When the GOP still had some decency (“open the border both ways”)

Here’s a jaw dropping video from the 1980 campaign.  Bush stakes out a very liberal position on immigration, and then Reagan responds from a position even further to the left, almost sounding like Bryan Caplan, or a SJW.

Still think Trump is similar to Reagan? What I find most interesting is not their specific views on the issue, but rather their tone.  Their sense of decency.  The contrast between the language of the 1980 GOP and the crude, selfish, nationalistic language of the modern GOP could not be more stark.  This video even makes Mitt Romney look insensitive by comparison.

HT:  I forget. . . .

 


Tags:

 
 
 

63 Responses to “When the GOP still had some decency (“open the border both ways”)”

  1. Gravatar of Lorenzo from Oz Lorenzo from Oz
    24. May 2016 at 16:47

    Ronald Reagan was a widely read man who believed in things.

    The essence of demagoguery is not believing in things but in saying whatever the audience wants to hear. (The real trick is saying what they want to hear but haven’t articulated themselves yet.)

    Which, btw, is why I get so frustrated by “The Donald is a fascist” line. Fascists have ideologies; if you think The Donald has an ideology, you haven’t been paying attention.

    Also, no overt rejection of democracy, no paramilitary movement, no organised street violence (except by opponents), not in favour of a belligerent foreign policy (in fact, one line of The Donald support is he is the less belligerent candidate), no fetishising of violence. So, not a fascist.

    But absolutely a demagogue and that is how you have to understand him.

  2. Gravatar of Yaron Yaron
    24. May 2016 at 16:52

    I really don’t understand why the elites of the American society are so into the project of making America another duplication of Mexico. Mexico is not that great.

  3. Gravatar of Britonomist Britonomist
    24. May 2016 at 17:03

    >no fetishising of violence.

    Tell me more how Donald “I will torture the families of suspected terrorists” Trump doesn’t fetishize violence…

  4. Gravatar of Kevin Erdmann Kevin Erdmann
    24. May 2016 at 17:15

    SJWs? Are SJWs for open borders? My impression is that they are for closed borders. I don’t think you would find a lot of SJWs who would support a functional process for letting large numbers of workers in to the US or for facilitating foreign investment in either direction. Don’t be confused by the photo-op moralizing.

  5. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    24. May 2016 at 17:19

    We used to live in a time when academics had at least some vague idea of what decency was. Not in the last 50 years, alas.

  6. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    24. May 2016 at 17:37

    Then California went solidly Democratic and real Americans started realizing what a huge danger immigration was to the GOP. The end.

    Also, Bush sounds like a bit like Trump, if he were running in the Democratic primary.

    Yes, Reagan sounds like Hillary here. The GOP has changed to respond to problems that didn’t exist in 1980.

  7. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    24. May 2016 at 17:38

    Lorenzo, I agree that demagogue is the term that best fits him.

  8. Gravatar of Philo Philo
    24. May 2016 at 18:10

    Ah yes, decency! In the good old days, if you could fake *that* you had bright prospects in politics; now, it seems, the voters want something a bit spicier.

  9. Gravatar of Ken P Ken P
    24. May 2016 at 18:13

    Good post, Scott.

  10. Gravatar of Chuck Chuck
    24. May 2016 at 18:34

    “Ah yes, decency! In the good old days, if you could fake *that* you had bright prospects in politics; now, it seems, the voters want something a bit spicier.”

    Indeed. As our culture has become more proletarianized, the level of discourse has fallen.

    Thankfully, the real power remains with the elites.

  11. Gravatar of Steve Steve
    24. May 2016 at 18:57

    The political environment was totally different in 1980. The domino theory was still in play and the USSR was still the Evil Empire. Reagan’s Mexico answer should be interpreted in that context; economic engagement with Mexico would prevent them from falling into a more dangerous political/philosophical orbit like Cuba did. It was also assumed (incorrectly) that people crossing from Mexico would want to return to their families in time.

    Today the two Domino theories that are in play, are that immigrants bring socialism (rather than engagement preventing socialism), and the Hijra.

