recalls in his memoir how as a young man he came to terms with hypocrisy, discovering the “enormous and unquestionably helpful part that humbug plays in the social life of a great people.” Inconsistency between public virtue and private vice is not altogether a bad thing. No matter how nasty the realities are, maintaining respectable appearances, minding the civilities, and adhering to the conventions is part of what keeps civilization going.

The current problem goes beyond excruciatingly bad manners. What we increasingly lack, and have lacked for some time, is a sense of the moral underpinning of republican (small r) government. Manners and morals maintain a free state as much as laws do, as Tocqueville observed long ago, and when a certain culture of virtue dies, so too does something of what makes democracy work. Old-fashioned words like integrity, selflessness, frugality, gravitas, and modesty rarely rate a mention in modern descriptions of the good life—is it surprising that they don’t come up in politics, either?

William James, a pacifist who understood this point, argued in “The Moral Equivalent War” that “intrepidity, contempt of softness, surrender of private interest, obedience to command must still remain the rock upon which states are built—unless, indeed, we wish for dangerous reactions against commonwealths fit only for contempt.” Just so. Trump might have become a less upsetting figure if he had not wriggled through the clutches of the draft in the 1960s.

Trump’s rise is only one among many signs that something has gone profoundly amiss in our popular culture. It is related to the hysteria that has swept through many campuses, as students call for the suppression of various forms of free speech and the provision of “safe spaces” where they will not be challenged by ideas with which they disagree. The rise of Trump and the fall of free speech in academia are equal signs that we are losing the intellectual sturdiness and honesty without which a republic cannot thrive.

There are other traces of rot. They can be seen in the excuses that political leaders and experts have begun to make as they cozy up to Trump. Like French bureaucrats in the age of Vichy, or Italian aristocrats in the age of Mussolini, they are already saying things like: “I can make it less bad,” “He’s different in private,” “He has his good points,” “He is evolving,” and “Someone has to do the work of government.” Of course, some politicians—Chris Christie, that would be you—simply skip the pretense and indulge in spite or opportunism as the mood takes them.

This is not the first age in which politicians have taken morally disgraceful positions, even by the standards of their time. In the 1950s and 1960s there were flagrant bigots in Congress. But many of them were in other ways public spirited­—think Senator Richard Russell of Georgia, for example, who presided with dignity over the Senate Armed Services Committee for nearly two decades. Lyndon Johnson may not have opposed the evils of his time forthrightly, but he used the full extent of his wiliness to break through the institutionalized discrimination of the South. The villainy of today takes softer forms, but it is pervasive—politicians swallow their principles (such as they are) and endorse a candidate they despise, turn on a judge they once praised, denounce the opposition for behavior identical to their own, or press their branch’s prerogatives and rules to the Constitutional limit, and beyond.

The rot is cultural. It is no coincidence that Trump was the star of a “reality” show. He is the beneficiary of an amoral celebrity culture devoid of all content save an omnipresent lubriciousness. He is a kind of male Kim Kardashian, and about as politically serious.He is a kind of male Kim Kardashian, and about as politically serious. In the context of culture, if not (yet) politics, he is unremarkable; the daily entertainments of today are both tawdry and self-consciously, corrosively ironic. Ours is an age when young people have become used to getting news, of a sort, from Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert, when an earlier generation watched Walter Cronkite and David Brinkley. It is the difference between giggling with young, sneering hipsters and listening to serious adults. Go to YouTube and look at old episodes of Profiles in Courage, if you can find them—a wildly successful television series based on the book nominally authored by John F. Kennedy, which celebrated an individual’s, often a politician’s, courage in standing alone against a crowd, even a crowd with whose politics the audience agreed. The show of comparable popularity today is House of Cards. Bill Clinton has said that he loves it.

American culture is, in short, nastier, more nihilistic, and far less inhibited than ever before. It breeds alternating bouts of cynicism and hysteria, and now it has given us Trump.

The Republican Party as we know it may die of Trump. If it does, it will have succumbed in part because many of its leaders chose not to fight for the Party of Lincoln, which is a set of ideas about how to govern a country, rather than an organization clawing for political and personal advantage. What is at stake, however, is something much more precious than even a great political party. To an extent unimaginable for a very long time, the moral keel of free government is showing cracks. It is not easy to discern how we shall mend them.

[AURaptor 1,137]

If I must suffer Trump to keep out Hillary, I will.

[AUUSN 823]

[TitanTiger 20,708]

If I must suffer Trump to keep out Hillary, I will.

