The Existential Threat to Our Democracy

 

From a friend who happens to be a particularly shrewd observer:

I find it telling that is the past couple of weeks two of the so-called “moderate” Democrats (Bloomberg and Buttigieg) have referred to Donald Trump as an “existential threat” to democracy. Well, consider that. Trump has been in office for 3 years. The country held perfectly free and open elections a year ago, which Trump opponents largely won. Ditto, on a much smaller scale, a few weeks ago. If Trump attempted to use the apparatus of the Federal government to interfere in any of those elections, or to prevent any of his opponents from being seated, I must have missed those stories. Print, broadcast, and electronic media in this country have been overwhelmingly critical of Trump every day of the past 3 years. To the best of my knowledge, Rachel Maddow, Jim Acosta, Chuck Todd, and hundreds and hundreds like them are still free as birds, and still writing and speaking whatever they want. Every single week, even the briefest scan of Apple News reveals scores of entertainers, business leaders, elected officials, academics, and other high-status individuals offering everything from sharp criticism to unhinged invective against Trump. If any of those individuals have suffered any measurable personal or professional harm as a result, I am unaware of it. Jack Dorsey still runs Twitter; Robert De Niro is still a mega-celebrity; Ilhan Omar is still in Congress. And on and on.

(I am reminded of an anecdote Tom Wolfe wrote about many years ago. He was part of a panel discussion at, I think, Princeton in the 1960s, on some topic I’ve forgotten. The gist of the discussion was essentially, “America is becoming a fascist state!” and most of the panelists seemed to accept this as self-evident. But at one point, one of the panelists, Gunter Grass, a German left-wing writer who had actually grown up under Hitler, stood up and said, in effect, “What on earth are you talking about? Where are the Gestapo? Where are the men with the machine guns? In a real fascist state, the guards would have come through those doors long before now, and we would all be sitting in prison cells. Or shot.”)

But…. Heather MacDonald and scores and scores of others who do not toe the so-called “social justice” line have been prevented from speaking or removed from Twitter or YouTube. Brendan Eich, James Damore, Kevin Williamson, and others have been fired from jobs for having the “wrong” opinions or saying the “wrong” thing. Journalists and elected officials have been harassed in public. A prominent black Harvard Law professor was removed from one of his positions at the university for having the courage to assist in the defense of the “wrong” client. The list goes on, and on, and on. And these visible, high-profile examples — long as the list is — are not even the worst of it. The worst of it is the unknowable but much longer list of speakers who are not invited in the first place, people who are not hired, opinions that are not voiced, all out of fear of retribution on the part of the “social justice” bullies.

Unfortunately, most well-meaning people (especially including well-meaning liberals) are inclined to dismiss all of this as pretty much just a well-yeah-there-are-some-kooky-folks-at-the-universities thing. But it’s not. “Social justice” bullying is a cancer that has spread well beyond the universities. Never mind the arts and philanthropy, which are basically just extensions of the universities. Mainstream journalism has become riddled with it. The entire tech sector is riddled with it. The HR departments — and increasingly marketing departments — of a huge number of traditional corporations are riddled with it. Local school boards — mainly through the influence of teachers unions — even in otherwise “centrist” districts are riddled with it. Wall Street may (we will see) stand up to a Liz Warren or a Bernie Sanders, but if you dare to suggest openly that there’s something not right about a “trans woman” with biologically male levels of testosterone, lung capacity, and muscle mass competing in athletic events against women without those things, I’m pretty sure there’s no opening for you at Goldman Sachs.

There is indeed an “existential threat” to the freedom of thought, conscience, and expression which are indispensable to our democracy, but it does not come from Donald Trump, however much of an obnoxious, egotistical ass he may be.

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 76 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Spin (View Comment):

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    Spin (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    Spin (View Comment):

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    Of course, so would I.

    I wouldn’t.

    Yeah you would. Don’t even try it…we all would.

    Actually, I think a lot of people would skip to the “retire to the French Riviera with loot” stage of dictatorship as opposed to actually governing.