    Today’s theories very well may be wrong, but I would assign at least one Pinocchios to the claim that Republicans immigration policy was more sensitive back then. And the loss of societal decency is strongly correlated to the loss of community and church.

  12. Gravatar of Mark Mark
    24. May 2016 at 19:19

    Well yeah but that was before 9/11.

    (being sarcastic of course)

  13. Gravatar of Steve Steve
    24. May 2016 at 20:02

    To put it differently, in 1980 American Exceptionalism was a core belief among Republicans, and to some extent even among Democrats.

    As a result, in 1980, trade and immigration were seen as ways to spread American Exceptionalism abroad. Today, with American Exceptionalism DOA, trade and immigration are merely ways to replace America.

    I would venture that the rejection of American Exceptionalism is central to the political crisis ahead of us. Cruz would have been the best spokesman for America, instead of a PC apologism from the Kasich side or a fevered nationalism from the Trump side. Unfortunately we will be stuck sleeping in soiled bed sheets for at least four more years, and probably forever.

  14. Gravatar of Massimo Heitor Massimo Heitor
    24. May 2016 at 21:14

    Milton Friedman spoke against immigration and the welfare state.

    Margaret Thatcher, close friend, ally, and political soulmate of Ronald Reagan, said “I don`t like Mexicans,” she said. “Mexicans will be the ruin of America.”

    Is that the decency you speak of? And by decency, you mean supporting your position of mass immigration to all and only white nations.

    And people who oppose your position are speaking to emotion and prejudice and hence demagogues, but people who support your position are not demagogues. That sounds ridiculous.

  15. Gravatar of Anand Anand
    24. May 2016 at 21:42

    (Off topic)
    Greece has received yet another bailout. The Greek stock market is roughly at the same level as it was in August 2015 http://www.tradingeconomics.com/greece/stock-market. And that only after it has been rising in recent months (probably due to expectation of a bailout) it is down about 20% from the end of July 2015 before it fell off a cliff after the standoff over the referendum.

    Does this change your view on the strategy which Syriza pursued in the negotiations, and the analysis of the crisis?

  16. Gravatar of Anand Anand
    24. May 2016 at 21:45

    (Replace July by June above)

  17. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    24. May 2016 at 22:04

    LOL League of Women Voters

  18. Gravatar of David Hansell David Hansell
    24. May 2016 at 23:50

    Lorenzo, thanks. Demagogue is very apt.

  19. Gravatar of Miguel Madeira Miguel Madeira
    25. May 2016 at 02:44

    “Which, btw, is why I get so frustrated by “The Donald is a fascist” line. Fascists have ideologies;”

    Fascists did not really have a very systemetical ideology also (“we, who had the courage to smash all the traditional political categories and to call ourselves from time to time: aristocrats and democrats, revolutionaries and reactionaries, proletarians and antiproletarians, pacifists and anti-pacifists” – Mussolini); in many ways, “fascism” is largely the result of a sequence of case-by-case decisions by a non-ideological demagogue.

  20. Gravatar of TravisV TravisV
    25. May 2016 at 05:16

    Arnold Kling recently wrote a post entitled “Secular Dis-Stagnation.” I feel like something is wrong with it. Maybe he should look at BAA corporate bonds rather than risky corporate bonds……

  21. Gravatar of Benjamin Cole Benjamin Cole
    25. May 2016 at 05:17

    Nationalism? Demagoguery? Who said this:

    “In this land of dreams fulfilled where greater dreams may be imagined, nothing is impossible, no victory is beyond our reach; no glory will ever be too great.. . . The world’s hopes rest with America’s future.. . . Our work will pale before the greatness of America’s champions in the 21st century….”

    That is a bit nationalistic for even The Donald.

    It was Ronald Reagan.

    Reagan was a much better speaker, and had much-better speechwriters, the best in the business. Trump is a boor, and writes his own speeches, although “writes” is probably a euphemism.

