by
Gadfly
A
close friend sent to me a book review by Cass
Sunstein, published in The New York Times. The title of the review was, “It
Can Happen Here.” The implication of
the article is that President Trump is like Hitler in his authoritarian
tendencies.
Sunstein’s review
includes books by other authors from a personal, “lived experience”
perspective. In my opinion (based on years of research), whether
deliberate or accidental, presentations such as Sunstein's distract from a more
sinister development in America. He
writes well and his arguments are compelling in an ideographic sense—that is, plausible analysis of a
phenomenon within a very narrow scope. In
this case, the scope is a set of memoirs of ordinary people who lived during
the rise and reign of Hitler. These
arguments become incidental, merely anecdotal, and diminished from a nomothetic
perspective—that is, an understanding of a phenomenon within a much broader
context. In the more comprehensive
nomothetic case, it is important to understand the conditions that enabled
Hitler’s rise to power.
Simply put, the conditions that enabled the Hitler phenomenon were quite
apparent. First, Germany was a
democracy. Democracies allow for the
manifestation of mob behavior and natural transition to socialism (and
eventually the more extreme fascist form of national socialism). Second, the signatory nations of the Versailles
Treaty isolated, alienated, and shamed the German population. Third, economic conditions agitated the
population. The population was ready for
hope and change, and Hitler promised it.
He rose to power democratically. Hitler
and the German population sought reparations—that is, payback. In other words, German lives mattered. The Nazis and the SS were a minority of the
overall population, they controlled the public narrative and the political
agenda, not unlike what we see playing out in America. A major difference of note: Germany and Poland have not torn down residual
physical remains of concentration camps.
To the contrary, they keep them to remember important lessons from
history.
My friend is a decent and
honorable man, and certainly not an outlier in the population of concerned
Americans. I have read many opinion pieces
with similar implications advanced by Sunstein, even a booklet by Yale
historian Timothy Snyder: On
Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth
Century. These authors seek evidence to support their belief
that Trump is an authoritarian. Yet, the
evidence is normative in that what they present are unwarranted
assertions about what they want to believe.
For example, in Sunstein’s review, he states:
If the president of the United States is constantly lying, complaining
that the independent press is responsible for fake news, calling for the
withdrawal of licenses from television networks, publicly demanding jail
sentences for political opponents, undermining the authority of the Department
of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, magnifying social
divisions, delegitimizing critics as “crooked” or
“failing,” and even refusing, in violation of the law, to protect young
children against the risks associated with lead paint—well, it’s not fascism,
but the United States has not seen anything like it before.
Let us unpack this statement.
Constantly lying. The left has been constant in their
accusation that President Trump lies.
Sunstein provides no examples. No
need to. If the left says it enough, it
becomes true (Germany’s Goebbels was fully aware of this maxim).
There is no doubt that Trump exaggerates and says bold things, but this
does not rise to the level of lies.
Trump may truly believe the things he says, even if they turn out not to
be true. We often hear politicians say, “I
misspoke,” even when they lie.
Did President Obama lie when he repeatedly told the public, “you can
keep your doctor” or that families would save $2,500 a year in health care
premiums? Now we know from Jonathon Gruber
and Ben
Rhodes that the Obama Administration deliberately lied to advance its
agenda—in particular, Obamacare and the Iran Nuclear Deal, respectively.
Independent press is responsible for fake news. Does
any reasonable person believe the press is independent? The Washington Post is owned by Jeff
Bezos, the wealthiest man in the world and a leftist progressive. The New York Times fired an editor for
allowing Senator Cotton’s op-ed to be published. Except for Fox News, The Wall
Street Journal, and a handful of radio programs and other digital news
sources, the mainstream media is leftist, progressive, and anti-Trump. ABC’s Nightly News with David Muir has
yet to cover any of the news related to exculpatory evidence in the Lieutenant
General Michael Flynn case or the dozens of Congressman Schiff’s committee transcripts
finally made public.
Calling for the withdrawal of licenses from television networks. This
was mere frustrated rhetoric. No
licenses were withdrawn. Yet, under the
Obama Administration, there was an attempt to place government
monitors in news rooms. This would
have put a real damper on an independent press.
Publicly demanding jail sentences for political opponents. This is
true. One individual who was singled out
was Hillary Clinton. The “exoneration” effort
by FBI Director Comey was a gross violation of our legal system. Comey not only delineated federal crimes
committed, he circumvented the normal process for prosecuting them. As Comey, Clinton, and others like to repeat,
“no one is above the law,” unless you are a member of the political left. How many prosecutions of criminals who happen
to be political opponents have taken place under the Trump Administration? Zero . . . so far. Meanwhile, Obama holdovers have viciously prosecuted
Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, Roger Stone, and several others who happened to
be political operatives with the Trump campaign.
