As much as I abhor Trump for being a vulgar, amoral, lying ignoramus, neither one more voice saying it nor one more person harping on his every word, every move, every act, is going to change anything. Trump lied? Oh no, it’s another Tuesday at 10 a.m. So what? Who expected otherwise? And so if it goes without saying, don’t say it. There’s no reason.
It’s also bad tactics, despite the Trump-hating obsession so many carry, to exhaust any utility to challenging the president. People are so inured to attacks that they mean nothing, and nothing he says or does has much of an impact. One lie is an outrage. A million is a statistic. Things that would have toppled any administration before just roll off his back, both because he does such wildly inappropriate stuff so regularly and there is so much screeching that it’s just background noise at this point. No outrage lasts longer than a few hours, tops, before the next comes along and captures the moment.
But Stephanie Slade, managing editor of Reason, posed an issue that gave me pause.
I’m also reminded again of a phenomenon I’ve commented on a couple of times: that true liberals right now seem more concerned by illiberalism on their own side of the left-right divide (whereas in our politics more broadly, the focus is exclusively on the other side being evil).
While I’m not entirely clear what’s meant by “true liberals,” I’m taking the liberty of applying that to myself, having been mostly liberal for a very long time. To be clear, I mean liberal in the old sense, respect for constitutional rights and civil liberties. A belief in personal responsibilty, but with a strong safety net and equal opportunity for all. What liberal does not mean, and it makes me nuts when the word is misused, is progressive, as that word is now applied to authoritarians bent on what they call social justice, identity politics and political correctness. None of this should be surprising to anyone who’s been here before.
And many have mistaken my criticism of progressive politics for approval of either Trump or neo-conservatism. They are angered by my failure to approve of their views because my disapproval of progressive politics gave rise to an assumption that I was part of the alternate camp. They were very wrong.
As Slade recognizes, the problem was one of trying to keep my own house clean. As bad as Trump might be, it had nothing to do with the alternative, the progressive left, which was bad in its own terribly misguided way. It was, as Slade notes, illiberal. It was against every tenet of civil liberties, just the other flavor of authoritarianism. The tyranny of the left was still tyranny.
My mistake was that I thought as social justice emerged that people, particularly young lawyers, would be smart enough, rational enough, to recognize their own tendency to achieve what were otherwise generally decent goals by fiat. They appreciated the clout they could accomplish by swarming together where they were individually powerless, but they were unconcerned that their weapon was clout, not reason. And certainly not sound reason.
Were they not able to grasp that the same principles that they extolled when it suited their ends had to be applied to everyone, even those they despised? If they could appreciate the virtue of due process for their poor black clients, how could they not grasp its virtue for male students accused of rape? If they understood why elements of crimes were critical to distinguish innocent from malevolent conduct when it came to the identities they cared about, how could they then embrace vagaries where crimes were determined by irrational post hoc feelings so that conduct that was fine at the time became wrong a year later?
The litany of horribles, many chronicled here, goes on and on, bolstered not by reason but empty excuses mixed into a salad of meaningless jargon. Trying to argue why this was not merely the wrong direction, that the ends do not justify the means, that being principled was the virtue, not achieving whatever goal the swarm dictated to each worker bee, seemed a worthy effort. And so I tried to do so in the hope that I might change a few minds, perhaps provide some alternative to those who shared some progressive goals but were troubled by the vast array of inherent conflicts, flagrantly unprincipled methods and gross intolerance.
But over the past few years, it’s become increasingly clear that the authoritarian nature of progressives is far closer to the alt-right than it is to liberalism. Similarly, liberalism is far closer to moderate conservatism, where rational discussion and a principled view of the means mattering more than the ends still prevails. Like many never-Trumpers, who argue that they didn’t leave the Republican Party, but the Republican Party left them, lying, cheating and stealing wasn’t the way to prevail.
The concern going forward isn’t who is the lesser of two evils, as the evils are different. Even if you prefer the outcomes Trump has given, he’s still only concerned with his twin motivations, self-aggrandizement and self-enrichment. It would be humiliating for Trump to lose re-election, and the narcissist couldn’t bear it. But it’s not enough to rest on the alternative being “not Trump.” The damage an authoritarian regime could inflict would be different than the damage an ignorant narcissist inflicts, but could well be far more destructive to liberal values.
After all, Trump’s greatest virtue has been his stunning incompetence, his inability to make much of anything stick. For all his authoritarian blustering, he’s been remarkably ineffective. It’s not that he hasn’t done damage, but far less than he could have if he had any clue how to shut his yap and get things done. I fear that progressives, should they come to power, will be far more effective.
And I’ve come to realize that they perceive liberals, guys like me who respect constitutional rights, principles and believe that the ends do not justify the means, as their hated enemy. I fear that the backlash to Trump is that the authoritarian left sees the greatest, perhaps only, opportunity it will ever have to come to power. After all, the lesser authoritarian is the lesser of two evils.