    Reagan regrettably did run on the usual GOP-Southern strategy, loaded with code words about “young bucks” collecting welfare, but he never struck me as racist. Many Reaganauts made racist commentary, and they certainly pandered to that element of the GOP.

    Reagan’s AG, Edwin Meese, was obsessed with fighting pornography and recreational drug use. There was actually a 35-chapter “Meese Commission” report on pornography, and some people were thrown in jail for erotica.

    “Atty. Gen. Edwin Meese III announced Tuesday (Feb. 1987) the opening of a Center for Obscenity Prosecution and the creation a task force of federal attorneys to lead a crackdown by federal, state and local authorities on the estimated $8-billion-a-year pornography industry.”

    Yes, the federal government should decide what I can see and read in entertainment. Reagan thought so.

    Reagan, and the GOP elite, have long sounded utopian on immigration. When immigration was the topic, suddenly the GOP is deeply caring and open-armed. Love for the world!

    I suspect the GOP establishment just wanted cheap labor. You know, a nation of laws, law and order, andm btw, 20 million illegal immigrants with no voting rights. Which is still the GOP establishment position.

    Reagan’s trade protectionism—as implemented!—dwarfs anything Trump has even proposed. Reagan went after the exchange rates of foreign trading partners at the Plaza Accords. Japan never recovered, although they should not have gone along with the deal. Still, when Reagan was effectively banning Japanese autos from America, above a certain ceiling….and put 100% tariffs on Japanese electronics, and 50% tariffs on Japanese motorcycles.

    Reagan declared a trade war on Japan. Or is there nicer language for it?

    In many regards, no, Trump is not Reagan. Reagan was often worse, especially on free-trade issues, and freedom of speech (so-called pornography).

    So far Trump has not dressed up in military costumes, ala George Bush jr.

    I will denounce Trump when he doffs the epaulettes.

  22. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    25. May 2016 at 05:24

    These comments are so ridiculous I won’t bother responding.

  23. Gravatar of Massimo Heitor Massimo Heitor
    25. May 2016 at 06:12

    “These comments are so ridiculous I won’t bother responding.”

    This sums up Sumner’s response to everything. We are outside of Sumner’s Overton window of even possibly legitimate viewpoints.

  24. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    25. May 2016 at 08:06

    Massimo, seconded.

  25. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    25. May 2016 at 08:58

    Yep, Sumner’s done with you idiots. Not that you won’t all keep coming here to continue the nativist and/or racist circle jerk. Because you are too good for Stormfront or something, so you find it makes more sense to flame the host of a blog you vehemently disagree with.

    If you don’t know by now that nothing you say will change Sumner’s mind (just as nothing he says will change yours) then you are even dumber than you seem.

  26. Gravatar of Alexander Hamilton Alexander Hamilton
    25. May 2016 at 09:41

    Massimo, You’re not going to get any meaningful replies if you’re just here to spread lies about Milton Friedman.

  27. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    25. May 2016 at 10:10

    This sums up Sumner’s response to everything. We are outside of Sumner’s Overton window of even possibly legitimate viewpoints.

    He’s a faculty member. For faculty members, there are faculty and then there are these ghostly figures who fix the HVAC system and keep the college books and answer the phone at the help desk. You don’t take what they say seriously any more than you take what your pre-school children say seriously.

  28. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    25. May 2016 at 10:26

    Good thing we have academic institutions to teach us all to be decent.

    https://reason.com/blog/2016/05/25/milo-yiannopoulos-assaulted-by-crazy-stu

    And we have the Mercatus Center standing athwart history yelling ‘Stop!’ to brutes:

    https://reason.com/blog/2016/05/25/milo-yiannopoulos-assaulted-by-crazy-stu

  29. Gravatar of Massimo Heitor Massimo Heitor
    25. May 2016 at 11:13

    @msgkings

    “Yep, Sumner’s done with you idiots. Not that you won’t all keep coming here to continue the nativist and/or racist circle jerk.”

