This is one of the least pleasant pieces I have ever sat down to write. I am forcing myself to do it. I feel the warning must be issued, although my sense is that those who would heed it, need it least.
Many people are encouraged by the election of Donald J. Trump. To them, the 2016 election was America’s last chance to settle things according to the ‘rule of law.’ I also was heartened, but I am less hopeful that good times are ahead.
When Obama first passed Obamacare and began implementing his vision for America’s future, these folks were outraged. They were outraged, but they worked within the system. They organized. They delivered a repudiation of Obama’s agenda in three consecutive elections–2010, 2012, and 2014. The repudiation was virtually complete: not only was almost every Federal branch of power put into the hands of the opposition, but a vast majority of the governorships, the assemblies, the senates, the judiciaries, and even city councils, went into those hands, too.
But the Republicans did not act as though they had such a position of strength, and the people became disheartened. Then came Obergefell, which disenfranchised millions and millions of voters, including voters in ‘blue’ states. The GOP acquiesced without a whimper. But I think a less appreciated but more significant blow was John Robert’s asinine ruling in favor of Obamacare, wherein he offered a reading that fifth graders could recognize as utterly strained and contrived. Do the words mean nothing?
Meanwhile, liberals and progressives applauded. In their minds, the ‘rule of law’ was upheld simply by virtue of the fact that these issues worked their way through the system.
Conservatives had worked through the system in a bid to exercise self-government, and on point after point, issue after issue, they had ended up with the losing end of the stick. Moreover, being on the ‘losing end of the stick’ effectively meant being called bigots, racists, sexists, and all manner of vile things, with many wondering if anyone they had put into position of power would defend them, stick up for them, act on their principles, etc.
Enter the 2016 election campaign.
That the conservative ‘base’ had lost all faith in the GOP’s willingness to stand and fight is demonstrated vividly as ‘establishment’ candidate after ‘establishment’ candidate were forced out of the race. In the end, it was only Cruz and Trump, which further illustrates the electorate’s judgement upon the GOPE. But Cruz had his own establishment ties, and frankly, even he seemed less brave than Donald Trump.
As a sheer act of self-preservation, millions of Americans put their back into throwing the world’s greatest Hail Mary that has ever been seen. It is perhaps the greatest that will ever be seen.
Miraculously, Trump prevailed. All the forces and factors that had fueled the massive discontent in the heartland were not able to suppress the ‘force of nature’ that was Trump. But when we say ‘Trump,’ at the same time, we must see that he is a stand in for the many millions who saw in him one last chance for self-government within the parameters of the rule of law.
Very few people that I interacted with believed that the Republic would survive 4-8 years of Hillary Clinton.
Although I preferred Cruz, and voted for him in the Wisconsin primary, I cast my vote for Trump without reservation.
But not with much hope for the future.
Many appear to be surprised by the vitriolic response to Trump’s election by the ‘left.’ But not me. Before the election (Nov. 2), on my Facebook page, I wrote:
I keep hearing all this talk about how liberals are concerned that Trump supporters will turn violent if Trump doesn’t win. Oh my, its completely the other way around! If Trump wins, the left is going to turn up its vitriol to levels that will shock a great many. But if it shocks YOU, you should ponder how it is that you didn’t see that coming. You may be missing something important, and it would behoove you to figure it out, fast.
I don’t doubt that there are elements on the ‘right’ that have no qualms with turning to violence. But I think Trump’s support is misunderstood. A lot of these folks are the Tea Party people–and the Tea Party folk were largely ambivalent about politics before Obama politicized nearly everything. They were demonized left and right and of course characterized as being violent, but in fact their defining characteristic was that they still believed it was good and proper to work through the system.
Which they did, with great success, in 2010, 2012, and 2014, delivering huge majorities for the anti-Obama party in every area save the presidency in 2012.