Nobody needs me to spend my efforts condemning Trump. There are plenty of people doing that already, even if many of them have forfeited fact and reason to do so. So my efforts are directed at the other authoritarians, who believe they are the more moral and decent tyrants, but tyrants nonetheless. And they are not happy about it, and hate me for being a traitor to their cause. I don’t give a damn.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
As someone who is unable to desist from “screeching” about Trump, despite the pleas of my very progressive children, I have to admire your resignation and restraint. You have been remarkably consistent in asserting the rights of both poor black clients and male rapists. And I agree: The political spectrum is more circular than linear, with the “far right” and “far left” occupying territory in very close proximity.
“Accused” rapists, Jamie.
When I came here and started reading your posts, I was a staunch conservative. Over time, you’ve managed to make me rethink several of my viewpoints and even alter some of them. I now view the extremes of both sides like Coke and Pepsi…same crap, different can. You are having an effect on people, even if they’re not your target audience.
(I know you hate tummy rubs but I can’t afford to hit the donate button at the moment)
I often find principled conservative views illuminating and persuasive. Even if I don’t agree, it’s not because they’re wrong, but rather than something else is more right. That said, my tolerance for ideological strongarming has grown increasingly shorter in inverse proportion to its popularity.
There are many people who see what you see, same crap, different cans, but aren’t willing to call bullshit on their friends and comrades and become pariahs. They’re weak, but it’s understandable. So somebody has to be the jerk calling bullshit, and since I can’t be canceled, it might as well be me.
I’ve been thinking about that last part for a while, given the times. Criminal defense lawyers can’t be canceled; hell, it’s fair to say that people have been trying to “cancel” CDLs since forever.
I call out bullshit naturally, but I chuckle when I think that being a CDL gives me some sort of “duty” to do so, since my livelihood won’t be affected by doing it.
I can afford to, and I’d be honored if you’d consider half the sum as being from you. I’ve learned some valuable nuance from SHG and the commenters, yourself included.
You are both appreciated.
While I have occasionally been deeply annoyed at the rhetoric and actions of some of those to my left, it it nothing like the wholesale destruction of morals and values executed by the right. So while your both-sidesism has some elements of truth to it, the net effect is to give succor to those who are destroying the entire concept of justice.
You give yourself away with your use of “both-sideism,” which is nothing more than a rhetorical gimic to cover rationalization. If there are reasons, use reasons, not empty woke jargon.
The progressives you decry are not currently destroying the Department of Justice and the intelligence community from the inside. That power imbalance alone makes your comparison between the two sides extremely facile.
That’s not quite the winning argument you think it is.
Oh, come now, if both sides of the conflict haven’t done exactly same things to an objectively comparable degree, then you can’t criticize the one who’s trailing in their destruction! Be fair here.
I mean, how else are we going to ensure America is burned down and the earth salted in our wake?
We’re all individuals. Each destroys in their own special way.
I see your game now. Good bye.
I wish you did. But you don’t. Yesterday, I had this same engagment with an alt-right guy. He was just like you. Bye.
Exactly what one would expect a Trumpian agent provocateur to say to disgrace progressives.
The “progressives” hate Trump because they are so much like him. Though “progressives” try their best to forget, voters basically elected Trump as a stinging rebuke to the politically correct. Mostly because the “progressives” are quite shrill, hateful, irrational, violent and generally insufferable in their own right. They actually need Trump as a foil. Once he is gone, there will not be anyone to point to who is even arguably worse than the “progressives.” As soon as the voters can round up a not totally unfit candidate, they will come back to hand “progressives” yet another devastating electoral rejection. Eventually, like the right wing religious nutjobs of the 1990s, these strikingly similar doctrinal purists will be pushed off the stage of history. Because the common folk don’t want what they are selling.
Not sure that progressives are “like Trump” or like the alt-right. Trump isn’t much of anything to be “like” except Trump.
Well, the end goals may be different, but in terms of honesty, intelligence, emotional maturity, self perception, megalomania, refinement and tolerance, they are all roughly on a par.
Jesus and Trump held a press conference yesterday to announce the Second Coming of the Kingdom of God!
The headline today in the N.Y.T. was “Critics Blame Trump for the Long Delay; Experts Fear Women and Minorities to Suffer Most”.
You have stated this truism about as clearly as I’ve seen it stated/expressed by anyone. Having begun my law practice way back in 1967, I’ve held the same political positions consistently: I’m a traditional liberal, that is, a supporter of civil liberties but also a supporter of liberal positions and programs to take the edge off of the deep and stubborn pockets of poverty in our country. I am appalled at “progressives” and their intolerance of disagreement, just as I’m appalled by the progressives’ counterparts on the right, namely the reactionaries (some of whom appear to be fascists). Traditional conservatives (having spent my whole adult life in Massachusetts, I remember what traditional conservatives are, or were) and traditional liberals actually have a lot in common, and they can live together peacefully and productively. Progressives and reactionaries, on the other hand, should have their own country so that they can fight it out.
An old pal of mine, SDS at Columbia, told me that his daughter informed him he was a conservative and she was disgusted by his politics. I may not be able to stop progressives (even though I will do what I can to try), but they can’t call themselves “liberal.” They haven’t earned it and are anything but liberal.
Gen Z will not copy the millennials . They will show disdain to their elders just like every other generation has. They will be brilliant and idiotic just like the rest of us.
I have had some talks with my daughter (a high senior) and they give me some hope.
I only hope Gen Z isn’t as hopeless and nihilstic about life, though COVID certainly isn’t helping.