    I think what would happen for most people is they’d find themselves with the ability to “make things right” and they’d institute rules about this or that, thinking they were doing good. People would bristle, and then the newly minted dictator would send out the thugs.

    Not me.

    I think, maybe.

    Maybe me.

    I think power corrupts. And I think all of us would be corrupted by it.

    I might be. I’m already pretty corrupt though. 

    • #61
  2. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    MACHO GRANDE' (aka – Chri… (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Type Monkey (View Comment):

    Ammo.com (View Comment):
    Dissenting voices should speak up more, when they do they distribute the costs among all dissenters which reduces the cost to any one individual.

    But the individual who loses his job for speaking up doesn’t distribute the costs among all dissenters. He pays that price himself. And that’s why many choose silence. Not because they’re cowards (as David French insists) but because they are not in any position to risk the ability to provide for and care for their families.

     

    Accurate. And I’d be happy to explain that concern to giant brain-pan guys like David French, face-to-face, so he can really understand what I mean when I say it.

    Considering how having the wrong opinion, now, is much easier to suss out than ever before, and people have lost jobs over it, you can bet that their families come first, and they’ll be quiet. Or quieter. Because they have to be, else they’ll be forced to go the stores where people like Bernie Sanders think it’s great to stand line for bread – government issued bread, which you’ll get issued, good and hard, and you’ll like it, and vote for more of it.

    Or else.

    Indeed. The young and inexperienced, the sophoMarxists, the undecided-major protesters and antifa-tuous thuglets have nothing to lose. Taxpayers with children don’t have that peculiar luxury. 

    • #62
  3. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    TBA (View Comment):

    Spin (View Comment):

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    Spin (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    Spin (View Comment):

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    Of course, so would I.

    I wouldn’t.

    Yeah you would. Don’t even try it…we all would.

    Actually, I think a lot of people would skip to the “retire to the French Riviera with loot” stage of dictatorship as opposed to actually governing.

    I think what would happen for most people is they’d find themselves with the ability to “make things right” and they’d institute rules about this or that, thinking they were doing good. People would bristle, and then the newly minted dictator would send out the thugs.

    Not me.

    I think, maybe.

    Maybe me.

    I think power corrupts. And I think all of us would be corrupted by it.

    I might be. I’m already pretty corrupt though.

    What’s the point of power if you can’t go mad with corruption with it?

    Seriously. Corruption even makes Canada interesting. 

    Pinterest Angels and you get pictures like this

    ⚜️QE

    Pinterest succubus and you get stuff like this. 

    Succubus

    It’s a wonder we don’t have more corruption.

    • #63
  4. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    MACHO GRANDE' (aka – Chri… (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Type Monkey (View Comment):

    Ammo.com (View Comment):
    Dissenting voices should speak up more, when they do they distribute the costs among all dissenters which reduces the cost to any one individual.

    But the individual who loses his job for speaking up doesn’t distribute the costs among all dissenters. He pays that price himself. And that’s why many choose silence. Not because they’re cowards (as David French insists) but because they are not in any position to risk the ability to provide for and care for their families.

     

    Accurate. And I’d be happy to explain that concern to giant brain-pan guys like David French, face-to-face, so he can really understand what I mean when I say it.

    Considering how having the wrong opinion, now, is much easier to suss out than ever before, and people have lost jobs over it, you can bet that their families come first, and they’ll be quiet. Or quieter. Because they have to be, else they’ll be forced to go the stores where people like Bernie Sanders think it’s great to stand line for bread – government issued bread, which you’ll get issued, good and hard, and you’ll like it, and vote for more of it.

    Or else.

    Thankfully we Americans have guns. 

    Hidden Gun Storage  "Some Gave All"  Large American Concealment Flag

    • #64
  5. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    MACHO GRANDE’ (aka – Chri… (View Comment):

    Considering how having the wrong opinion, now, is much easier to suss out than ever before, and people have lost jobs over it, you can bet that their families come first, and they’ll be quiet. Or quieter. Because they have to be, else they’ll be forced to go the stores where people like Bernie Sanders think it’s great to stand line for bread – government issued bread, which you’ll get issued, good and hard, and you’ll like it, and vote for more of it.

