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 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Rise of the Un-Intelligentsia
It’s not fear of Donald Trump’s becoming president that causes me despair. There are plenty of safeguards and limitations — not only of the office, but of public attention-span — that makes the scariest of his statements (not coincidentally, this category overlaps with those most-desired by his constituency) extremely unlikely to come to pass. For me, it’s having to face two facts that I am always aware of, but can usually safely ignore. First, that we share this country with a super-majority of people who have a multitude of incorrect worldviews and opinions. Second, that when a republic becomes democratic enough, those people may make their voices heard. Seeing Trump supporters’ views being validated is what causes me despair.
In the rush to stamp down the rise of Trump, many people alluded unthinkingly and superficially to the likes of Hitler, Mussolini, and Pinochet. A much more apt comparison is that of the modern European Right. Not so much the most reprehensible versions like Greece’s Golden Dawn or Hungary’s Jobbik, nor the more respectable ones like Britain’s UKIP, but probably something more like France’s National Front, with it’s combination of protectionism, immigration-skepticism, and (small letter) national socialism. As things currently stand, we run the risk that the two major political parties become the Democrats and an American-European Right. With no natural home for classical liberals, I fear we may become more like Europe than Obama and the Democrat’s wildest dreams.
Some seem to think that Trump is devastating the politically-correct culture; that is, if nothing else, political correctness will be forced to retreat. But it seems more likely to me that Trump’s ability to get away with saying things will not trickle down to greater freedom of expression for Joe Everyman. The media is happy to cover Trump’s daily outrages because they’re good for ratings; the rest of us will just be bigots. If Trump doesn’t complete the American transition into a European-style social republic, he’ll be an aberration that will evaporate as soon as he’s gone.
One of the best aspects of republican democracy is its stability, but Trump the politician is destabilization. This is inherently risky, in much the same way a second constitutional convention would be, because it’s unlikely to turn out how proponents imagine it would. Unfortunately, you can’t blame other people if you succeed in destabilization but fail to get want you want.
I gave this post its title not because Trump supports are unintelligent or because intelligence is synonymous with correctness; to anyone on Ricochet, this is obvious. I use it because the noble sort of pro-Trump thought leaders are heavily relying on a base who are understandably angry, unambiguously wrong, and proud of it, and these leaders should have known better. Democracy doesn’t care how wrong you are if your numbers are legion, and we’re all about to feel the consequences.
Published in General
For those of us trying patiently to explain the appeal of Trump, and why everyone needed to take his campaign seriously for the past year, I must again paraphrase John Derbyshire:
Agreed.
This is a population that elected Obama twice and has a crook and a crazy socialist running and that rejected the best slate of candidates we’ve ever had. So we have some deep problems. People are no stupider or more ignorant than usual, but there is lots wrong and it didn’t occur over night. This is what Burke predicted if a people loses the accumulation of moral prescriptions and prejudices that guide it every so slowly toward civilization.
I’m not sure that’s true. We’ve had a couple generations go through dumbed-down schools, that has to be having some effect.
I’m sorry that living in a free country is so hard for you.
Democracy and voting are not freedom, at all. Don’t confuse the two. And don’t confuse the fact that there’s voting with all votes or opinions being legitimate.
It’s more that so many people prefer to be taken care of to living in a free country.
If you are saying that the majority is not always right, I totally agree with you there, but that’s life. There have been movements that started out as minorities and became majorities, such as the Civil Rights movement, but they didn’t do it by lamenting the fact that people with incorrect opinions and illegitimate views get to vote and make their voices heard.
And there are others that have exactly the opposite. The various socialist revolutions were all instigated by minorities, and they certainly did lament that any other “incorrect” opinions even existed.
I am not sure what you are saying. All powerful minorities lament incorrect opinions, and many make those opinions illegal. Socialists are not the only ones who do it; it’s been going on forever.
I think they’re saying something even worse than that: that voting is no guarantee of freedom. (I happen to agree with them that voting doesn’t guarantee freedom, not by a long shot.)
I agree with them too, but I don’t understand why this is news. Even if all African Americans had been able to vote during Jim Crow, the fact that they were a minority meant that the majority white population could oppress them. It wasn’t right, and it wasn’t good, but democracy made it possible.