    Yep, Sumner is done with you American peasants. You are all nativist racists grouchy demagogues who don’t understand the modern world. Your land and resources are highly valuable but the current crop of residents have a marginal utility value of zero as can be seen on supply/demand plots. Therefore we will proceed with demographic re-engineering policy and suppress all resistance.

  30. Gravatar of Doug M Doug M
    25. May 2016 at 11:18

    That was back when the GOP was the party of free trade.

  31. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    25. May 2016 at 11:22

    @Massimo

    I understand that you have a significant beef with Sumner’s views on this. Why you can’t stop coming here and posting the same shit every day is the part I’m confused about.

    Harding has his own blog, shouldn’t you and he and Major Freedom and Art Deco and the rest of the Trump-lovers/Sumner-haters here just convene there? Sumner won’t bother you at all there.

  32. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    25. May 2016 at 11:26

    @ssumner

    I hope my post to Massimo above doesn’t offend you as it may lead to less traffic here. Although, probably not. I suspect a big reason for your Trumpista trolling is for clicks. I appreciate the irony of posters like Art Deco and Major Freedom putting cash in your pocket.

  33. Gravatar of Massimo Heitor Massimo Heitor
    25. May 2016 at 11:59

    @msgkings,

    Very good point. I was hoping to articulate my view well, understand Sumner’s view better. Sumner has thrown in the towel on serious discussion, so there’s no point, and visiting this site is probably completely non-productive.

    Where is E Harding’s blog? I love Steve Sailer. I love Alain Finkielkraut who I’ve mentioned. I was hoping Art Deco had a blog, but apparently not?

  34. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    25. May 2016 at 12:29

    Massimo, I have two blogs, the Marginal Counterrevolution and Against Jebel al-Lawz. The Marginal Counterrevolution was in response to Tyler’s deletion of my comments, while Against Jebel al-Lawz is meant to refute claims about Jebel al-Lawz.

    I have Adblock Plus installed, so no cash is going to Sumner’s pocket.

    “Why you can’t stop coming here and posting the same shit every day is the part I’m confused about.”

    -A typically wise monetary economist is wrong on the Internet. Trump is the biggest issue Sumner is wrong on (predicting recessions is the second-biggest).

    Art Deco has a blog, but it was last updated some years ago. Would be interesting if he started writing again.

    Massimo, agree. I shall hereby respond to any and all future Trump posts here with a “Make America Great Again!”.

  35. Gravatar of Major.Freedom Major.Freedom
    25. May 2016 at 12:31

    msgkings,

    One of the reasons I read this blog is for the seemingly endless enjoyment, for example reading you radical Trump haters write that everyone else who does not waste their time spewing the same hatred for Trump, are somehow Trump lovers.

    For the record I do not support Trump’s candidacy for President. But please don’t let that get in the way of your constant repetitive kowtowing.

  36. Gravatar of Major.Freedom Major.Freedom
    25. May 2016 at 12:34

    msgkings:

    “If you don’t know by now that nothing you say will change Sumner’s mind (just as nothing he says will change yours) then you are even dumber than you seem.”

    I also enjoy the insults, as they reveal shortcomings in the ideas here, which helps me with understanding where you people need the most help.

  37. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    25. May 2016 at 12:47

    @MF:

    Oh good, you now understand where ‘us people’ need the most help. So….now what? Some kind of help is forthcoming? I can’t wait!

  38. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    25. May 2016 at 12:50

    @MF again:

    I guess that’s why you spam a blog by someone who you completely disagree with and have little respect for, instead of running your own blog or posting at more congenial ones. You’re just a big ol’ Helping Harry!

  39. Gravatar of Massimo Heitor Massimo Heitor
    25. May 2016 at 12:55

    “I have Adblock Plus installed, so no cash is going to Sumner’s pocket.”

    In Sumner’s defense, I genuinely believe he’s just ranting frustration here. This isn’t a scheme to make ad dollars or anything else.

  40. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    25. May 2016 at 13:03

    @MF:

    OK then, help us Obi-Major Freedom, you’re our only hope!

