Posted on 07/27/2018 5:40:36 AM PDT by Kaslin
Today there are many Republicans who blame Trump for the de-Reaganization of the Republican Party and wistfully pine for the 1980s era of gentleman’s politics. This is, by the large, the main source of anxiety about Trump in some Republican quarters, and it is also the driving momentum of the so-called “Never Trump” movement.
I came of age in the Reagan area, and I too prefer a more civil political climate. But that is not the America we live in now. Reagan’s policies and style were perfectly calibrated to deal with the specific problems and specific political environment of the late 1970s. Today, however, a good deal of Reaganism is obsolete. Not only has stagflation disappeared and the Soviet Union collapsed but Reagan himself would be a fish out of water in the dark, roiled currents of today.
But Lincoln wouldn’t. His political environment was even more roiled than the one we have now. And Lincoln would have seen that, in this environment, an environment made by a gangster clan of Democrats like Obama and Hillary, you don’t get very far with Reagan’s gentlemanly style. In short, Trump is the man of the hour, not Reagan. Trump has the chance to do what Reagan never even dreamed about, taking a page from Lincoln and smashing the Democratic plantation.
When we consider Trump’s two big Republican “heresies”—his positions on trade and immigration—we can see that they might be heresies from Reagan’s point of view, but they were not heresies from Lincoln’s point of view. As Gabor Boritt shows in Lincoln and the Economics of the American Dream, Lincoln’s GOP was unabashedly protectionist and viewed tariffs as a necessary and valid economic strategy to protect American workers and American industry from mercantilist competition from European powers.
And while many progressives as well as conservatives insist that tariffs have never worked, Trump seems to be making them work, as evidenced by the recent agreement with the EU to lower its tariffs. Historically, Boritt shows that America had tariffs from Hamilton’s time through the end of the 19th century, and it was during this period that America grew most rapidly and became the largest economy in the world, surpassing Great Britain.
On immigration, too, Trump and Lincoln can be seen as generally aligned. This point is hardly obvious, but we get a vital clue about how Lincoln would have thought about today’s immigration debate but considering the position Lincoln actually took on extending civil rights—the right to full citizenship, the right to vote, the right to serve on juries—to blacks. Lincoln basically held that it is wrong for any people, anywhere, to enslave another people because slavery is wrong or, to put it philosophically, against natural right.
But natural rights are not the same as civil rights. Civil rights are the product of living in a particular community. The community is a social compact between the citizens who have formed that community. These existing citizens have the right to decide who gets to be a member of their club, and on what terms.
For this reason, Lincoln insisted that opposition to slavery and the extension of civil protections to blacks were two separate issues. Before the war Lincoln was committed to fighting only for the former; only after the war did he move tentatively in the direction of the latter.
It follows from this that Lincoln would have agreed with Trump that natives are prior to immigrants, and that natives are the ones who get to decide who is allowed to immigrate, and in what number, and on what conditions. This, by the way, applies to decisions both about legal and illegal immigration.
But hold it, the progressive will say. “America is a nation of immigrants. Immigrants are the ones who made America.” Actually, this is only a partial truth. As the founders and Lincoln all recognized, the first Americans were not immigrants. They were settlers. There’s a difference.
Immigrants are people who come individually, in families, or in small groups to a country that has already been created and established. Immigrants, one may say, are people who apply to be members of a club whose rules appeal to them. Settlers, however, are the original group that forms that community in the first place and charts out its basic rules or constitution.
Trump somehow knows all this, either through learning or just intuitively. And ironically Trump in adopting the policies of Lincoln, rather than those of Reagan, is proving that he is the first Republican since Reagan to win the support of the group once known as the “Reagan Democrats.”
Since Reagan, the GOP has unsuccessfully wooed these voters by anodyne appeals to abortion and other social issues. Trump is the first one to appeal to them both on economic and social issues, and that is why the descendants of the Reagan Democrats now have a new name: Trumpsters.
Trump is the only Republican on the scene today who actually has a chance to finish off the Democratic plantation. To do this he must re-Lincolnize the GOP. This means going further than opposing racial preferences and affirmative action. He must eliminate racial categories from the Census and promote a new civil rights act that outlaws using those categories to discriminate against any ethnic group, black, white, brown or yellow. Republicans have been talking color-blindness for a long time; it’s time to implement it.