We live in a fallen world. I agree with Winston Churchill that democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others. What is the alternative? A country where thought leaders who hold all the correct opinions run everything?
I say this as someone who grew up in and has lived most of her life in Massachusetts in an active pro-life family. I have an idea of what it is like to be in the minority, but as much as I disagree with my statesmen on many things, I have never lamented the fact that they get to vote and be heard. That just seems very strange to me.
Elequently stated!
Yes, that’s the depressing thing. Trump or Hillary – they are both symptoms of something very rotten in America and that wasn’t going to change even if Ted Cruz managed to game his way to the nomination.
My opinion – we’re already on the downward slope. The inflection point was Obama getting re-elected in 2012.
Good post, Mike, on a very depressing morning. Where do classical liberals go now?
I cannot help but think the Republican party is somewhat to blame for Trump’s rise. The party has not adhered to Conservative values since Reagan left office and some Republicans like Nixon were Progressives in disguise. Republicans have increased the size of government and fallen into the trap of crony-capitalism. When the average under-educated voter equates Conservatism to the Republican party they incorrectly assign a negative connotation to Conservatism. What they are really looking at is a watered-down version of Conservatism.
Trump is not a Conservative and will not be another Ronald Reagan. He is definitely a change of pace and appeals to voters who feel like the “intelligentsia” is looking out for themselves and ignoring their cries for attention. I just hope he can beat Hillary and we don’t lose the Supreme Court for years to come.
The statement about democracy is mostly true, but there are cultures that don’t even seem “ready” for democracy. That doesn’t make other forms better, but there does need to be a certain level of commonly understood objective moral truth to allow democracy to work at all. As for better systems, I’ll just say it may be a little short-sighted to assume republican democracy is the end of the line of progression of better and better political systems.
If people start to understand objective moral truth better than they do now, which in it’s most simple formulation is “you must have a very good reason to force someone else to do something they don’t want to,” and the trajectory of history gives us at least some confidence that understanding of this will improve with each new generation, this could lead to the eventual improvement of republican democracy and perhaps the discovery of entirely new and better political systems.
The best system is the one that maximizes freedom and is consistent and open in its application of the rule of law for its citizens. Many forms of government, from monarchy to despotism to democracy can achieve this state, but they each have different requirements to maintain that state, and they each have different vulnerabilities.
The inherent weakness of a republic or democracy is the reliance on the citizens to be moral and self-policing over many generations, and resistant to short-term politics, demagogues, and mob rule. When the citizens are no longer capable of self-restraint, a democracy or republic can turn into a tyranny as ruthless and nasty as the worst despotism.
Call me crazy, but… How about a Constitutional Republic? One that sets aside a number of freedoms as being outside the boundaries of direct democracy?
“the noble sort of pro-Trump thought leaders”.
I didn’t know seven words could contain so many oxymorons. Seriously? I challenge you to name one.
If people come to a better understanding of objective moral truth, they can easily create a new and better society within the framework provided by the American Founding Fathers. Or do you see something lacking in that framework?
I would compare the Constitution to the wheel. Sure, someday someone might come up with something better, but I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting. :)
I’m personally considering becoming a monarchist.
Generally the people who are trying to save the country by destroying the GOP. I think it’s misguided, but their intentions are noble.
He was trying to argue in good faith. Give a man a break…..
Well, democracy is something of a blunt tool. A system that is more nimble, more granularized, and more adaptive may be possible as the world gets more technological, wealthy, and hyper-customized. It could be more of an evolution of democracy rather than a revolution.
The refusal of both parties to properly address the crisis on our southern border is a perfect example.
Try the Journal of American Greatness.
Exactly. Unfortunately, we’ve been chipping away at the boundaries established by our republican founders in the name of democracy. As has been pointed out countless times, democracies survive only until voters learn that they can legally steal via the ballot box.
All for it, but it has never totally existed in practice in America. Minorities have always had a rather rough time of it, and in some cases, a very rough time of it; that is nothing new.If we find ourselves as members of a minority, there are two ways to deal with it: we can try to follow the example of people like Martin Luther King, and do our best to present our case as eloquently as possible, or we can wag our fingers at the majority of people and lecture them constantly about how uneducated they are. One way might work; the other way won’t. That is all I am saying :)