Trump would not be the candidate at all if the GOP had backed their play. That Trump is the candidate reflects two things simultaneously: 1., their belief that the GOP has betrayed them and 2., they still believe it is good and proper to work through the system.
In a demonstrably free and fair election, if Hillary prevails […], they will absolutely act according to their belief represented in #2.
But it is completely the opposite for the political left… which is precisely one of the big problems.
So, here we are. There have indeed been riots. The media has gone bonkers. The progressives have doubled-down on their assertion that the ‘right wing’ are a bunch of racist, fascist pigs. I have seen countless threats of physical violence made. My favorite is represented in the meme to the right, which I think sums up the lot of them perfectly.
Or, to put it like one of my Facebook ‘friends’ put it: “I only hate those who hate”, thereby giving herself complete license to wish for and advocate for actions that far exceed what even the worst KKK member might contemplate doing.
Unlike the great mass of those who put the Republicans in power in four consecutive elections, the first instincts of the liberal progressives will not be to work through the system to obtain the results they desire.
They are already gathering kindling, because they mean to burn the system down.
Now, it may be hard to understand how this all works. It is not all obvious or intuitive. But it can be pieced together and has been pieced together by many others. It goes a little like this.
Your average liberal progressive is a fine fellow who abhors violence, personally. But he recognizes that there are circumstances where violence is necessary. He would never shoot a man down, but he recognizes that some men will need to be shot down (*ahem*, men like LaVoy Finicum. Read the comments). While fully conceding that the State has its flaws and warts, he endorses the liberal platitude that “Government is simply the name we give to the things we choose to do together.”
Can you see it? There are many things that they would never do, because they are kindly, tolerant folk, but they know need to be done… and for those things, we have the government.
But how does the government know what the people ‘choose’? Well, that’s actually one of the fundamental divides between the American people. Many of us believe that you ‘choose’ those things by electing people who reflect your values with the expectation that they will earnestly act on those principles. Ironically, the GOP has seemed perpetually timid when it comes to acting on their principles, while the Democrats aren’t. But, critically, Democrats tend to think that opinion polls and surveys are enough to justify their actions.
This is far more important than I have time to address in this post. But a good illustration is the previously mentioned Obergefell decision. Despite near complete repudiation of gay marriage throughout the 50 states, liberals felt they were within their rights to overturn numerous state laws and referendums for the simple reason that people’s attitudes had changed in favor of gay marriage since those laws and referendums were passed. No need to pass new laws reversing the previous ones!
Democrats love this approach because they know how to manipulate public opinion, and, like Edward Bernays, believe that such manipulations are thoroughly democratic in nature. Of course, in their minds, they are the only ones who are allowed to manipulate public opinion, hence their continued horror with Citizens United. But they see an important difference: when they manipulate public opinion, it is through the public channels, and therefore thoroughly ‘evidence based’ and free from bias, backed by the authority of the expert du jour. But if others do it, it is ‘special interests’ at work.
This is not a trifling point.
You see, liberal progressives have now been deprived of this huge infrastructure. Under Trump (#NotMyPresident), the government is no longer the name we give to the things we choose to do together. They do not have the House, or the Senate, or the White House. Soon, they will not have the Supreme Court, their ultimate bludgeon.
But this will not change who they are and what they believe about the rest of America. And what they believe about the rest of America is that it has drawn right up to the door of Nazism itself. There are exceptions, obviously, but this is the prevailing sentiment.
Deprived of the institutional apparatus that they had seen put to great use under Obama and which they eagerly looked for Hillary to expand and extend (and which a vast number of Trump supporters perceived as an existential threat), they will…
Well, I’m not entirely sure what they will do, I’m only sure about what they are inclined to do. But what I do know is that every option will be on the table. The more aggressive Trump is in implementing his agenda, the more aggressive they will be in their push back. And no, they won’t be looking for 2018 to be the liberal equivalent of 2010, in large part because they will discover that this is not a viable path forward for them (eg, all the things they despise will be welcomed in ‘fly over’ country).