It's like saying you prefer to blow your brains out rather than ingest poison to commit suicide.

[AURaptor 1,137]

If I must suffer Trump to keep out Hillary, I will.

It's like saying you prefer to blow your brains out rather than ingest poison to commit suicide.

I'd pick the former if given the choice

[homersapien 11,812]

http://www.economist...y-time-fire-him

......The things Mr Trump has said in this campaign make him unworthy of leading one of the world’s great political parties, let alone America. One way to judge politicians is by whether they appeal to our better natures: Mr Trump has prospered by inciting hatred and violence. He is so unpredictable that the thought of him anywhere near high office is terrifying. He must be stopped.

The world according to Trump

Because each additional Trumpism seems a bit less shocking than the one before, there is a danger of becoming desensitised to his outbursts. To recap, he has referred to Mexicans crossing the border as rapists; called enthusiastically for the use of torture; hinted that Antonin Scalia, a Supreme Court justice, was murdered; proposed banning all Muslims from visiting America; advocated killing the families of terrorists; and repeated, approvingly, a damaging fiction that a century ago American soldiers in the Philippines dipped their ammunition in pigs’ blood before executing Muslim rebels. At a recent rally he said he would like to punch a protester in the face. This is by no means an exhaustive list.

Almost the only policy Mr Trump clearly subscribes to is a fantasy: the construction of a wall along the southern border, paid for by Mexico. What would he do if faced with a crisis in the South China Sea, a terrorist attack in America or another financial meltdown? Nobody has any idea. Mr Trump may be well suited to campaigning in primaries, where voters bear little resemblance to the country as a whole, but it is difficult to imagine any candidate less suited to the consequence of winning a general election, namely governing...........

[Guest NC1406]

Sounds eerily familiar to the last eight years. Yikes. I hope my wife is correct in calling him the next Reagan. I don't see it yet.

[cooltigger21 0]

A nation that will elect Barack Obama twice is one that is capable of electing the likes of Donald Trump.

[AURaptor 1,137]

Sounds eerily familiar to the last eight years. Yikes. I hope my wife is correct in calling him the next Reagan. I don't see it yet.

Wife really didn't know Reagan at all.

* And I reject any claim that the GOP is one of the worlds greatest parties. Not anymore.

[JoeBags7277 759]

Rough waters ahead. I hope you guys are ready. I sure as hell am.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

Trump is not the problem. The problem lies in a political party that has turned into a talk radio phenomenon and, a system in which, partisan politics completely overshadows effective governing. While I do not care for the way Trump plays to the ideological idiots, I do not blame him for creating them or, using them.

Personally, I find Trump far less offensive than Cruz, Hillary, or Rubio. Those three offer little more than the idea that voting for them is a vote against the political opposition. The three of them share the same corrupt views of government and democracy. They are all more concerned with politics and furthering the ideology (and themselves) rather than, effectively governing. They cannot wait for the next opportunity to dig in for, and enjoy the spotlight of, a big political showdown.

Kasich, Christie, and Trump are correct about these senators. They are so lost in partisan politics, rhetoric, the party interests, the ideology, their own false sense of self-importance that, they fail to accomplish anything that looks like effective governing. They would rather make grandiose speeches and, play politician.

An electorate of ideological idiots, electing the most extreme ideological idiot, makes for great political theatre. For those who are more partisan than patriotic, more consumed with the "perfection" of their ideology than respectful of democracy, enjoy! Enjoy the political circus and the entertainment you crave. But please, do not blame Trump for giving the people what they want. And please, give him some credit for not being so lost in his own rhetoric that he has forgotten that, at some point, the politics and pandering have to give way to the REAL objective of effectively governing within a democracy.

I am not saying that you should agree with Trump. What I am saying is, demonizing Trump or, attempting to use Trump in the effort to define our political problem, is foolish.

Politics is about ideology, rhetoric, pandering to the base. Governing (particularly in a democracy) is about compromise and negotiating. Say what you will about Trump. I understand and frankly, he deserves the criticism. However, do not lose site of the fact that he is not so consumed with politics and ideology, that he has become unfit to govern within a democracy. At some point, politics must give way to effective governing.

[cole256 17,085]

A nation that will elect Barack Obama twice is one that is capable of electing the likes of Donald Trump.

Well they elected Bush twice before that....

[AURaptor 1,137]

A nation that will elect Barack Obama twice is one that is capable of electing the likes of Donald Trump.

