Posted on 12/25/2015 7:53:32 AM PST by SeekAndFind
This incessant clamoring by voters and punditry for better "leaders" and more "leadership" is one of the most unsavory, dangerous, and un-American tendencies in political discourse.
When Donald Trump was asked last week by Joe Scarborough what he made of an endorsement from Vladimir Putin -- a thug who's probably murdered journalists and political opponents and more -- the GOP presidential front-runner responded, "He's running his country, and at least he's a leader, unlike what we have in this country." Then he offered an incredibly dumb moral equivalency about how the United States also does "plenty of killing."
There was plenty of well-earned criticism directed at Trump's comments. Most commenters were offended not because the Russians are being aggressively "led," mind you, but because Putin does things we don't approve of. Perhaps if the Russian strongman used his muscle to tackle global warming as the Chinese Communists are pretending to do, the New York Times' editorial page would praise him for his forethought and willingness to act. If Putin banned protests aimed at abortion clinics instead of Pussy Riot, how many progressives would cheer him?
In contemporary American parlance -- and maybe it's always been this way -- a "leader" typically describes someone who will aggressively push your preferred policies. How much do Americans really care about what this aggressiveness entails?
Trump's entire case, for instance, is propelled by the notion that a single (self-identified) competent, a strong-willed president, without any perceptible deference to the foundational ideals of the nation, will be able to smash any cultural or political obstacles standing in the way of making America Great Again.
But this is certainly not the first time we've seen voters adopt a cultish reverence for a strong-willed presidential candidate without any perceptible deference to the foundational ideals of the country whose personal charisma was supposed to shatter obstacles standing in the way of making America great again. Many of the same people anxious about the authoritarian overtones of Trump's appeal were unconcerned about the intense adulation that adoring crowds showered on Barack Obama in 2008, though the spectacle featured similarly troubling signs -- the iconography, the messianic messaging, and the implausible promises of government-produced comfort and safety. Just as President Trump fans will judge every person on how nice or mean he or she is to Trump, so, too, those rooting against Obama were immediately branded unpatriotic or racist.
Obama's inevitable failure to live up to the hype has had many repercussions -- and none of them healthy.
One: Liberal hypocrites, who only a few years ago were lamenting how W.'s abuses had destroyed the republic, now justify Obama's numerous executive overreaches because they correspond with liberal political aims. Obama's argument -- and, thus, the contention of his fans -- seems to pivot on the notion that the president has a moral imperative to act on his favored policies because the lawmaking branch of government refuses to do so. That is weird. This reasoning will almost certainly be the modus operandi for presidents unable to push through their own agendas -- which, considering where the country is headed, will be every president.
Two: Other liberals (and maybe many of the same ones) argue that Obama hasn't done enough with his power -- that the president is unwilling to lead -- even if there are procedural or constitutional barriers for him to achieve what they demand. Too many Americans seem to believe that presidents can make laws if they fight hard enough, and these people now view checks and balances as antiquated and unnecessary impediments to progress.
Three: Many onetime small-government conservatives, frustrated with the president's success and the impotence and corruption of their party (often a legitimate complaint but often an overestimation of what politicians can accomplish), are interested in finding their own Obama -- or what they imagine Obama is, which is to say, a dictator.
Not that this fetishizing of leadership is confined to the progressive Left or the conservative Right. In fact, more than anyone in American discourse, the self-styled moderate pundit loves to talk about leadership. It would be a full-time job cataloguing how often a person will read about the nation's dearth of genuine leadership -- which is, in essence, a call to ignore the democratic forces that make truly free governing messy and uncomfortable. There are entire conferences teeming with D.C. technocrats trying to figure out how proles can be led to preferred outcomes and decisions. The moderates seem to believe that organic disagreements can be smoothed over by a smart speech or two, and they always mythologize about the political leadership of the past.
For many, it's always the worst of times and we're always in need of the greatest of leaders. It's worth mentioning that Putin was democratically elected, with polls showing his approval rating usually somewhere in the 80s. Unity! Regrettably, sometimes I think that's how unity would look here, as well. We, on the other hand, have disparate forces with an array of concerns, outlooks, and conflicting worldviews. This is why we might be thankful that federalism and individual freedom, often scoffed at, are at the heart of the American Founding.
"There is danger from all men," wrote John Adams in what may be the most genuinely conservative of all positions. Now, obviously, you have to have a certain skill set to bring people to some consensus, to make decisions about war, and to administrate such a massive body as our government. But the president is not your savior. A person empowered to make everything great also has the power to make everything horrible. If a president alone can transform America, then something has gone terribly wrong with the system.