The Secret Service, I reckon, is going to be quite busy.
But this isn’t the worst news.
In fact, for liberals, this next part is very good news.
The truth is that the liberal progressives have in fact nearly won the day. It might be said that Obama pressed the advantage a decade too soon.
As I explained in my post prior to the election, the existence of people with attitudes like Annaliese Nielsen beg an explanation. They come from somewhere. Clearly, they exist in large numbers. How are they made?
Now, this is a question that has preoccupied the left for many years, especially in their bid to figure out why people are opposed to gay marriage or why people are (allegedly) racists, and then devise a way to defuse such attitudes. Their answer is both hilarious and terrifying, but the point is that they are fixated on thinking about the formation of opinions, because they know that people’s attitudes and beliefs come from somewhere.
These same people are shocked at the excesses of the ‘social justice warriors’ but cannot bring themselves to consider the possibility that they created the SJWs. But they are not too troubled, because they know that that they can ‘tweak’ the behavior modification programs and perhaps perfect the result. Or, at least, they ought not be too troubled, because the left still has full control over the mechanism by which this social engineering has been taking place.
I am speaking of the education system. The elementary schools, the middle schools, the high schools, and the college and universities are all fully in the hands of the liberals. Despite the fact that it is clear as day that the publicly funded school system is using tax dollars to deliberately undermine the beliefs and values of millions of the tax payers, there is little sign that the Republicans will meddle in such affairs. It is too risky. They will certainly be crucified in the press, and, if the liberal response in Wisconsin to Walker’s “Act 10” is any clue (and it most certainly is!), there will again be thousands in the street, some of them quite menacing, chanting “This is what democracy looks like!”
Of course, that’s not what democracy looks like. That’s a mobocracy. A democracy handles their problems through elections and the rule of law, and this is even more the case in a republic such as the United States.
But this will mean nothing to them, and their ranks will continue to swell as each new graduating class moves from the petri dish of high school to the formal inoculation center of the university, where students will be drenched in Marxist doctrine, whether it is a Shakespeare class or (more likely), “Guerrilla Altruism: A Mini-Manual of Subversive Activism.” Because that will help the student get a job and support his family!
Actually, it didn’t help at all, right? Which is why there was a need for government assistance. But now if there is no government assistance, this person’s poor course selection will result in him getting hungry. And he won’t blame himself. He’ll blame Trump and the Republicans.
And he will lash out.
And they will lash out.
Yet, if they wait another 10-15 years, barring any unpredictable intrusions by the ‘real world’ (eg, a 9-11), they need not worry. They will have the country.
But, if you know your man, you know he doesn’t have the patience and foresight for that sort of thing. He has willingly submitted himself to his conditioning. In his mind, if one is ‘triggered,’ anything he does after that is justified, and the one to blame is, always, the one doing the ‘triggering.’
Which is why, I am afraid to say, the coming years could very well be some of the most chaotic, violent years that America has seen yet (at a domestic level). And it will all originate from the ‘left.’ (I can see retaliation or over-compensation from the ‘right’, but that’s why I used the word ‘originate.’).
I will offer one caveat of hope.
If Trump survives long enough to implement some of his agenda (only possible, I think, if the GOP decides its safe to show its backbone), and the world doesn’t end, and more importantly, things actually get better, reality may finally break in even for the SJW. There are reasons to think this could happen (eg, the media has been defanged by Wikileaks, etc).
But I wouldn’t count on this. Even if the country becomes demonstrably and undeniably better, the left will not see this as a good thing, because it means more time in the wilderness for them. Even the irrefutable successes will be fought tooth and nail. You watch.
So what should our response be? I honestly don’t know. I’ve thought about it, and I just don’t have it. When I have some concrete ideas, I’ll share them. In the meantime, the ball is in Trump’s court and hopefully the GOP will take seriously the threat that the education system, as it currently sits, poses to the Republic.