On Trump
We have a terrific package on Trump in the new issue. You really should read all the articles posthaste if you haven’t already: There are editorials by Steve Hayes, John McCormack, and me; and you’ll find excellent pieces by Fred Barnes on why not to expect a new Trump; by Elliott Abrams on what hawkish Democrats did in 1972 when facing the nomination of George McGovern; by Mike Warren on Trump’s new top aide, lobbyist and fixer Paul Manafort; and by Peter Lawler taking on Trumpism and its implications seriously.
Whew, I can hear you say. No, really, they’re great reads, and I’m proud they’re all in our magazine this week.
To supplement them, I thought I’d simply pass along here two emails that I happened to receive within minutes of each other Sunday. They’re both from serious and experienced national security professionals, one of whom is somewhat accepting of Trump, the other not.
The first is from an old friend who happens to be in the middle of a cross-country drive. Its subject line is “Field Report from the Heartland.” Here it is:
Bill,
What a perfect time for a transcontinental transit. Time to absorb, time to observe.
It is simply Trump time. Like it or not. The great primordial ooze, better known as “the people”, are fed up with the governing class in the U.S. They are issuing a notice of vacation. “Nothing personal, but you are done.” Democrats and Republicans alike. HRC is heading into a perfect storm. It’s like the world champion cricket team matched against the Mets (just to keep you in) in a pickup game of street baseball. “Overhand pitching…what? What?” “You can’t do that!”
I would like to think that “we were warned.” Reflecting on my own experience with illegal immigration, it is clear no one in town cared, or paid attention, but worse shoved the broccoli right down their throats. “Here kitty, kitty, three more border patrol agents, now amnesty for 12 million.” “Aren’t you proud of me?” “Now go back to your corner and color.” “I’m busy doing good things for you.”
And he concludes we should try to work with Trump rather than turn our backs on him.
The second email was from a charter subscriber to The Weekly Standard whom I don’t know personally:
I thought you might enjoy this excerpt from Edmund Burke’s Appeal from the New to the Old Whigs, which seems appropriate to our current situation:
“Great discontents frequently arise in the best-constituted governments, from causes which no human wisdom can foresee, and no human power can prevent. They occur at uncertain periods, but at periods which are not commonly far asunder. Governments of all kinds are administered only by men; and great mistakes, tending to inflame these discontents, may concur. The indecision of those who happen to rule at the critical time, their supine neglect, or their precipitate and ill-judged attention, may aggravate the public misfortunes. … In such circumstances the minds of the people become sore and ulcerated. They are put out of humour with all public men, and all public parties; they are fatigued with their dissensions; they are irritated at their coalitions; they are made easily to believe (what much pains are taken to make them believe), that all oppositions are factious, and all courtiers base and servile. From their disgust at men, they are soon led to quarrel with their frame of government, which they presume gives nourishment to the vices, real or supposed, of those who administer in it. Mistaking malignity for sagacity, they are soon led to cast off all hope from a good administration of affairs, and come to think that all reformation depends, not on a change of actors, but upon an alteration in the machinery. Then will be felt the full effect of encouraging doctrines which tend to make the citizens despise their constitution. …
What security against all this? All human securities are liable to uncertainty. But if any thing bids fair for the prevention of so great a calamity, it must consist in the use of the ordinary means of just influence in society, whilst those means continue unimpaired. The public judgment ought to receive a proper direction. All weighty men may have their share in so good a work.”
Thank you for continuing to try to save our Republic!
As you can tell from my editorial, I’m with the charter subscriber and Burke, rather than with my old friend. Of course in these matters of practical judgment one can always be wrong. Still, as Churchill wrote, in matters of political uncertainty honor is a pretty reliable guide. And I can’t believe the honorable course is to accommodate Donald Trump, rather than to try to give the country a better choice than Hillary Clinton or Trump.
***
ADVERTISEMENT
***
Foreign Policy 2016
Meanwhile, the world goes on irrespective of Trump–and the world’s not going in a good direction. Obviously The Weekly Standard is a key resource to help you keep abreast of and to understand world developments … but here’s another, this one from the Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI). FPI is a non-partisan and non-profit organization in Washington, D.C., on whose board I serve, that believes in U.S. strength and global leadership. FPI has just released Foreign Policy 2016, a resource that is publicly available online via FPI’s website at www.foreignpolicyi.org/foreignpolicy2016. This short book offers a useful overview of today’s most pressing challenges to U.S. foreign policy, concisely pulling together key points, critical facts, and important insights.
The new edition of Foreign Policy 2016 is available here. I think you’ll find it a helpful primer on America and the world. Feel free to share it as widely as you’d like.
***
More Conversations
Ready for another conversation? The Foundation for Constitutional Government has released a new conversation with Harvey Mansfield on Conversations with Bill Kristol. The eighth in our ongoing series with Mansfield, this conversation marks the tenth anniversary of his important and provocative book Manliness.
In the conversation, Mansfield offers his account of manliness and its importance as a permanent, though problematic, feature of human nature. He explains how liberal political philosophers and liberal society have often been suspicious of manliness, and details the consequences of this for our politics. Mansfield and I also discuss contemporary efforts to transcend manliness through the creation of a gender-neutral society, which have led, according to Mansfield, to “more justice and less happiness.”
Watch the conversation–and then, if you’re in the D.C. area, do join us for a symposium to celebrate the tenth anniversary of Manliness, hosted by the Hoover Institution and the Foundation for Constitutional Government. The event, featuring a first-rate group including James Ceaser, Diana Schaub and Christina Hoff Sommers, will take place at the Hoover Institution in Washington on Monday May 23, beginning at 4:00 p.m. Click here for details and to RSVP.
And let me, in the spirit of at least one aspect of manliness, wish all the mothers reading this newsletter a belated Happy Mother’s Day!
***
Onward!
Bill Kristol
