Celebrating a Year of American Greatness

I'll just say a few words:

I don't understand this new attitude that some so-called conservatives have today. The guest said that if conservatism isn't working, let's try something new. Well, who says that it isn't working? It seems to me that these Populists (and I guess this is what they are) are just saying and doing what will get them attention in today's more shallow environment, where calling names seems to have replaced actual thought. It seems to me that Steven Hayes is the one who is giving in to this. It is a quite upsetting development.

@GeorgeTownsend

I have been trying to understand the populist agenda that Donald Trump followers talk about but I can’t find written down anywhere. I bought American Greatness by Chris Buskirk and Seth Leibsohn because I thought it would help me to understand what policy prescriptions they were espousing. The book was listed by Tevi Troy as one of the top ten books of 2017.

I have just finished Chapter 1 and am extremely disappointed. The text is unsubstantiated assertion after unsubstantiated assertion. No data or facts are presented to buttress any of the opinions, some of which I think are just flat out wrong. Their principal enemy who has taken over the Republican establishment is the neoconservatives. The primary culprit seems to be George Bush’s war in Iraq along with the lack of immigration control. They feel the neoconservatives hate them, populate the conservative think tanks and don’t hire them, don’t invite them on conservative TV or radio shows and don’t purchase their articles for conservative print media. National Review and The Weekly Standard are specifically identified.

There is some very powerful intellectual firepower among the believers including people from Hillsdale College and Claremont College. These are the people who brought you “The Flight 93 Election” which is included in the book.

Here is a typical paragraph from Chapter 1:

Many of the very people who accused Donald Trump of intemperance would be known by nothing so much as their own radical rhetoric, and those who accused Donald Trump of lying would themselves play fast and loose with the truth. In their hubris and rage they visited destruction upon themselves.

No one is specifically identified as an example for radical rhetoric or playing fast and loose with the truth.

I am going to force myself to read the entire volume—Chapter 1 is about 8% of the book, but it is turgidly written and poorly reasoned. I’m going to use the time it takes for next year’s Lenten penance.

George Townsend (View Comment):

It seems to me that Steven Hayes is the one who is giving in to this. It is a quite upsetting development.

I think you meant Steven Hayward.

Right after listening to this podcast I listened to Law Talk Ep. 105: Resolutions. The contrast was striking.

The other podcast was realistic about President Trump's downsides. This podcast ignores Trump's atrocious behavior and its effects. Republican off year and special elections show the future. Democrats will almost certainly gain the House in 2018. They will very likely gain the Senate in 2018 or 2020; not long ago most pundits saw a Republican lock on gaining seats in 2018. Democrats will also very likely gain the Presidency in 2020. Almost every week, the President says something disgraceful and reminds Democrats, and many swing voters, why they hate him. He is the Democrat's turnout engine.

George Townsend (View Comment):

It seems to me that Steven Hayes is the one who is giving in to this. It is a quite upsetting development.

Al Kennedy (View Comment):

I think you meant Steven Hayward.

You are absolutely right. I really have to watch myself. I always get those names mixed up in my mind. I admire Steve Hayes a lot. And I used to admire Steven Hayward. He is Reagan biographer, who always did good work, I thought. Thanks, Al, for the correction.

And thanks for the preceding paragraph. It backs up everything I was thinking. I haven't read the book, but I've noticed that, while they put down real conservatives as having exhausted any intellectual chops, they don't don't do very well in that score themselves. They seem to believe it is enough that they say something. No back-up is needed. This is because, I believe, Populism itself has nothing to back it up. Beyond making people feel good, by saying that our leaders must listen to "the people", there is nothing there. This country is not built on Populism. Sure, there is an element. But it is carefully balanced with counterweights, to be sure that the majority doesn't run away with itself, and act imprudently.

Thanks again for your hard work.