Second, Trump must invade the Democratic plantation with creative policies that restore entrepreneurship, jobs, and opportunity to America’s barrios, ghettoes and native American reservations. Surely there are blacks, Latinos and native Americans in these godforsaken communities who would welcome a chance to learn, to improve themselves, and to prosper there.
Trump and the GOP can help this process through a bold combination of tax incentives, deregulation, arm-twisting of the kind that Trump specializes in, as well as the suspension of destructive family and social policies that encourage illegitimacy, crime and civic breakdown. The GOP already has the formula; what’s needed now are the spine and the nerve to put it into effect.
It won’t be easy. Trump needs the Republicans behind him on this because the Democrats, who are already in a fevered mode, are going to go berserk. We are likely to see a Democratic uproar echo through the halls of Congress, reverberate through the media, cause fainting spells in Hollywood, and crack the tectonic plates of the culture. Trump and the Republicans—united, calm and collected—should bring it on with the same resolve that Lincoln said, in effect, to the Democratic planters of his time: bring it on.
To be clear, the long-term goal for Trump and the GOP is not merely to improve life on the plantation. The goal, rather, is its shutdown, the panic-filled dispersion of the overseers, in short, total emancipation. Once these hellholes are permanently transformed, no longer will America be plagued by the wretched politics of white supremacy and ethnic exploitation. Whites, blacks and browns can all dream the American dream and pursue happiness not through identity politics but rather as individuals, as families, and as Americans.
Finally, we need the cleansing antidote of truth. Democrats today are not content with promoting lies; they are insistent that we collaborate and bow down to their lies. This is not a new demand. “The question recurs,” Lincoln said of the Democrats in his Cooper Union speech in February 1860, “what will satisfy them?” And Lincoln answered, “this and only this: cease to call slavery wrong and join them in calling it right. Silence will not be tolerated—we must place ourselves avowedly with them.” The enforcement of political correctness has been a Democratic strategy from Lincoln’s day to our own.
For too long conservatives and Republicans have allowed big lies to take over the culture and, in some cases, their minds. This progressive cultural hegemony has polluted our education system and our media with fake narratives and fake history. It has also created a kind of Stockholm syndrome among conservative intellectuals. “In our hearts we know we’re wrong.” But we’re not wrong. We’ve been lied to. It’s time for us to stop apologizing—we have nothing to apologize for—and go on the offensive. Truth is our deadliest weapon, if we will deploy it.
The defeat of the plantation would make Trump the first great president of the 21st century, and the GOP the worthy custodian of American ideals. With our support, Trump can bring to an end the vicious train of exploitation that the Democratic Party has wrought for nearly 200 years. What better way to rescue the principles of the founders, and to vindicate the philosophical statesmanship of Lincoln, than to sweep away this blight on the American experiment, this nightmarish interruption of the American dream?
“The fiery trial through which we pass,” Lincoln said in his Annual Message to Congress in 1862, “will light us down, in honor or dishonor, to the latest generation.” The point, he had already stated in his Peoria speech several years earlier, was not merely to save the Union. Rather, “If we do this, we shall not only have saved the Union, but we shall have so saved it as to make, and to keep it, forever worthy of the saving.” This America worth saving is the object of our striving; it is what Lincoln termed “the last best hope on earth.”
This article is excerpted from Dinesh D’Souza’s new book Death of a Nation, out July 31. His movie of the same title opens nationwide on Friday, August 3.
I couldn't get further than this.
Maybe I live under a rock, but I have not heard that Trump was de-Reaganizing the GOP. That seems like a stupid thing to say. Reagan was concerned about immigration, Reagan had an active and forceful foreign policy, Reagan cut taxes, Reagan made trade deals for the US -- in what way is Trump deviating?
Also, the "Never Trump" movement is certainly not about the return to gentlemanly policies. It's about globalization and whether the US should be strong and sovereign. The "Never Trump" people answer "No -- we should be part of the New World Order". Trump answers "Yes -- MAGA".
Politeness is a made-up concern for the media. No one really cares about the gentlemanly aspects (which often hide awful corruption).
We are at war with the left. The left does not understand or appreciate civility. We should not bring just a knife to a gunfight.
All the never Trumpers I know work in the international business world. They are a small minority in the U.S.
Part of my problem with D’Souza is that he does not know American history.
Lincoln did not survive the war.
