Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 40 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Perhaps ideological purity is less important than I thought…
Wikimedia Commons
Snooty pseudo-intellectuals like myself sometimes claim to be above mere politics, and more interested in philosophy and ideas. I care less for the issues of the day than I do for the great ideas that govern our personal and political lives. While this is a fairly common refrain from conservatives, it is unusual among Democrats. Because their issues of the day move from baby seals to racism to illegal immigration to global warming to men playing women’s sports to banning gas stoves to Lord knows what, suddenly and unpredictably. And, of course, it’s difficult to find a cohesive ideology that would explain all their issues, or the transitions between them. So Democrats tend to be purely political creatures. Some Republicans are, too, of course. But some of us prefer to see things through a philosophical lens.
Never-Trumpers mostly start from this more philosophical perspective, but in their case they move quickly from a pursuit of ideological purity to, well, to some rather nonsensical things:
1) They claim to be disgusted by policies they support. Because Trump is unacceptable.
2) They suggest that if you like his immigration policies, then you must also approve of his personal life.
3) They think Trump’s ideological imperfections make him unworthy of the votes of exalted philosopher-kings like themselves.
4) They ignore what might’ve happened if Harris had won over Trump, forgetting that we had two choices in the last election.
5) If Trump does something they don’t understand, they presume that they must know more about his reasoning than he does.
These Never-Trumpers then rationalize these and other sometimes incoherent criticisms by claiming to be incapable of abandoning their principles for mere political gains. Even if I don’t understand some of the arguments of Never-Trumpers, I am largely sympathetic to their basic point: To an ideologue like me, Trump is hard to support. I’m not sure what Trump’s ideology is. Or if he even has one.
Of course, many snooty pseudo-intellectual Republicans (like me) dream of a world in which we could simply present a coherent and inspiring explanation of the benefits of conservative thought, and Democrats would magically start losing elections. We’re more interested in winning minds than ballots, figuring that the second will always follow the first. But I’m starting to think that the primary goal of the Republican party should be to defeat Democrats, rather than promote conservatism. Blasphemy! I can’t believe I’m even allowing such a thought to cross my mind! But follow me for a moment…
First, we need to accept that we will always have a Democrat Party. It’s not going away.
Wikimedia Commons
Consider the Civil War. You might have thought that that event would have been the end of the Democrat party. Or, at least, that it would force the Democrats to fundamentally change their policies and goals. But no. Democrats merely went from The Slavery Party to The Jim Crow Party. They didn’t have to give up racism or oppression of minority groups as their policy goals. They just had to be a bit more subtle about it. But they kept pressing on.
And consider what Abraham Lincoln had to do during the Civil War. He ignored the very Constitution he worshipped, when he needed to. He was despised by Democrats for ending slavery, and widely criticized by Republicans for his philosophical inconsistencies under pressure. He may have been the most unpopular American president in history, even up to today’s time. But despite his occasional ideological sins, he succeeded in saving America as a country, and was later considered one of our greatest presidents. Much later. Long after he died.
Today, most Americans consider themselves fortunate that Lincoln came along when he did.
Wikimedia Commons
Snooty pseudo-intellectuals like myself really struggle with Donald Trump. I don’t think he’s a true conservative. In fact, I’m not sure he thinks about the world in that way at all – I don’t think he’s read Machiavelli or Burke or any of the great political thinkers. Perhaps I’m wrong, but he strikes me as a political animal – a problem fixer – concerned with the issues of the day. Concerned with WINNING, whatever the issues of the day are.
This is not a criticism. He’s obviously brilliant. And sincere, and tough. And a patriot. I don’t pretend to have any insight into his personal thoughts. But even when he has an obvious opportunity to make a simple philosophical point, he prefers to stick with his both-barrels type of rhetoric, blasting his adversaries with insults and ridicule.
Again, I find this off-putting.
Jonah Elkowitz, Shutterstock. ID 2529055697
But I’m starting to think that it’s just exactly what we need right now.
By thinking only of politically defeating Democrats at every opportunity, no matter how minor, conservative ideologues like me end up getting everything we want. Think of how much better the world is for conservatism, and thus for people around the world, just in the past two weeks.
So rather than hoping for political wins to follow ideological wins, we’re getting ideological wins as a result of political wins. Huge ideological wins. Which I didn’t expect. But the results are so obvious, even an intellectual can see them now. Electing a simple political genius has given us the complex ideological victories we’ve sought in vain for decades.