  41. Gravatar of Mike Sax Mike Sax
    25. May 2016 at 14:06

    Major I’m surprised to hear you vote at all. Isn’t democracy itself the problem?

    I’d be surprised to hear that Herman Hoppe does.

  42. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    25. May 2016 at 14:46

    Good piece Scott. Yes, the GOP used to have some decency.

  43. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    25. May 2016 at 14:51

    “Cruz would have been the best spokesman for America”

    … and yet he stood out among the non-Trump candidates in the early months of the campaign by never daring to utter a single negative utterance against Trump. Only later did we discover what he really thought of him. Much much later. Too much later.

  44. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    25. May 2016 at 14:51

    Major doesn’t vote.

  45. Gravatar of Massimo Heitor Massimo Heitor
    25. May 2016 at 15:25

    “Cruz would have been the best spokesman for America”

    I totally voted for Cruz in the primary over Trump.

  46. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    25. May 2016 at 16:35

    I agree that they have more decency than Trump – at least in this conversation. But today with the help of hindsight Reagan also sounds very naive in this bit. I don’t think he would repeat some of his statements today.

  47. Gravatar of Lorenzo from Oz Lorenzo from Oz
    25. May 2016 at 23:43

    Britonomist: “Tell me more how Donald “I will torture the families of suspected terrorists” Trump doesn’t fetishize violence…”

    Jacksonian rhetoric is not the same. The fetishizing of violence in fascism went much deeper; to the notion that man realised his true nobility of nature in violence.

    Miguel Madeira
    “Fascists did not really have a very systemetical ideology also (“we, who had the courage to smash all the traditional political categories and to call ourselves from time to time: aristocrats and democrats, revolutionaries and reactionaries, proletarians and antiproletarians, pacifists and anti-pacifists” – Mussolini); in many ways, “fascism” is largely the result of a sequence of case-by-case decisions by a non-ideological demagogue.”

    Nazism very much did have an ideology, but Italian Fascism did more than Mussolini is pretending. He replaced the collectivism of class (the radical socialism of his youth) with the collectivism of nation born out of his war service and reading of what the Great War demonstrated while retaining and amplifying the notion of the heroic struggle and purifying violence.

  48. Gravatar of Kgaard Kgaard
    26. May 2016 at 01:48

    Massimo, thirded.

  49. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    26. May 2016 at 10:22

    msgkings. LOL, I wish. Unfortunately I make almost nothing on this blog.

    Lorenzo, Would it be fair to say that Trumpism is to fascism what New Keynesianism is to 1930s Keynesianism? I recall Mankiw listed something like 10 Trump traits that were right out of the fascist playbook. Admittedly many were stylistic. But New Keynesians was also pretty different from Keynesians, as times had changed. It’s sort of fascism for a 21st century democracy.

  50. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    26. May 2016 at 13:02

    @ssumner:

    Maybe we can call 21st century democratic fascism something like ‘Twitter fascism’ or even better the obvious #fascism

  51. Gravatar of Mike Sax Mike Sax
    26. May 2016 at 14:04

    But think about this though Harding. What if a Presidential candidate were to run on ending democracy a la Hitler? Or who knows, maybe Trump? After all, once he were elected he might think that maybe we can put off the election a few times.

    He’d probably say ‘Look, I agree we have to have elections every 4 years. But some people say maybe this time we should push it back a couple of years, do it in 6 years. Now I don’t know enough about it, I have to have my people do some research.’

    Would a Herman Hoppe or a Major vote then-if it was a vote to end all votes?

  52. Gravatar of Major.Freedom Major.Freedom
    26. May 2016 at 18:48

    msgkings:

    @MF…

    @MF again…

    @MF…

    Nothing much in those posts, not sure what you are trying to say or do.

  53. Gravatar of Lorenzo from Oz Lorenzo from Oz
    26. May 2016 at 20:46

    Scott: good question. I would turn it back — how Keynesian is New Keynesianism? Surely the answer is, “not very”; at least, not very different from pre-Keynesian mainstream economics, as Leland Yeager famously pointed out.

