One reason to be skeptical about anti-Trump Republicans is that they tend to propagate a diagnosis of Trumpism as a mere aberration from an otherwise noble conservative tradition. Such self-serving mythology misleads the political discussion.
My new piece (link in bio):
🧵1/
If America is to claw its way out of this crisis to something better, it must do so on the basis of an honest assessment of what Trumpism is, what fueled its rise, and where it came from. The anti-Trumpers, however, are offering something very different. 2/
In their standard tale, Trump executed a hostile takeover of the GOP and turned it into something that has nothing to do with the party’s former real self, that supposedly venerable “Reagan Republicanism” anti-Trumpers almost invariably invoke as their ideal. 3/
Two diametrically opposed narratives emerged in response to Trump’s rise before the 2016 election. The one the anti-Trumpers are propagating is the aberrationist tale, according to which the venerable tradition of principled American conservatism has been hijacked. 4/
Trumpism, in this interpretation, is fundamentally not conservatism, entirely separate from what came before, an accident, an insurgency, something hostile to the “soul” of the GOP – a narrative that allows “moderate” conservatives and Never Trumpers to self-exonerate. 5/
On the other end of the spectrum, there is an interpretation claiming that Trump’s rise was really no big surprise: This is what conservatism, at its core, had always been – a reactionary movement, fueled by racial and cultural grievance, animated by anti-liberal sentiment. 6/
Everything else was just a front, a veneer of intellectual depth and respectability. There had been no venerable tradition to begin with, rather a fairly straight line from Buckley to Ronald Reagan to Pat Buchanan and Newt Gingrich to Sarah Palin to, finally, Donald Trump. 7/
Neither the continuity nor the aberration narratives stand up to serious scrutiny in their most simplistic forms. The challenge is to grapple with both the recent radicalization, but also the long-standing anti-democratic tendencies and impulses on the Right. 8/
We need to acknowledge both the extent to which far-right factions and ideas have recently managed to take over the power centers of conservatism, but also the fact that extremism has always been an influential feature of the rightwing coalition. 9/
Modern conservatism as a political project arose in the middle decades of the 20th century as an alliance between different factions who agreed that a fully realized democracy was the enemy of the “natural” order defined by hierarchies of race, gender, wealth, and religion. 10/
The central conflict on the Right has always revolved around the question of how far conservatives had to go to preserve this “natural” order – with far-right forces pushing for a more radical politics and more drastic action – for a reactionary “counter-revolution.” 11/
GOP elites and “moderate” conservatives have often tried – and always failed – to harness far-right popular energies that ultimately fueled Trump’s rise. They have never been able to control the accelerating radicalization that is now threatening constitutional government. 12/
This interpretation stands in stark contrast to the self-serving aberrationist tale of Trumpism as an accidental departure. And it has profound implications for a society that will have to find a way to contain and overcome Trumpism. 13/
Things would be so much easier if Trump really were the cause, rather than himself a symptom – if all we had to do was to get rid of Trump and let the country, and the Republican Party, revert to “normal.” 14/
But since the rise of Trumpism is more in line with long-standing extremist tendencies, a manifestation of a deeply entrenched anti-democratic political culture, then merely turning the clock back to a pre-2016 “normal” can’t be the answer. 15/
That pre-2016 “normal” allowed Trump to swiftly take over the Republican Party and the Right more broadly. If the goal is for a stable democracy that truly deserves the label to emerge out of the current mess, America – and conservatives – will have to do better.
More here:
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Democrats are, finally, asserting their right to define the boundaries of normalcy – and their claim to be defending the nation’s true ideals against the reactionary assault.
Some thoughts from my new piece (link in bio):
🧵1/
I wrote about why the “These guys are weird” messaging matters: It crystallizes a central fault line – who gets to define “normal” America? – and catalyzes a significant shift in how Democrats handle (and finally reject!) Republican assertions of representing “real America.” 2/
Since the late 1960s, Republicans have successfully weaponized the idea that they represent the norm that should define the nation. This assertion (in)famously crystallized in the “silent majority” notion Richard Nixon popularized early in his presidency. 3/
ICYMI on the weekend: I wrote about an encounter with enraged Trumpers - and the difficult road ahead for a society in which conspiracies, extremist iconography, and political violence have become ubiquitous.
MAGA on the Beach Redux (link in bio):
🧵1/
I wrote about a run-in with an elderly lady who quickly went from pleasant small talk to launching a conspiratorial tirade about Joe Biden’s war on upstanding patriots and how Trump alone could save the Republic. It tells us something about political culture in America today. 2/
She was an elderly white person, with an academic background, widely traveled, had lived overseas, and, it can be assumed, reasonably wealthy. I’ve spent a fair bit of time reflecting on what, if anything, I should take away from this encounter. 3/
Harris’ arc since 2020 points to how much of a reactionary retrenchment we have experienced, and how much social, racial, and gender progress have come to be viewed as “woke” radicalism that has supposedly gone too far - a position shared by elites across party lines. 2/
Harris was seen as the perfect VP in the summer of 2020: A woman of color, highly qualified and accomplished, who rose to elite status through her abilities and determination, in a party that wanted to tell the world: Yes, we are indeed the champions of multiracial pluralism. 3/
Harris emerged as VP in the summer of 2020 when it seemed the country might finally deal with its defining demons. But as the reactionary counter-mobilization triumphed, she was sidelined. Until now.
My new piece (link in bio):
🧵1/
I wrote about the meaning of Kamala Harris in this particular moment in American history: Her story as VP reflects the post-George Floyd racial reckoning that never came as well as the racial and social retrenchment since 2020. 2/
The Right will go all in on racist and sexist attacks against the Black woman that now stands between them and a return to power. Already in 2020, the Right tried a little birtherism against Harris - unsurprising from a movement that wants to abolish birthright citizenship. 3/
There has been a ton of attention lately for Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation-led planning operation for a more efficient, more ruthless rightwing regime - peaking in reaction to Trump pretending he doesn’t know anything about it, which is an obvious, brazen lie. 2/
Public attention is necessary: In a very real sense, these plans are on the ballot in November. However, it’s also turned “Project 2025” into a bit of a catchall term - when we should be precise about what it tells us about Trump’s role and about the Right more broadly. 3/
Trump is not the mastermind behind Project 2025. It’s worse: The rightwing establishment has radicalized to the point where their plans are entirely in line with his vengeful desires.
My new piece (link in bio):
🧵1/
I wrote about the relationship between Trump and Project 2025, between the inner circle of MAGA world on the one hand and the institutional and intellectual elites of American conservatism on the other: A radicalizing alliance against democratic pluralism. 2/
Donald Trump lied when he declared he had nothing to do with Project 2025 and knew no one involved in the operation. Not exactly shocking, I know. But there is something more interesting and revealing going on here than just habitual lying. 3/