Which, in a representative republic, makes more sense anyway, I suppose.
I’m not comparing Trump to Lincoln. Obviously. I’m simply pointing out that sometimes it takes an unpopular leader, willing to accept the criticism for doing the best he can under difficult circumstances, to get anything significant accomplished.
Shutterstock. EB Adventure Photography. ID: 1971108200
The Democrat party has gained enormous political power in America. Until we fix that political problem, conservatism as a philosophy has no chance whatsoever.
And Donald Trump appears to be just the man to fix it.
It’s just hard for us snooty pseudo-intellectuals to accept.
But I’ll try.
Because for the first time in a VERY long time, things are looking much better. Perhaps I should shut up, enjoy the show, and see how this turns out. Perhaps I just didn’t understand. Perhaps I was mistaken about Mr. Trump.
Which is hard for us snooty pseudo-intellectuals to accept.
Flickr. Michael Vadon.
But that’s OK. Really, it is. Please carry on, Mr. Trump. Don’t listen to me. If you can save this country I love, even through an approach I had not considered, then I’m your biggest fan. Maybe history will view you as this country’s savior. Maybe, just maybe, you know more about politics than I do. Or maybe you’re just the right man at the right time.
Whatever. Please carry on.
Published in General
I’m not necessarily in favor of amazing things.
Barack Obama accomplished amazing things.
Woodrow Wilson accomplished amazing things.
Ronald Reagan accomplished amazing things.
I LOVE that piece in the link! Gives me the one thing that’s been lacking for YEARS — hope.
I look at so many things, where I found it was sort of lost, but I rediscovered it came from @soupguy Kelly Johnston. Seems a bit out of the box for him so I’m doubly impressed.
Roger Kimball used in his article on American Greatness:
Trump, Musk, and the Deep State: The Battle Over Transparency
See Comments 68 and 72. Short answer is you’re right.
If I had to name one thing that rang false in the original post, among all the many things that rang true, it would be the same thing that M. America mentions here.
I didn’t mention it to the good doctor because I assumed it was something that (a) he already agrees with me about, (b) had already recognized as a likely misinterpretation even before he typed the words, and (c) had decided to let slide in Final Pre-pub Review, in the interest of brevity, since his target audience were people of sufficient reading ability and prior awareness of his intelligence to get his intention right without more, and costlier, elaboration. “Don’t worry, Self,” he must have said to himself. “They’ll figure it out.”
In such cases I am always happy when someone of like mind, like M. America, does add the missing fine point, so thanks, M.
Brought this quote from Theodore Dalrymple to mind:
Dalrymple is both correct and in total opposition to our social and educational conditioning. I doubt anyone will much disagree with him. But what I find challenging is consistently applying that truth to the analytical lens I see events through.
In his funny and, unhappily, insightful book about human stupidity, Carlo Cipolla offers his laws of human stupidity. Two of which apply in this case.
The second of the two laws I cite, he argues is true because unlike a merely evil person, whose motivations might be used to predict his bad behavior and avoid it, a stupid person will do things randomly and without warning that harm everyone including themselves.
Cipolla’s insight wields, I’m sorry to say, some explanatory power regarding our political environment, especially where the voters are concerned. There is no doubt a very large pool of ignorant, unprincipled voters who can be persuaded to vote for practically anything. In a closely divided electorate, the stupid voters “in circulation” have a greater opportunity to cause harm.
Day of the Moron
Keith,
In re…
or
…if you meant the second, I agree. I don’t necessarily agree if you were saying the first, which definitely means something different, though it is not completely clear what that is, which is why I might not agree.
[TAGS: Humour, Pedagogically Pedantic]
His little snide remarks were a reaction, not an initiation of a schoolboy playground spat. Like in sports, the person who retaliates is the one the ref sees and flags. They flag him but he refuses to cower like our elected reps do. Who represents us better, politicians who worry about what people think or Trump, who doesn’t care what they think?
I would agree but I do not any reminders of that 4-year nightmare.
Many will lose when the housing market crashes when more are moving away than moving in. Must be done, though. I have little sympathy. These are also the voters that turned VA blue when most of the state is red.
Judicial Coup
I heard one of the whiz kids created a substack or something that people must pay to subscribe to. Nothing in it. He knew the left would pay to hunt for things to use to attack him.
I don’t care for those ammo eaters but I would like to buy a suppressor or two without the harrassment.
Seems the left was keeping politico afloat.
But using OUR money, not their own.