    Reading Umberto Eco’s 1995 piece on “Ur Fascism”–the original source via Mankiw, via Douthat (NYT), via Jamelle Bouie (Slate) for the list of characteristics–one can certainly see echoes.
    http://www.pegc.us/archive/Articles/eco_ur-fascism.pdf?version=meter+at+3&module=meter-Links&pgtype=article&contentId=&mediaId=&referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fgregmankiw.blogspot.com.au%2F2015%2F12%2Funderstanding-trump.html&priority=true&action=click&contentCollection=meter-links-click

    But echoes are not enough. Luigi Zingales original comparison of Trump with Berlusconi is very apt, as you have reiterated. Who thinks that Berlusconi can be usefully analysed by the “fascist” metric?
    http://www.city-journal.org/html/dodging-trump-bullet-10850.html

    Reading posts and online pieces of the “I will vote for Trump because …” variety, the overwhelmingly dominant theme is cultural alienation (against relentless and ever-expanding moral bullying, rhetorics of denunciation pretending to be politics of compassion, being treated as a civilisation without achievements only crimes, a culture without virtues only sins, bearing lots of blame yet having little power, being the only folk with cross-generational guilt, etc).

    But a notable secondary theme is “he is the candidate of the less belligerent foreign policy”, that a vote for The Donald is a vote for less American empire. Now, whether anything can be inferred about what Trump would do from what he says is a very good question (see demagoguery) but the claim is far from self-evidently false. If The Donald was actually a fascist, even a “fascist for the C21st”, it would be.
    https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-foreign-policy-speech

  54. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    27. May 2016 at 04:52

    I recall Mankiw listed something like 10 Trump traits that were right out of the fascist playbook.

    There is no such list in his blog archives. Trump bears no resemblance to interwar fascist leaders. Trump is a businessman, fairly elderly, and quite accomplished. He has no real interest in ideology and his judgements are off-the-cuff and haphazard. The interwar fascist leadership consisted of no accounts (Hitler, Codreanu), journalists who spent their entire adult life yapping about politics (Doriot, Mussolini), common-and-garden professionals (Heinlein, Pavelic, Primo de Rivera), and soldiers (Gombos, Szalasi, Quisling, Gajda). The exception would be the Finnish fascists, whose leadership was a motley collection. Only Gen. Gajda, Gen. Quisling, and the professors out of the Academic Karelian Society were particularly accomplished in their vocations. They were mostly small men in the course of ordinary life, and the one’s who were something other than small were the least successful in electoral politics.

  55. Gravatar of Mike Sax Mike Sax
    27. May 2016 at 08:46

    “But a notable secondary theme is “he is the candidate of the less belligerent foreign policy”, that a vote for The Donald is a vote for less American empire. Now, whether anything can be inferred about what Trump would do from what he says is a very good question (see demagoguery) but the claim is far from self-evidently false.”

    Right, because the way for there to be less war is to let other countries obtain nuclear weapons and talk about using them in Europe ourselves.

    That’s ‘less empire’

    Trump’s desire to get out of international alliances and treaties probably leads to more international problems not less.

    Certainly starting a trade war with China is not the way to avoid that.

    It certainly doesn’t surprise me that you get Bernie Sanders supporters claiming that Trump might not be so bad.

    This recalls 1933 when the Left said that it made no difference whether Hitler or the Social Democrats won: after all, the SDs were mere ‘Social Fascists’ themselves.

  56. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    27. May 2016 at 13:31

    Trump’s desire to get out of international alliances and treaties probably leads to more international problems not less.

    We have bilateral alliances with Australia, Japan, and Korea; we subscribe to the Rio Treaty. We subscribe to NATO, anachronistic though that is. Which of these does Trump propose to abrogate?

    Certainly starting a trade war with China is not the way to avoid that.

    It might help you if you’d not confound your talking points with current history.