-- David Harsanyi is a senior editor at the Federalist and the author of The People Have Spoken (and They Are Wrong): The Case Against Democracy.
Trump would do none of those things. He would fill them with his people with an iron fist. That’s what he said he’d do.
Tyrants are fine as long as they are Marxist dictators.
Merry Christmas
Meanwhile our *true* dictator will try to rule the world thru the UN. That's my theory.
... The President is not, repeat NOT, our parent. He is the temporarily hired administrator of a limited government....
That is the absolute anthesis of the foundation of fringe lunatic liberal Democrats’ belief system.
“...If it takes a dictator to save this country from what Obama the dictator has done, then I’m all for it....”
I don’t want a dicatator.
I want a President who is thoroughly AMERICAN, who loves this Country and it’s ideals, it’s IDEA, respects it’s Constitution, and realizes that HIS OWN success and fortunes is due to the very existence of this land; someone who loves and respects and it’s traditions and heritage as much as I do, who will do what is necessary to protect it from the current external invasion and from the current internal subversion, and who will do everything in HIS power to make sure that this same America, that was handed down to us by the sacrifices of other Americans, will be there for OUR grandchildren.
That’s what I want.
I would fight a Republican dictator as vehemently as I would a democrat communist dictator.
I’m an American, and we won’t play that sh*t here for long.
I don’t remember any reporters asking political candidates about Idi Amin of Uganda when that brutal thug was in power. Why don’t they ask about civil rights violations in Cuba? My point is, don’t get us off-topic of America’s decline under the current administration and the wisdom of stopping America’s crony capitalists from their current actions of plundering our economy and selling us out to foreign economic interests then flooding our borders with refugees and illegals who will keep voting the same Democratic high tax high spend cronies back in power, voting roll cheats. Democrats pack the voting rolls with false voters and my taxes keep getting raised.
He doesn’t even try to be persuasive.
The silliest part is his attack on democracy.
Sure we all know it’s the same as mob rule. But it has the same limited role now as it’s always had in our system.
He’s just arguing that Trump and Obama are the same because they both have democratic support- which is logically laughable.
Absolutely, I want my own dictator.
We need a few years of a Pinochet to reverse the incredible damage OTrauma has done.
Then, as a departing move, Trump should tighten down the Constitutional rule of law again. One 4 year term of ruthless, then he departs, sending the country into Cruz’s hands, and on the way out, restores the rule of law.
Yeah dictators are awesome! Let’s get rid of that pesky Constitution too!
The iron fist is aimed at our adversaries and international competitors. Nothing wrong with that. In international trade the big dog eats. :-)
The Title alone tells us the author believes the bow-boy to be a dick-tator; sly fox that he is. Yet he finds nothing repugnant in that fact until the tide turns. On what side of the bed do these fools jump when the alarm sounds. Whichever it may be, when doing so they seem to be hitting the same wall every morning which in time addles their mental capacity.
Trump may not know our Constitution word by word but he does acknowledge its existence and the importance of this cornerstone of Our America. And, unlike others, the man is able to recite the Pledge of Allegiance with his hand on his heart rather than an attempt to cover his private credentials. The difference is Indo-American and that of Great American. David is experiencing LSD hallucinations as are most of the GOP winos. David has yet to slay the current Goliath—but has he even tried?
Yes, that’s it
*sigh*
Then they can do it.
And I don’t care if it’s Trump or not.
Exactly correct. Bump!
Most of the Republicans in Congress work for the billionaire donor class (and so do the Rats). Everyone but Trump is owned by the billionaire donor class. The billionaire donors will allow their Congressmen and Senators to talk the talk during an election but as we have seen over and over again they will not be allowed to walk the walk once safely back in DC. Particularly Senators since they only have to sound like they are for the people once every 6 years.
Don't be fooled again! Vote Trump he is the only candidate not owned by billionaire donors.
Indeed. Things have degraded to such a point that it is becoming increasingly conceivable that the only avenue for the ultimate survival of Western Civilization might actually require a dictatorial force.
Amazing thing to contemplate. But it’s where the combination of Obama’s lawlessness and the sheer impotence of both the GOP and the “conservative” opposition, coupled with the suicidal culture, have led us.
You also don’t see any stories of other Marxists killing and jailing their dissidents. Putin was their hero until he turned on their messiah.
Merry Christmas
Obama acting like a dictator doesn’t get their attention.
Trump declaring he will enforce the laws is what has them in a tizzy. The Cheap Labor Express has paid them handsomely to prevent us from electing anyone who would do that.
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.