I hope D’Souza does not create another mess that President Trump will have to clean up, pardon the expression.
Wow. Totally impressed with the excerpt of D’Souza’s manifesto. I think D’Souza is a kind of prophet, a seer. The Trump team would do exceedingly well to study and learn from D’Souza as this may assist them add greater focus to their course they appear to be charting.
What D’Souza says here is exciting. There is a real chance to recalibrate the dreck that has been rotting our society since the mid 60’s. I sincerely pray that men of courage would now rise up.
Since Reagan, the GOP became a party dominated by undocumented Democrats in R jerseys that I call Bush League Republicans.
They pretended to be conservative while carrying out bipartisan policies designed to turn the country into North Mexico.
Without Trump it was a very short time before the GOP was irrelevant.
“No — we should be part of the New World Order”.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
GHW Bush recognized that we would not vote for the New World Order so he went about importing people who would.
His sons, including adopted Slick Willy, carried that out.
He is, correctly, observing that Trump is operating in a political environment that much more closely approximates that in which Lincoln found himself than what Reagan had to deal with in the 80's.
The article is pretty well thought out and addresses many of the areas that cause most politicians to simply shrug their shoulders.
As he usually does, D'Soussa is talented in identifying problem areas and offering very broad remedies, but if this article is an indication of what the book is going to be, he's kinda thin on what specifically should be done about any of them.
Th Republican Establishment HATED RONALD REAGAN..........
Part of my problem with D’Souza is that he does not know American history.“Before the war Lincoln was committed to fighting only for the former; only after the war did he move tentatively in the direction of the latter.”
Lincoln did not survive the war.
I hope D’Souza does not create another mess that President Trump will have to clean up, pardon the expression.
Lincoln survived only 5 days after the surrender of Lee at Appomattox Courthouse. The war was winding down but not ended on April 14, 1865. But it would be fair to say that the Confederacy actually lost the war when Lincoln was reelected in November of 1864. The 13th Amendment was proposed on Jan 31, 1865 (and ratified in December of that year).You are splitting hairs and making a broad statement that "D’Souza . . . does not know American history." I consider the proposition that you know more American history than D’Souza does to be unproven.
Democratic Plantation has been exposed by Trump big time no place for them they are dangerous waste.
For several reasons, that will not work.
Let me cite a specific example. D’Souza wants black voters to pull a straight R ticket so he invokes Lincoln's supposed commitment to civil rights.
But everyone with a computer knows Lincoln's real views: “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”
Lincoln's advocacy of white supremacy is not going to attract black votes today.
A better course of action would be for conservatives to have a message that appeals to voters of all colors: hard work, high morals, clean livings, respect for flag and country, and optimism for the future. That would attract a lot of new voters both black and white.
“Part of my problem with D’Souza is that he does not know American history.”
That’s for sure but his fan club either doesn’t notice or doesn’t care.
One of D’Souza’s greatest skills seems to be his ability to pose as a victim. Poor Dinesh, unfairly prosecuted by the Democrats. Well that might fly if he didn’t have a history of playing fast and loose with ethics.
He got booted from his cushy job as head of a Christian college because he was shacking up with someone other than his wife. Oops. He tried making a name for himself by accusing paleocons of racism, while plagiarizing the books of the people he was accusing. Oops. The campaign law that he was jailed for violating was a law that he knew existed, and which he purposely tried to evade- it wasn’t an honest mistake. Oops.
What’s eventually going to happen is that people are going to figure out that he’s just another David Frum, David Brock- two other frauds who managed to pass themselves off conservative writers.
People who inveigh against racism are cockeyed optimists. And/or hypocrites. The Democrat slaveowners of the South were products of their environment just as surely as we are products of our own, quite different, environment. And the slaves in the South were products of their environment as well. And so, for that matter, were the Germans who lived under, and cooperated with, the NAZI party. And so was Patty Hurst, and any other victim of the Stockholm Syndrome. That is a matter of fact.It is also a fact that the Japanese - for only one example - define their country as consisting of people who are related to the Emperor. Which is racism, neat. And there is no reason to assume that African blacks are immune to the phenomenon; they have their individual tribes and intertribal conflicts, too. The idea that racism is even wrong is a modern American cultural supposition. You can find support for the thesis in the writings of Paul, but you can also find the Epistle to Philemon, addressed respectfully to a slaveowner, there too. Christian culture does undergo changes.
