Thursday, November 9, 2017

Why aren't good results translating into enthusiasm for Trump?

A lot is going right.

Numbers for housing sales, jobs and the stock market are all heading in the right direction, and at a robust clip. There is a new seriousness in foreign policy, most recently encapsulated in Trump's very fine speech in Seoul. He is the first president to outline, in the kind of forum in which he spoke (the South Korean legislature) in full, horrifying detail what a human-rights nightmare and economic basket case North Korea is. He balanced the invitation for the North to reverse course and join the normal-people nations of the world that has been extended by previous presidents with an unprecedentedly stern assertion of resolve to do what's necessary if the North chooses to continue posing a threat. The results of trade and security talks in China are not yet in, and Trump still has stops in the Philippines and Vietnam to make, but given the success of this trip so far and his track record for behaving much better abroad than he dies in Washington and New York, it's likely going to go well.

So why is a consensus shaping up that the off-year election results of Tuesday night signal a renewed zeal on the part of the nation's Left, a zeal the intensity of which may portend seismic shifts in November 2018?

Culture, people.

I can't stress this enough.

There are several levels of cultural factors at play here:


  1. Leftists love their identity politics. Virginia now has its first transgendered state representative. The linked article is a CNN piece crowing about that and other demographic firsts it considers significant.
  2. This love if identity politics extends to portraying any right-of-center bristling at it as bigotry. The most obvious example in the just-concluded campaigns is the Latinos for Victory pickup truck ad trying to tie Ed Gillespie to fringe exclusionary ideology.
  3. The ineptitude of a Republican congress that can't get the "A"CA repealed, can't come up with a simple, uniformly pro-freedom tax reform package, and take the initiative on anything else of significance because there is always some special-interest group that will lobby it to death. There is clearly an absence of the spine requisite for dealing with that.
  4. Polls show that educational rot has yielded its results. Significant percentages of millennials think socialism is preferable to a free market.
  5. The Trump base will not jettison its delusion that the ill-defined populism it touts is the wave of the future.
I harbor no illusions that the tide is with the principles this blog defends daily. They must be defended nonetheless.

Donald Trump sure as hell isn't going to do it. He's not up to the task. Neither are any of his boot-lickers.

It starts with acknowledging that a sovereign God ultimately rules this universe. Out of that comes a respect for the way he has designed His creation. Out of that ought to come an understanding that freedom is the second most precious gift a human being gets after his or her life. From that, it follows that freedom only thrives and endures if it's exercised for godly purposes.

Tuesday turned out as it did because Trump is correctly perceived as a narcissistic blowhard with no set of guiding principles beyond self-aggrandizement (Ralph Northam won 95 percent of the voters who disapprove of Trump's job performance), because our most influential cultural institutions hate God, and because people have become scared of their own freedom.

Reversing this is the task before us.

Not easy, but essential.

10 comments:

  1. I'm scared of the cop who wants to jail me for weed man. Does that mean I hate freedom or the powers behind the cop hate freedom?

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's only vital for you not to hate God is it not? And of course you can and should try to convince others to do the same, but is it really your call to proclaim that our most influential institutions hate God? Even if it's true, is there an earthly law addressing this alleged hatred in our nation, or should there be?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Sounds almost like a theocracy or theonomy you are after.

    ReplyDelete
  4. re: comment number one: It means you're way too occupied with unimportant pseudo-issues.

    Yes, it's my call to proclaim it, since I have ample documentation of it, which I share daily at LITD.

    No, there is no earthly law, nor should there be.

    Re: comment 3: Get real. America circa 1790 was not a theocracy, but Christianity was flourishing.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Tocqueville saw the importance of religiosity to the American experiment in the 1830s.

    http://www.heritage.org/civil-society/report/tocqueville-christianity-and-american-democracy

    In seeking to renew our understanding of religion’s contribution to freedom, we can turn to no better teacher than Alexis de Tocqueville. Tocqueville explained more thoroughly than anyone else why religion, though in some ways a pre-modern and pre-democratic phenomenon, is nevertheless essential to the health of modern democracy. This is one of the key themes of his monumental study, Democracy in America.

    Modern democratic freedom, Tocqueville argues, developed as a result of Christianity’s influence on European civilization, and more particularly as a result of Puritanism’s influence on American civilization. This link is not accidental: Political freedom requires an unshakeable moral foundation that only religion can supply. Moreover, religion is necessary not only to democracy’s emergence, but also to its preservation. Democracy fosters intellectual and moral habits that can be deadly to freedom: the tyranny of the majority, individualism, materialism, and democratic despotism. American Christianity acts as a corrective to these perilous democratic tendencies.

    Accordingly, Tocqueville concludes, the preservation of America’s traditional religion is one of the most important tasks of democratic statesmanship. Indeed, he goes so far as to say that religion “should be considered the first” of America’s “political institutions” and even that it is necessary for Americans to “maintain Christianity…at all cost.”[2]

    ReplyDelete
  6. Did the kosher conservative from Santa Monica way, Lil Willie Milla grind out another great bunch of words for the blowhard to deliver? I don't buy him being the savior of anything, much less the world and I am aghast at his representation of our people over in the lands of the Rising Sun

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm quite sure that Steven Miller and Michael Anton were the main writers. They did a superb job. That would be true regardless who was delivering the speech.

    I'm not sure of your point, since LITD is in complete agreement about buying DJT as the savior of anything. On the other hand, when he makes a good move, LITD is perfectly willing to acknowledge that.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Well, it matters to me who is giving the speech.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Not sure of my point? Oh well, sorry you don't get it. Actually, no I'm not. I'll just have to attempt to make myself clearer I guess. If I want to. Right now I don't. Carry on. Cheers!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Yeah, the drug war is such an "unimportant pseudo issue" spending 50 to 100 Bil a year over 50 years. I would think that would get your attention. And the addiction situation, to drugs and alcohol (which is far from benign) continues unabated. It also has quite a lot to do with what the blacks are upset about. Cops. Stop and Frisk. They're on it like flies on shit...

    ReplyDelete