For John, BLUF: Tuesday was a busy day. Nothing to see here; just move along.
From Law Professor Glenn Reynolds we have "Donald Trump is the response to a bullying culture" And here is the sub-headline: "Abusive political correctness drives voters into the impolitic billionaire's loud embrace."
Back in February, analyzing Donald Trump’s appeal, David Gelernter wrote: Political correctness. Trump hasn't made it a campaign theme exactly, but he mentions it often with angry disgust. Reporters, pundits, and the other candidates treat it as a sideshow, a handy way for Trump (King Kong Jr.) to smack down the pitiful airplanes that attack him as he bestrides his mighty tower, roaring. But the analysts have it exactly backward. Political correctness is the biggest issue facing America today. Even Trump has just barely faced up to it. The ironic name disguises the real nature of this force, which ought to be called invasive leftism or thought-police liberalism or metastasized progressivism. The old-time American mainstream, working- and middle-class white males and their families, is mad as hell about political correctness and the havoc it has wreaked for 40 years — havoc made worse by the flat refusal of most serious Republicans to confront it.”Yes, the political and academic elites and the press created a space and The Donald filled it.♠
Then Mr Ed Driscoll gives us a link to Rush Limbaugh talking about Mr Donald Trump's Press Conference:♥"Philippines' Duterte endorses killing corrupt journalists". It is a solution, but not one I recommend. One does have to ask, are those folks at anti-Trump rallies with the Philippine flag endorsing that sort of thing on behalf of Senator Sanders?
But, back in the US, it seems like Mr Trump has the "What can they do to me?" attitude. And what can someone do to Mr Trump? Not vote for him? I guess that an incoming non-Trump Administration could go Latin America on us and go after Mr Trump in retaliation for his having the chutzpah to run. I guess if you can ignore the rules on Preservation of Government Records you can trump up charges against Trump.
Then we finally have someone (Mr George Friedman) speaking up about "Fascism". The headline is "Nationalism Is Rising, Not Fascism". The sub-headline is "The claims of an increase in fascism in Europe and the U.S. derive from a misunderstanding of the term."
Now that is a shock. A misunderstanding of terms, which are the tools of any discussion of politics.
Recently, there have been a number of articles and statements asserting that fascism is rising in Europe, and that Donald Trump is an American example of fascism. This is a misrepresentation of a very real phenomenon. The nation-state is reasserting itself as the primary vehicle of political life. Multinational institutions like the European Union and multilateral trade treaties are being challenged because they are seen by some as not being in the national interest. The charge of a rise in fascism derives from a profound misunderstanding of what fascism is. It is also an attempt to discredit the resurgence of nationalism and to defend the multinational systems that have dominated the West since World War II.Here are some comment on the article by Mr George Friedman from someone thinking in this area:
There are two parts to his commentary.... No quibble with the need to be clear on nationalism versus fascism... (that's the least we should be able to expect from educated people.)Some will persist in using the term "fascist", since it is a dog whistle for Democrats. Some will eschew this term. We will see how the backers of former SecState Clinton roll.
The other part concerns the backlash against multilateralism and internationalism.... The backlash does NOT necessarily connote a "long live the nation-state" mentality .... Rather, leaders are scapegoating international organizations and treaties (or trade partners) to deflect attention from the failures of their own domestic policies (that applies both in the US and Europe).
But people are not as stupid as their leaders think.... They know that "the state" has failed them, meaning their leaders. Given the anti-establishment revolt seen across the Western world, it is not clear that there is some rational/utopian "nation-state" that represents a comforting antithesis to the pattern of integration we have witnessed.
Hat tip to the InstaPundit.
Regards — Cliff
♠ If Trump did not exist, we would have to invent him. (With apologies to Voltaire)
♥ What is the line Glenn Reynolds uses? "Democrat operatives with bylines"?