Well they elected Bush twice before that....

Over bat guano crazy Gore and idiot Kerry ? Damn straight.

Now, a case could be made for '08 and McCain, but by the time '12 rolled around, it should have been clear that Romeny was the better choice. We chose poorly.

[AUUSN 823]

A nation that will elect Barack Obama twice is one that is capable of electing the likes of Donald Trump.

Well they elected Bush twice before that....

Over bat guano crazy Gore and idiot Kerry ? Damn straight.

Now, a case could be made for '08 and McCain, but by the time '12 rolled around, it should have been clear that Romeny was the better choice. We chose poorly.

Righties just couldnt bring themselves to vote for a...gasp... Mormon.

[AUUSN 823]

Eighteen years ago, Wojciech Kozak helped build Trump Tower, the skyscraper jewel in Donald J. Trump’s real-estate empire. Today, Mr. Kozak recalls that time with nightmare memories of backbreaking 12-hour shifts and of being cheated with 200 other undocumented Polish immigrants out of meager wages and fringe benefits.

”We worked in horrid, terrible conditions,” Mr. Kozak said of the six months he spent in 1980 wielding a sledgehammer and a blowtorch in demolishing the Bonwit Teller Building on Fifth Avenue to make way for Trump Tower. ”We were frightened illegal immigrants and did not know enough about our rights.”

Mr. Kozak, like other laborers on that job, has no hope of collecting about $4,000 in back wages from a contracting company that began the demolition and later became insolvent. But after almost two decades, the demolition workers are still struggling to compel Mr. Trump and his business associates to compensate a union’s welfare funds and thus increase pension and medical benefits for some of the Polish workers.

Mr. Kozak is now a party and witness in a class-action lawsuit that has meandered through the Federal courts for 15 years and charges that Mr. Trump owes $4 million to the union welfare funds for the work the Poles performed. Filed in 1983, the suit has been bogged down by a torrent of motions and appeals of judicial decisions and by the deaths of a judge, a lawyer, the original lead plaintiffs, an important witness and two of Mr. Trump’s co-defendants.

Mr. Kozak is one of thousands of working Americans whom Donald Trump has fleeced over the years.

He wants to convince them he’ll fight for working Americans in the White House — but even if he knew how, he never has.

https://marcorubio.com/news/trump-tower-illegal-immigrant-polish/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Link_Post&utm_term=Trump&utm_content=TrumpTower&utm_campaign=Daily_Social_Organic&utm_0id=022616d

[AURaptor 1,137]

Righties just couldnt bring themselves to vote for a...gasp... Mormon.

I know, right ? Cray cray.

[AUUSN 823]

Righties just couldnt bring themselves to vote for a...gasp... Mormon.

I know, right ? Cray cray.

Obama won by 6 million votes. People clearly stayed home.

[cooltigger21 0]

Romney lost because his Romney care was the blueprint for Obama care. He was another in a long line of establishment Republicans put up for election. Conservatives stayed home.

[AURaptor 1,137]

4.8 million votes , & only 2 states + DC, but what ever.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

"Mr. Kozak is one of thousands of working Americans whom Donald Trump has fleeced over the years."

How can you be an undocumented Polish immigrant and, a working American at the same time?

Was he working for Trump, the developer, or, the general contractor, a subcontractor?

[AURaptor 1,137]

How can Hillary, who is under investigation by the FBI, even be allowed to run?

[icanthearyou 4,468]

"How can Hillary, who is under investigation by the FBI, even be allowed to run?"

Due process?

[AURaptor 1,137]

"How can Hillary, who is under investigation by the FBI, even be allowed to run?"

Due process?

I didn't say she should be in jail before being found guilty, but it's clear she's committed many crimes, lied about them, and put the security of the country at great risk.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

"I didn't say she should be in jail before being found guilty, but it's clear she's committed many crimes, lied about them, and put the security of the country at great risk."

You have become a parody of yourself. You make it perfectly clear that you lack any objectivity. You are a pathetic joke.

[AURaptor 1,137]

"I didn't say she should be in jail before being found guilty, but it's clear she's committed many crimes, lied about them, and put the security of the country at great risk."

You have become a parody of yourself. You make it perfectly clear that you lack any objectivity. You are a pathetic joke.

Nothing you just said has any merit or basis in reality. You simply cannot stand anyone talking about Hillary in anything but flattering terms, and want us all to ignore what she's done.

I get that. I really do.