By Kevin D. Williamson
Wednesday, January 25, 2017
We need to talk about the “Resistance.”
Many conservatives, and a few of the more intellectually
honest progressives, had a good long gander at these very silly people running
around in vagina costumes and their even sillier — but less funny — associates
engaged in violence and rioting, and thought: “You know, this doesn’t seem to
have an awful lot to do with President Donald J. Trump.”
Trump is, in many ways, exactly the sort of politician
Democrats keep telling Republicans they need to support: urban rather than
rural, socially moderate to liberal (a Clintonian personal life, to the left of
Senator Obama on gay marriage, and, whatever he’s been saying for the past five
minutes, possessing the most robustly pro-abortion rhetorical record of any
Republican president in the past 40 years), and a pragmatist rather than an
ideologue. If the archetypal Republican is a small-town family man whose
intellectual poles are the Apostle Paul and Milton Friedman, then Trump is
about as far away from that as it is possible to be. What is he?
There are basically two kinds of politician. The first is
the Salesman, the transactional politician, a type that is more common
historically and remains more common outside of the United States. The
Salesman’s appeal is relatively straightforward: “I want to do x, y,
and z, and here is what I’m willing
to trade to get that done.” Examples of the type include Sam Rayburn, Lyndon
Johnson, and George H. W. Bush — as well as crooks like Chakah Fattah and
careerists like Hillary Rodham Clinton. Transactional politicians dominate at
the lower levels of government, particularly at the municipal level. Indeed,
one of the reasons that the Republican party fails to connect with black and
Hispanic voters in the cities is that its leading figures hold the
transactional politics with which these Americans are most familiar in
contempt.
That is not only because Republicans are more ideological
than Democrats but also because they have, since the rise of the conservative
movement, understood themselves as a party of opposition: The GOP is the organ
of the counter-counterculture, smiting the 1960s-style liberationist ethic with
its left hand and the Wilson-Roosevelt-Johnson welfare state with its right.
Republicans have a great enthusiasm for the second major type of politician —
the Avatar — especially when it comes to presidents. Republicans want their
leaders, especially the one in the White House, to be expressions of certain
ideals, and that is what the Avatar is. Ronald Reagan was the expression of one
such set of values, and Donald Trump is another — one that is appealing to
those on the right in search of uncompromising national confidence and a
willingness to violate the norms of polite progressive society.
Given a choice between a Salesman and an Avatar, the
Democrats chose the transactional Hillary Rodham Clinton over the would-be
revolutionary Bernie Sanders. Republicans went the opposite direction, spurning
the deal-making Jeb Bushes and Marco Rubios of the world for a man who
advertises himself as a deal-maker but feels to them like something else.
If you opposed (and oppose) Donald Trump, then you have a
couple of options. One is to make an ass of yourself by dressing as a set of
genitals and vandalizing a Starbucks in Oakland. (The Keynesians may thank you,
but Bastiat will not.) But
we really shouldn’t pretend that that is politics — it is only adolescent
self-gratification, and those engaged in it aren’t the Resistance, but the
Nursery.
The more intelligent option is to treat President Trump
like a Salesman even if both sides think he’s an Avatar. Which is to say, you
may believe that he is a genuinely low sort of man, but he has been elected
president and he will have to be dealt with through political means — through
ordinary transactional politics. At the moment, that is easier for
conservatives: I do not think very much of Donald Trump, but I do think a great
deal of Betsy DeVos, Rick Perry, and regulatory reform. If the Right gets a
couple of good Supreme Court justices, corporate-tax reform, and some
meaningful regulatory relief, we can call that a win. But there probably will
be wins for the Left, too: President Trump is deeply opposed to conservative
plans for entitlement reform and the liberalization of trade, and he has at
times pronounced himself open to redistributionist taxes. And if we’re all
going to be honest with ourselves, Chuck Schumer and Kamala Harris might want
to pay a visit to a union hall in Iowa and ask the fellows there what they
think about Trump’s program on immigration. I did. It
was enlightening.
Blind and unthinking opposition to a president is only
the flipside of blind and unthinking obedience. I myself am not much one for
blind and unthinking anything.
This isn’t Nazi Germany, none of you ladies and gentlemen
in the pink hats is Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and the history books will not tell of
acts of courage at the Battle of Soy Latte. You want a different political
outcome? Go make it happen. This is politics, and politics can be ugly and
stupid — but it beats the alternative.
No comments:
Post a Comment