Get the Ricochet app
Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.
But in a good way. At least, that's my take on Travis Aaroe's article, rather curiously appearing in The Critic, an intermittently amusing webzine (or whatever it is journalists call what they do between graduating and getting real jobs these days).
It's a short piece, and may not even be particularly accurate. But it has the great virtue of being clever and insightful (although perhaps not in equal measure). A couple of extracts to whet your appetite, then off you go for a quick read:
The pre-2015 “Chamber of Commerce” GOP, which [Trump] replaced, had its own cultural agenda, one that had much more in common with “populism” as someone like Sohrab Ahmari now understands it. You had the peals for the Heartland against the cities, the jibes at book-learning, the opportunistic banjos. Donald Trump has partaken in none of this. He has never had himself filmed firing a gun, riding a horse, or wearing cowboy boots.
And
Opponents of Trumpism have long agonised over something like the following: isn’t it time we dropped the managerialist style a la Aaron Sorkin and tried to speak to people’s hearts, like MAGA does? This is begging the question. No rival of Trump has ever evinced any interest in managerialism, wonkery, policies of any kind. Everyone knew exactly what Trump would do if elected. Can you name a single material pledge from Clinton 2016, Biden 2020, Biden 2024, or Harris 2024?
Interesting, no?
Discussion (5)
CHARTER MEMBER
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
The link in the OP didn't work for me, but here, I think, the targeted article is. Yes, it may well be interesting.
CHARTER MEMBER
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
That's not how I understand the meaning of the words "technocracy" or "managerialism".
My understanding of those words is that they mean "to elect/appoint leaders based not on their promises but on their qualifications".
The theory is that government is too complicated and events happen too quickly for promises to have any real meaning. What really matters is that the people in charge have the qualifications to make the correct decisions once in office. Besides, how can ignorant voters possibly know which promises are good and which ones are bad? Only experts have the knowledge for that sort of judgement.
IMHO
CHARTER MEMBER
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Fixed, I hope. Sorry about that.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
I’ve given up grading the motives of politicians. Milton Friedman said it best, we need politicians to do the right thing. Regardless of their character.
I see Trump as a guy with a list of goals. Those goals align with enough American voters to get elected. Does he have the skill achieve his goals? Hard to say. He certainly appears to be more effective than his first term.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
The technocrats do make promises, usually about how much the voters can expect to benefit. But rarely is there an inspiring vision or a call to service or sacrifice for the good of others.