    Or else.

    I’m listening to The Road to Serfdom now. Hayek makes the point several times that socialists find out too late that to achieve their goals, methods they abhor have to be used. I’m not sure this is true. I think that most (modern) socialists believe that you can’t make an omelette without breaking a few eggs and that the end justifies the means.

    Among many lefties, the point isn’t the assistance of the poor. It’s the domination.

    fascism-socialism

    They yearn for a Pharoah to do great things. 

    A pharaoh in ancient Egypt watching the construction of a pyramid across the Nile by  Christian Jégou

    To command the people. 

    To give them a cushy job pushing around the lowly. 

    Joseph performs administrative duties for Pharaoh in Egypt

    To worship a powerful God King. 

    The poor and the wretched are sideshow to many. 

     

    • #65
  6. MACHO GRANDE' (aka - Chris Cam… Coolidge
    MACHO GRANDE' (aka - Chris Cam…
    @ChrisCampion

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    MACHO GRANDE’ (aka – Chri… (View Comment):

    Considering how having the wrong opinion, now, is much easier to suss out than ever before, and people have lost jobs over it, you can bet that their families come first, and they’ll be quiet. Or quieter. Because they have to be, else they’ll be forced to go the stores where people like Bernie Sanders think it’s great to stand line for bread – government issued bread, which you’ll get issued, good and hard, and you’ll like it, and vote for more of it.

    Or else.

    I’m listening to The Road to Serfdom now. Hayek makes the point several times that socialists find out too late that to achieve their goals, methods they abhor have to be used. I’m not sure this is true. I think that most (modern) socialists believe that you can’t make an omelette without breaking a few eggs and that the end justifies the means.

    Among many lefties, the point isn’t the assistance of the poor. It’s the domination.

    fascism-socialism

    They yearn for a Pharoah to do great things.

    A pharaoh in ancient Egypt watching the construction of a pyramid across the Nile by Christian Jégou

    To command the people.

    To give them a cushy job pushing around the lowly.

    Joseph performs administrative duties for Pharaoh in Egypt

    To worship a powerful God King.

    The poor and the wretched are sideshow to many.

     

    Henry went to a dark place  last night.

    • #66
  7. Paul Stinchfield Member
    Paul Stinchfield
    @PaulStinchfield

    Randy Webster (View Comment):
    I’m listening to The Road to Serfdom now. Hayek makes the point several times that socialists find out too late that to achieve their goals, methods they abhor have to be used. I’m not sure this is true. I think that most (modern) socialists believe that you can’t make an omelette without breaking a few eggs and that the end justifies the means.

    You’re not wrong.

    • #67
  8. Randy Webster Inactive
    Randy Webster
    @RandyWebster

    Paul Stinchfield (View Comment):
    Irrelevant to my point

    Also sadly true.

    • #68
  9. Paul Stinchfield Member
    Paul Stinchfield
    @PaulStinchfield

    Randy Webster (View Comment):
    Also sadly true.

    So we are agreed, then. :-(

    By the way, did you know that all the Pogo comic strips are back in print, in large editions from Fantagraphics? A bookseller noted this to me recently.

    • #69
  10. Randy Webster Inactive
    Randy Webster
    @RandyWebster

    Paul Stinchfield (View Comment):

    Randy Webster (View Comment):
    Also sadly true.

    So we are agreed, then. :-(

    By the way, did you know that all the Pogo comic strips are back in print, in large editions from Fantagraphics? A bookseller noted this to me recently.

    My daughter bought me the first three on three successive Christmases.

    I first started reading Pogo in the early 70’s when my roommate and I rented a house on Lake Norman for our senior year in college.  On the bookshelf was Ten Ever-lovin’ Blue-eyed Years of Pogo.  I became an instant fan.

    • #70
  11. Spin Inactive
    Spin
    @Spin

    Paul Stinchfield (View Comment):

    Randy Webster (View Comment):
    I’m listening to The Road to Serfdom now. Hayek makes the point several times that socialists find out too late that to achieve their goals, methods they abhor have to be used. I’m not sure this is true. I think that most (modern) socialists believe that you can’t make an omelette without breaking a few eggs and that the end justifies the means.