I came of age in the 1950s, and decided to be a Republican in part because of Lincoln. But then, I grew up in the North. Had I been raised in the South and been subject to less Union and more Confederate sympathy, who knows?
Three quarters of a century ago, open racism in the South by whites was a thing. But Thomas Sowell has pointed out that he has dined out with a blonde white woman in Atlanta, without the slightest incident - and that would have been an extremely dangerous thing to do in 1950. Back then, the South was - “the Solid South.” A Republican couldn’t get elected Dogcatcher, and the Democrat primary was the real election. Go back twenty years before that, and blacks were all Republican - if they dared to vote. Open racism by Republicans has never been a thing. Discrimination, yes, surely - but not open racism. YOU ARE STILL CRYING WOLF (About Trump “Racism”) was written by an anti-Trump Democrat - but one who recognized (in 2016) that Democrats were claiming Trump was an open racist - when whatever charge of covert racism you might attempt to lay against him, Trump never openly espoused racism. The writer points out that KKK-style open racists simply are not, now, a voting bloc of any importance at all.
D’Souza points out that the Democrats jumped from open racism against blacks to coopting blacks, and giving them a fish in preference to teaching them to fish. The Republican position has been pretty steady at, “Blacks have problems, but the last thing they need is ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” The Democrats’ “help” is minimum wage laws that make it hard for low-educated people to get in the labor force. And unlimited competition for low-skill jobs from Mexico (and points south).
In short I agree that Lincoln in particular and whites in general were racist in the Nineteenth Century. But then, blacks were damaged goods - damaged systematically by slaveowners. D’Souza’s message to blacks is that they - and only they - can transcend that. Remaining in lockstep with people whose settled politics is active promotion of racial distinctions and quotas is a Faustian bargain.
Blacks can become a truly potent political force when they find a way to make common cause with whites. They have that opportunity in principle with Trump, because he openly and frankly listened to them and asked for their vote in a way that not even Jack Kemp achieved (not for lack of trying). Now that he is delivering, and black unemployment is at a historic low, maybe they can take “yes” for an answer from Republicans. Because Republicans always hoped for low black unemployment, whereas Democrats are all lip service and no desire for actual results which threaten to allow blacks to realize they don’t need Democrats. Competition in education is beneficial to blacks (and whites) and blacks know it. Yet they vote for Democrats whose actual constituency is the Teacher’s Union.
If, as in days gone by, 90% of blacks voted Republican, of course the Democratic Party would disappear without a trace. That isn’t happening. All it really takes is 20% or 25%, and American politics would undergo a tectonic shift.
Updated.
That is an interesting comment.
But let's not forget who the slave states were, and who voted to enshrine slavery into the United States constitution. New York. New Jersey. New Hampshire. And Connecticut, and Pennsylvania and Massachusetts. And Rhode Island, and Delaware, and Maryland.
Virginia, North and South Carolina, and Georgia were also slave states. We must always cast 4/13 apportion of responsibility in that direction.
“Open racism by Republicans has never been a thing.”
Reread Lincoln’s comments: “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”
David Frum and David Brock. I have been trying to forget those two.
But you are right. D’Souza is of that ilk and is probably just a commercial writer filling what he sees as a niche market.
Kathleen Parker is another professional writer playing a role about which she knows nothing.
That is an interesting comment.The Democrat slaveowners of the South were products of their environment just as surely as we are products of our own, quite different, environment.”
How would you feel if the government suddenly decided that you would never have use of any electricity again? Very ill-used, I make no doubt. Well, that’s just a sample of the reasons why an American secretary today would have to think long and hard about exchanging her circumstances with those Queen Victoria (1819-1901) lived in. And, certainly, the slave owners of the South were no better off than Queen Victoria was.The environment those slaveowners grew up in was smug and super-entitled compared to most people in their day, but that just means that they were raised to expect - demand - to be waited on hand and foot. Just like we (well, our children at least) were raised to expect TV, dishwashers, and all the other appliances which you are acutely reminded of when the power is off and they don’t work. You assume that you would have behaved differently in the shoes of slaveholders, but Jordan Peterson will tell you that you would not. On the basis of his psychological studies of the behavior of Germans living under Hitler’s regime, he will tell you that things work differently than we would like to think.
As Lincoln put it,
“Don’t criticize them; they are just what we would be under similar circumstances.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.