Posted on 01/23/2016 7:26:46 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Donald Trump is no conservative. Now, That's not a crime, it's just a reason to vote against him.
Many fine people are not conservatives. But the reason Trump's candidacy should worry conservatives runs much deeper than that: He poses a direct challenge to conservatism, because he embodies the empty promise of managerial leadership outside of politics.
Trump's diagnoses of our key problems -- first and foremost, that America's elites are weak and unwilling to put the interests of Americans first -- have gained him a hearing from many on the right. But when he gestures toward prescriptions, Trump reveals that even his diagnoses are not as sound as they might seem.
Conservatives incline to take the weakness of our elite institutions as an argument for recovering constitutional principles -- and so for limiting the power of those institutions, reversing their centralization of authority, and recovering a vision of American life in which the chief purpose of the federal government is protective and not managerial.
Trump, on the contrary, offers himself as the alternative to our weak and foolish leaders, the guarantee of American superiority, and the cure for all that ails our society; and when pressed about how he will succeed in these ways, his answer pretty much amounts to: "great management."
The appeal of Trump's diagnoses should be instructive to conservatives. But the shallow narcissism of his prescriptions is a warning. American conservatism is an inherently skeptical political outlook. It assumes that no one can be fully trusted with public power and that self-government in a free society demands that we reject the siren song of politics-as-management.
A shortage of such skepticism is how we ended up with the problems Trump so bluntly laments. Repeating that mistake is no way to solve these problems. To address them, we need to begin by rejecting what Trump stands for, as much as what he stands against.
-- Yuval Levin, a contributing editor of National Review, is the editor of National Affairs.
You are correct sir! In war there is no substitute for victory.
Is there a way to block National Review from my browser? We block porn don’t we?
You stop trying to manage so dang much! We don't need great management, we need NON-management. Let the people, freely, manage themselves. For those few things that only a government is capable of managing use the level of government closest to the people capable of doing the job. Local over state, state over federal. The Framers gave us a Republic, vehemently NOT a pure democracy.
Alas, of the current crop of 'republicans' only Cruz talks and acts like he underseands what being a Republic means. His college dissertation was on the 9th and 10th! Hillary's was on Alinsky and that has oft been cited as revealing her true self. Cruz has the opposite indicator. Cruz says gay marriage isn't near the top of his to do list, because it's not a federal matter. If the federal courts hadn't unconstitutionally pre-empted the matter and he was running for Governor he'd rank it differently because he'd have jurisdiction. And he's willing to take the hit from that hack Huckabee and defend his position. Cruz says the feds shouldn't be picked winners or losers between different types of energy. I bet he'd allow Iowa to provide Iowa tax breaks or subsidies to ethanol, at Iowa's expense, should Iowa so wish. Meanwhile Trump want to force the entire country to pay for Iowa's deal. This Iowan wishes Cruz's position applied at both the federal and my state's level!
RE: Is there a way to block National Review from my browser?
Don’t go to their site or don’t click on any article that says National Review.
The connections you mentioned to CFR are via his wife’s joining the task force.
In the last part of the Task Force’s report, “Additional and Dissenting Views,” Heidi S. Cruz wrote (pp. 33-34):
“I support the Task Force report and its recommendations aimed at building a safer and more prosperous North America. Economic prosperity and a world safe from terrorism and other security threats are no doubt inextricably linked. While governments play an invaluable role in both regards, we must emphasize the imperative that economic investment be led and perpetuated by the private sector.
There is no force proven like the market for aligning incentives, sourcing capital, and producing results like financial markets and profit-making businesses. This is simply necessary to sustain a higher living standard for the poorest among us—truly the measure of our success. As such, investment funds and financing mechanisms should be deemed attractive instruments by those committing the capital and should only be developed in conjunction with market participants.”
What’s wrong with the above?
RE: From the same link you gave....
Ted Cruz indicated he “remains open to a path to legal status for undocumented workers.”
How’s that different from Trump’s statement last June?
Donald Trump says if he’s elected president, he’d let undocumented workers who are productive stay in the United States, but if they just sponge off the system and don’t contribute ... he’d have them deported.
Trump tells TMZ, he’d create a “system of merit,” saying people here illegally should have “a road to legal status” if they work hard and contribute to the country.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.