The Obama Administration put journalists under surveillance and censored
conservative groups using the IRS. The
Obama Administration spied on the Trump campaign and orchestrated a silent coup
through the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane operation, transitioned to the Mueller
investigation, and then an impeachment.
Undermining the authority of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). It was the senior
leaders of the DOJ and FBI that undermined President Trump’s authority. DOJ’s Yates
issued a directive to DOJ officials not to enforce one of President Trump’s
Executive Orders (a federal judge later placed an injunction on the Order and
the Supreme Court ruled the Order constitutional); Rosenstein appointed Mueller
as the Special Prosecutor and illegally authorized FISA warrants; and Ohr violated
department protocols in advancing the fallacious Steele Dossier. They were not loyal to the Office of the
President; more accurately, they were seditious. The FBI’s Comey, McCabe, Baker, Strzok, Page,
and others were actively involved in illegally delegitimizing President Trump,
but worse, targeting Trump’s political circle for manipulated prosecutions. Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, and other socialist
leaders knew how to silence political opposition. Yes, it can happen here—it already has.
Magnifying social divisions. Calling people racist, misogynist, xenophobic, homophobic, and so
forth does not make them so. It is the
left that magnifies and celebrates social division with its emphasis on
diversity, multiculturalism, and social justice.
Delegitimizing critics as “crooked” or “failing.” If anyone is criticized based on false or fabricated information, then
what is an appropriate response? After
millions of taxpayer funding spent over two years of the Mueller investigation
and the extraordinary partisan impeachment fiasco, it is understandable that
President Trump would consider these efforts to be crooked and failures.
Even refusing, in violation of the law, to protect young children
against the risks associated with lead paint. This
allegation was good for generating political capital for the left’s
agenda. However, the same news sources
advancing this narrative have not reported Trump
Administration efforts to the contrary.
Sunstein and his like-minded cohort may not realize that they are members
of America's intelligentsia. The
word “intelligentsia” originated in Russia about the time of the Bolshevik
Revolution. It describes an educated
group that feels superior in its theories about progress and an imagined future
utopia. Their intentions are noble
within the context of their self-proclaimed moral superiority. They represent an echo chamber that is socially
and politically isolated from the general population they seek to control.
Ironically,
the title of Sunstein’s article was inspired by Sinclair Lewis’s novel, It
Can’t Happen Here.
Lewis’s wife was a
journalist who followed Hitler’s rise to power in Germany. So, Lewis wrote about the possibility taking
place in America. The lead character was
modeled after Louisiana Governor Huey Long, a democrat, who wanted to defeat
Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the 1936 presidential primary. Long did not think FDR’s policies were left (socialist)
enough. Here is a sample of Long’s Share
the Wealth movement and political agenda.
Sound familiar?
The left complains that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote. This would have sufficed in a democracy. America is still a republic (founded as such
because America’s Founders feared the extreme manifestations of democracy)—unless
and until sufficiently destroyed by the left’s current deliberate and
well-funded mobocracy. That is why the
Electoral College still determines the winner, to prevent large, government-centric
metropolitan areas from dominating rural areas.
The fact that Trump advances a political agenda that is contrary to the
left’s is a matter of values (i.e., personal liberty and responsibility, self-governance
through a Constitutional Republic, truth and justice, religious freedom,
freedom of speech, equal protection and due process, etc.) reflected by the
political faction that supported his election.
Trump believes in personal responsibility and a government that protects
individual rights, not a government that compels individuals to assimilate into
a collective group (e.g., political identity groups) subsidized by the
government.
In 2016, the Trump and Clinton campaign slogans said a lot: “Make
America Great Again” (for all Americans) versus “I’m with Her” (appealing to
one political faction). This Trump campaign
video (you will not find this on YouTube; and Facebook and Twitter will not
allow it to be “shared”) was candid about the political landscape and his
intent to preserve America’s republic. One
of his important arguments was about corporatism and the unholy alliance
between large corporations and the media—one of the central features of fascism
in Germany and Italy). Clinton’s slogan
and comprehensive litany of policy proposals spoke to an authoritarian
perspective.
Trump’s message appeals to hard working, law abiding citizens. The left’s message appeals to the power elite
and those looking for government-provided (taxpayer funded) free lunches.
While Trump’s approach and language may be out of the ordinary, they are
an attempt to restore republican statesmanship to an environment infested by democratically-corrupt
politicians, from the deceitful to the feckless. With eyes wide open, Trump does not bring an
olive branch to a knife fight. As Teddy Roosevelt
understood in his day, Trump has fully embraced his duty as the man in the arena:
It is not the critic who counts; not the man who
points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have
done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena,
whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who
errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error
and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great
enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at
the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the
worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place
shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor
defeat.
No comments:
Post a Comment