2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWhy Havent Conservative Thinkers Denounced Trump?
Before the election, I wrote a piece describing why, despite his radical deviation from conservative orthodoxy on many policy issues, Donald Trumps rise and triumph as a candidate of the right bore an uncanny sort of logic. The Tea Party movement, whose nominal candidate in the Republican primaries had been the upright Christian constitutionalist Ted Cruz, smoothly transferred its support to Trump, the sybaritic populist who said that Cruzs dad was linked to John F. Kennedys killer, and this, somehow, seemed about right. Why not? Whats the difference? This fit with the scheme laid out in Corey Robins book The Reactionary Mind: the substance of conservative doctrine is secondary to a deeper, perennial force in conservative politics, which is the spirit of reaction itself.
But Robins book begins with Edmund Burke and conservative philosophy. Reaction, Robin argues, is typically high theory as much as demotic practice. The signal reactionaries are writers and intellectuals, but in Trumps case the conservative intelligentsia strayed from the script. Yes, conservative pundits were eager to claim the Tea Party as their own, despite the statist heresies of its members and the populist urges it expressed, but most of those pundits opposed Trump, sometimes bitterly, even after he won the Republican nomination.
Its important to note how remarkable this is: conservative pundits publicly declining to support the Presidential nominee of the Republican Party. They are a notably partisan bunch, partly by the nature of their political enterprise, and partly because the American electoral system does a decent job of meeting their ideological wantsas it doesnt for progressive intellectuals, who can often be seen at election time casting wistful glances to the left horizon. But its even more remarkable still, because this Republican was running against a Clinton. Though some conservatives still define themselves as Reaganite, the conservative movement as it functions today was formed not in the eighties of Ronald Reagan but in the nineties of Bill Clintonthe nineties, that is, of Whitewater, the Gingrich revolution, the Fox News Channel (founded in 1996), the Starr Report, and the Clinton impeachment.
Why Havent Conservative Thinkers Denounced Trump?
https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/why-havent-conservative-thinkers-denounced-trump
-------
Because conservatives stick together no matter how much shit smell is in the room...
elleng
(136,271 posts)REAL conservatives disappeared from the U.S. scene years ago. Current repugs are and have been RADICALs.
TXCritter
(344 posts)Radicals want to move forward. Reactionaries want to move backward.
onecaliberal
(35,930 posts)I was going to say this
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)The mask just fell away and FOX News hides it from about 40% of our population.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)He's giving them their wish list.
NRaleighLiberal
(60,517 posts)phleshdef
(11,936 posts)former9thward
(33,424 posts)George Will says Trump is a socialist.
George Will: Trump Involvement In Carrier Deal "Socialism"
GEORGE WILL: I entirely agree. So far Donald Trump's style is personal, not to say visceral. And ad hoc. And what that adds up to is a kind of use of presidential power absolutely unconstrained by law and statute and all those other niceties.
The problem is when you have, in the Carrier case, political power used to bring pressure upon a privately owned institution that has fiduciary duty to maximize shareholder value and drive them off with political pressure with making economic decisions about economic assets, you are, in effect, at the end of the day, getting the federal government involved in capital allocation. There is a name for that, it's called socialism.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/12/07/george_will_trump_involvement_in_carrier_deal_socialism.html
They wants it