Fool Me Once...

The Pseudo-Conservative Party

Democracy or Empire opened with the assumption that democracy would be the choice of the American people. I hope the reasons for this decision are becoming more apparent, step by step, despite the fear experienced by you and me. The purpose of the scrutiny of my past articles is to understand how we can recover our democracy and generate the changes and reforms that were overlooked as we entered the twenty-first century, but which have gradually become more apparent under Trumpism. We must always remember that crisis, whether personal or collective, presents the greatest opportunity for growth toward our aspirations. Courage and insight are often realized out of necessity more quickly and more desirably than when we are merely coasting along.

Americans must unite in the process of recognizing and respecting long-lasting and fundamental differences in how to govern democratically. Historically, this has pitted what is considered conservative against what we call liberal. Genuine conservatives, for whom conservatism may be as much a matter of temperament and style as of philosophy, have increasingly come to recognize that Trumpism is anything but traditional. Some realized this soon after Donald Trump moved into the White House; some only after his first term quickly became overwhelmingly unacceptable; and some only after voting for him a second time.

Many have become aware, but no one should assume that they have been converted. Most conservative Republicans continue to support Trump with determination, and many who have turned away will want to return to the Republicanism that led to Trumpism. Attitudes toward governance, culture, and the economy will be reflected not only in elections but also in the formulation of reforms designed to address the future. Perhaps it will be helpful to review what we have learned about the Republican Party during the last two generations, especially by taking note of the failures that must be understood, acknowledged, and never repeated.

The label “conservative” was misapplied from the moment the Republican Party adopted it during the Reagan Revolution. Whatever the brand was intended to mean, it has since been usurped by “Trumpism.” This shift makes about as much sense as calling a stream a river or pretending that a hurricane is merely a strong breeze. Yet there are increasing indications that the conservatism that ultimately evolved into Republican authoritarianism was already on that course long before the advent of Trump.

It is difficult for objective observers, including old-school conservatives, to define what the term conservative even means in this era. One could argue that it is a political position combining elements of anti-government, anti-big-government, anti-tax, anti-regulation, anti-immigration, anti-campaign-finance controls, pro-business, pro-government subsidization of business, and pro-privatization. However, most of these labels have little meaning unless they are placed against the alternatives, such as support for a social safety net, job training for workers when their industry folds, and public education.

Unfortunately, most policies now deemed “conservative” add up to rigging society in favor of the wealthy elite and -- if I may use the term respectfully and without accusation -- country club Republicans, who are predominantly white. The aim expanded beyond traditional policy concerns and became the protection of corporate power and compliant uber-wealthy individuals, while also fostering white supremacy driven by prejudice and racism.

Meanwhile, the elite wealthy attracted followers for a variety of reasons that were not always intuitive. This alignment with the interests and leadership of the top 1 percent and 10 percent began taking root across all realms and segments of society, including among Hispanics, younger people, and men of all color and ethnicities.

Added to the ways “conservative” is now defined are narrow, single-issue commitments that are not inherently rooted in conservative political philosophy, such as pro-gun and anti-abortion stances. Many feel driven to vote conservatively because of a single-issue commitment. Likewise, conservative organizations and wealthy individuals financially support political candidates and elected officials on behalf of these single-issue voters, who turn out in significant enough numbers to influence elections.

Christianity has become narrowed in the minds of many people in America’s secular society to a small conservative wing of Trumpism. Such a perspective exists especially among secular humanists, despite the fact that many of their moral imperatives originated in Judeo-Christian values.

There is no longer any discernible definition of American foreign policy -- conservative, liberal, or otherwise -- beyond Trump’s interpretation of the slogan “America First.” From the beginning, the phrase has been associated with an implied abandonment of the post-World War II alliances that helped ensure peace and security, as well as with a rejection of traditional multilateral institutions. Most disturbing has been his abandonment of, and at times outright hostility toward, NATO. He has made decisions that are widely regarded as disastrous by all but his most loyal advisers, many of whom lack either experience in foreign affairs or the judgment such matters require.

At the top of the list for his second term were tariffs and new trade deals that were immediately judged ruinous at home and uniformly resented abroad. His treatment of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, especially after Joe Biden had done so much to elevate it to a renewed level of unity and common purpose, has been a blow to the nation and to the international order. By substituting bluster and threats for diplomacy and placing his faith in transactional arrangements and personal relationships with foreign leaders, Trump has produced failure after failure for America First.

To say that strong defense has not been at the top of Republican priorities since Trump was elected president in 2016 is not a sophisticated observation. If Trump had his way, Ukraine would now be part of an expanding Russian sphere of influence, Hungary would remain the model for “Illiberal democracy,” Taiwan would become part of China, and America would be engaging more closely with nations such as North Korea.

Consider developments in the Middle East since Trump was re-elected. The United States became a military partner with Israel in a war against Iran. In my judgment, this was done in large part to create a fog of war that diverted attention from domestic political and legal pressures facing both Trump and Netanyahu. The picture across the region has become entirely dangerous and confused, while Palestinians and Lebanese have suffered to a degree that many Americans neither anticipated nor can fully comprehend, leaving the compassionate among us feeling powerless in the face of Trump’s influence.

America has been fooled once; if it is fooled twice, shame on us.

---

Ideas like these are best explored together. Share your thoughts. I read and respond to every comment.