    You’re not wrong.

    I think he’s wrong.  The real problem is that most modern socialists don’t define socialism the way Hayek did, the way you and I do, nor the way the real socialists did.  You can tell this is true because when you say something negative about socialism they never say “What?!  You don’t want the government to own the means of production?!”  No, they say “What?!  You don’t want rods?!  You don’t want libraries?!  You don’t want the police?!”  

    • #71
  12. Paul Stinchfield Member
    Paul Stinchfield
    @PaulStinchfield

    Spin (View Comment):
    I think he’s wrong. The real problem is that most modern socialists don’t define socialism the way Hayek did, the way you and I do, nor the way the real socialists did.

    That seems like a non-sequitur: Regardless of what socialism means to them, an awful lot of them are willing to break a lot of eggs to make the omelette of their dreams.

    • #72
  13. Spin Inactive
    Spin
    @Spin

    Paul Stinchfield (View Comment):

    Spin (View Comment):
    I think he’s wrong. The real problem is that most modern socialists don’t define socialism the way Hayek did, the way you and I do, nor the way the real socialists did.

    That seems like a non-sequitur: Regardless of what socialism means to them, an awful lot of them are willing to break a lot of eggs to make the omelette of their dreams.

    Breaking eggs and engaging in behavior that they abhor are two different things.  I don’t believe the modern socialist wants to send folks off to camps in order to obtain their goals.  Some may want to, but I don’t think that is true of most of them.  

    • #73
  14. Mark Camp Member
    Mark Camp
    @MarkCamp

    Spin (View Comment):

    Paul Stinchfield (View Comment):

    Randy Webster (View Comment):
    I’m listening to The Road to Serfdom now. Hayek makes the point several times that socialists find out too late that to achieve their goals, methods they abhor have to be used. I’m not sure this is true. I think that most (modern) socialists believe that you can’t make an omelette without breaking a few eggs and that the end justifies the means.

    You’re not wrong.

    I think he’s wrong. The real problem is that most modern socialists don’t define socialism the way Hayek did, the way you and I do, nor the way the real socialists did. You can tell this is true because when you say something negative about socialism they never say “What?! You don’t want the government to own the means of production?!” No, they say “What?! You don’t want rods?! You don’t want libraries?! You don’t want the police?!”

    Spin, I’m 100% with you on this one (if you fix the typo, otherwise, just 99.5%).  I can’t think of anything I’ve read that Hayek wrote that I think he was wrong about, and this is one of the things that isn’t one of them

    • #74
  15. Paul Stinchfield Member
    Paul Stinchfield
    @PaulStinchfield

    Spin (View Comment):
    I don’t believe the modern socialist wants to send folks off to camps in order to obtain their goals.

    Breaking eggs need not necessarily mean gulags: Note what happened to James Damore, for instance. In my experience most lefties approve of what was done to him.

    • #75
  16. jemcnamara63 Inactive
    jemcnamara63
    @jemcnamara63

    Mr. Robinson,

    Would love to get your take on what is/are the current extensional threat/s to our Nation today, in light of the events we have witnessed since your article in November 2019.  As well as, maybe your views on globalism and our 30 or 40 year slide into oblivion due to such.

    I certainly have some very strong views on globalism that start with President Wilson and emanate from his regime and transition through the 20th Century.  Namely some rather dubious views on the formation of the Federal Reserve Banking System, the 16th Amendment and our entrance into the League of Nations.

    Lastly, had the opportunity to reboot your discussion with Kitchens and Service regarding Trotsky.  Just a fantastic conversation that easily could have gone on for another hour and not been remotely boring or uninteresting.  It is a real pleasure to listen to someone moderate a discussion and have such an informed knowledge, yet be so open, frank and measured with the your contributions.

    For those who have not had a chance to listen to the discussion, here is the link:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuzXR-5w4Qk

    • #76
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.