  57. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    27. May 2016 at 13:37

    Lorenzo, Yes, PCism run amuck is bad, I’ve criticized it in posts. And so is Trump’s bigoted comments about Asians, Mexicans and Muslims. There should be a happy medium, and indeed the recent GOP presidential candidates were close to that happy medium, until Trump came along.

    Look, I think both extremes in the culture wars are bad. But the Dems are not nominating a nutty Yale student who wants to ban certain Halloween costumes. The GOP is nominating a racist nut.

    Art, It was 7, not 10:

    http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2015/12/understanding-trump.html

  58. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    28. May 2016 at 06:07

    So, Ross Douthat and Gregory Mankiw have an affection for inane analogies to? Tell me about the value of liberal education. See….

    a cult of action,

    To the extent this isn’t just part of a word salad, it’s dead on for the Kennedy Administration.

    a celebration of aggressive masculinity,

    ‘Bring it on.

    an intolerance of criticism,

    Richard Nixon (yes, the man himself, not HR Haldeman) was so incensed by the idiot editors of Scanlan’s Monthly that he had John Dean do a brief investigation of them. At the same time, he subscribed to The New Republic his adult life.

    a fear of difference and outsiders,

    Do you people ever quit playing these games?

    a pitch to the frustrations of the lower middle class,

    Because, of course, proper politicians proceed under the understanding that such people have no legitimate complaints.

    an intense nationalism and resentment at national humiliation,

    His ‘intense nationalism’ is a fraction of Teddy Roosevelt’s and less pronounced than Ronald Reagan’s. Any normal person resents national humiliation, bar peace-church types who live apart from public life.

    and a “popular elitism” that promises every citizen that they’re part of “the best people of the world.”

    As opposed to the predjudices of contemporary academic institutions, which regard them with indifference if not contempt. I once worked for an institution which, very inappropriately, yammers on and on about ‘diversity’, relaxes it’s admission and hiring standards, establishes special centers, victimology majors, and deanships &c. Around about 1998, they publish some statistics on the origin of their student body by region. A grand total of 3% were Southerners. They were collecting more students from California at the opposite end of the country than they were from the entire South. If the deficit of the black population had been about as severe, their graduating classes would not have been any more ebony than they were in 1960.

  59. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    28. May 2016 at 06:12

    Look, I think both extremes in the culture wars are bad.

    The ‘extreme’ that does not bother you controls the entire legal system bar rank and file lawyers who defend drunk drivers and do real estate closings. It controls the entire school apparat. It controls the media bar Fox and internet services like Breitbard.

    But the Dems are not nominating a nutty Yale student who wants to ban certain Halloween costumes.

    No, they employ Thomas Perez, who fancies that the federal government has the authority and should have the authority to dictate to local governments that they cannot issue citations to cross-dressers invading women’s bathrooms.

    The GOP is nominating a racist nut.

    There is no evidence he’s a nut and ‘racist’ is a term that has no meaning anymore. It’s a rhetorical thrust. Honest men never use it.

  60. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    28. May 2016 at 11:03

    Get your own blog, Art. Or adopt a kid. You are obsessed.

  61. Gravatar of Lorenzo from Oz Lorenzo from Oz
    29. May 2016 at 13:41

    Mike Sax: “because the way for there to be less war is to let other countries obtain nuclear weapons and talk about using them in Europe ourselves.”

    Whether the world system would become less stable without US management, excellent question. Probably not; the experience of the Obama years certainly suggests that. 1914-1945 suggests it even more. But that is a different question than whether US policy itself might become less belligerent.

    And yes, actually, letting other countries go for it is “less American empire”. Whether that is a good idea, whole different question.

  62. Gravatar of Lorenzo from Oz Lorenzo from Oz
    29. May 2016 at 13:43

    Scott: If civility and morality are weaponised, it turns out that removes important constraints within the body politic which — surprise! — has nasty implications. Those implications are likely to keep turning up while the causes continue to operate.

  63. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    31. May 2016 at 18:07

    Lorenzo, What exactly do you mean by “weaponizing” civility? Could you provide an example?

Leave a Reply