I'm glad to hear that your first foray into politics has worked out well for you.
I do find the "people versus the elites" framing interesting though when combined with the reference to the men as "class traitors". You've rather hit on something there. Society doesn't function without elites, it degenerate into chaos. We do need them, so it's not entirely surprising that even a movement nominally AGAINST "The Elites" is led by a man famous for his wealth and another famous for his family's deep political legacy, two men who are themselves indisputably "Elites". Pretty much all social conflicts manifest as intra-elite conflicts.
I worry a little that people lose sight of that. Ultimately, we are not, and cannot be, fighting against "The Elites", anymore than we can or should be fighting against "Capitalism" rather than specifically against "Crony Capitalism". For treatment of the body politic to succeed, we must not lose the ability to differentiate between that which is functional versus that which is corrupted and must be excised. There remains a real risk that the populist movement will become anti-intellectual, rather than merely holding failed intellectuals to account, become anti-expertise, rather than merely holding bad science and empty indoctrination up to the rigors of public debate, and becoming reflexively anti-elite to the point of being anti-meritocratic rather than merely demanding that "public servants" ACTUALLY serve the public. Those who move to abolish an aristocracy entirely too often historically find themselves creating anarchy or tyranny in its place, when what was necessary was only to weaken the aristocracy and impose accountability for their performance.
This is why I'm bothered by the description of Trump as a "class traitor" and "people versus elites" framing. The problem isn't that we have elites. People need them. The problem is that "The Elite" has become such a defined "class" with separate interests and culture from "The People" that we CAN frame them as opposed groups and call people "class traitor" and have that actually mean something. I expect a great many good things from this realignment and the next administration... But I'm not sure that I expect nuance. Even if we win, I'm not sure I expect the class divisions to be blurred as they need to be. A triumph of "The People" against "The Elites", can only be a pyrrhic victory if it doesn't lead to elevating elites who are FOR "The People" to replace those we tear down for their corruption. It's a failure if we don't restore a system where members of "The People" are able to rise into being Elites on their talents and accomplishments (and conversely, where elites who fail then fall into being regular people).
The election isn't over, so maybe I'm getting too far ahead of myself, worrying about the pitfalls of victory while the fight is still ongoing, but one Trump term already wasn't enough. We're going to need to look forward further than each next election and avoid making mistakes now that will cause problems later.
Just reread your comment and you touch on some really intelligent and significant concerns for any populist movement.
I think Trump and Kennedy are viewed by their fellow elites as class traitors. I think the average American who is backing them views them as allies well-positioned to achieve their goals. But it's certainly important that we don't devolve into anti-intellectualism or anti-expertise... The key is to foster the value of critical thinking among the masses so that we get out of the rut of blind credentialism that's led to our institutions being corrupted right under our noses. The skill of problem-solving has been lost among large swaths of America, and that needs to be restored if we want a society that functions optimally with citizens able to exercise real judgment and contribute meaningfully to the body politic.
Beyond that, I am hopeful that this team Trump has put together—all of whom seem aligned on the basics of what has gone wrong and what needs doing to right the ship of state—will lend balance to offset each other's weaknesses. The fact that all of them demonstrate the basic humility that's imperative in a good public servant (yes, even Trump, who could never bring such a group together if he wasn't capable of collaborative leadership) says to me that nuance will not be lost with them.
With regard to Trump as a leader, Rogan's interview of him was SO useful to watch. It genuinely helped me to grasp the depth of Trump's knowledge and understanding of the world, politically and economically at least. It was quite reassuring and impressive. Then consider he's got Kennedy's depth of perspective on history, the law, and health, Musk's logistical vision and know-how, Vance's bridge view of the elite and working class experiences and ability to translate between them, Tulsi's depth of understanding about our military commitments and what they mean for everyday Americans, and the Means siblings' genuine expertise, both politically and medically, on tackling our fundamental health issues... Assuming Trump prevails in this election, I will confess I'm feeling true hope that the dream for America's success—equal opportunity, shared prosperity and health, and peace through economic strength—might be realized in a 21st century society.
Love this comment and agree 1000%! Gotta get ready for church now, but I’ll be back later with a couple of thoughts. Thanks for taking the time to share yours, Steven. 🙏🏻
This is gold, Leah, “Because history and logic both show that freedom is the precondition for truth to prevail—its guarantor, not its saboteur. History and logic both show that actual champions of truth and justice do not censor lies, they expose them. They do not seek to thwart the ability of citizens to access information, they protect it.”
Thanks, Paige. The piece you quoted is, for me, the key truth for all Americans. As long as we have the freedom to express ourselves publicly, especially on politics, there is hope for change and justice. If we lose that freedom, hope will lie on its deathbed.
That said, I am heartened by the direction of things in this moment as I think a lot of people are waking up to the significance of this election, of its ability to bring us back towards responsible guardianship of our civil liberties.
Thanks for your shift in content, Leah! It is a blessing for all your continuing and ‘new’ followers. Steven’s post is fantastic and speaks to your upgraded Substack community. Keep it coming and may the ‘force’ be with us over the coming days!
I grew up in church. Whenever pastor did a good sermon, you’d get a few murmuring “amens” from the crowd. We had an older gentleman with a really deep voice who sat in the back. You knew pastor had really done a banger when you heard that booming “AAAAAY-MEN !” behind you. That’s how I feel about this article—a very low and loud AMEN 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
I find it hard to believe that Trump represents the Libertarian cause. I am sympathetic to your position on corporate cronyism, but fear this movement you hope is in motion has chosen a standard-bearer who will fail you badly and prove more authoritarian than those you denounce.
I do not doubt the core motivation of some of Harris' supporters on the right may be fear of loss of privilege upheld by the power structure you describe, but it is simplistic to impute that on the entire population. A valid alternative explanation for their support is that Trump simply is not disciplined or intellectually curious enough to consider the consequences of his actions on those aspects of U.S. institutions and global relationships that are, in fact, useful for serving the interests of everyone in the U.S. (not just the wealthy and powerful).
You impugn a lot of honorable people, including much-admired former generals and public servants who have unimpeachable conservative credentials. These are folks who have seen Trump operate up close and concluded he is unqualified. If, for the one sin of condemning Trump, you rashly group these folks with the villains of globalist capitalism, it may reflect ideology as extreme as the ideologies you condemn.
I have a 27 year-old son who voted for Trump in 2016 and who would be sympathetic to most of your analysis here. His reaction to the chaos of that administration (not the back and forth with hostile Democrats and media, but the workings within and the assessment of insiders) was to withhold his support in 2020. Actions after the election fully validated his evolving opinion. Trump may indeed "burn it all down" if elected, and there are no guarantees that what comes out on the other end will be anything like what you are hoping for.
There are other paths to getting the voice of the people to be truly heard and reforming our broken system. We should pursue those options before throwing another Trump Hail Mary pass.
To clarify a couple points, the opposite of authoritarianism on the vertical plane is not capital L libertarian, but small L—a movement that prioritizes individual liberty in the sense of egalitarianism, a truly level playing field such that the rights and opportunities of everyone, not just the elites, are respected and protected. It's a return to that fundamental principle of the Founders far more than it is the black-and-white "Freedom = Good/Government = Bad" rigid outlook of the Libertarian party platform.
I don't think the conservatives lining up behind Kamala are deeply principled people who are standing in integrity for the rights and wellbeing of the American people, so much as they are lining up to defend the Uniparty status quo that's allowed them to profit off of their own decisions and enjoy a level of privilege that insulates them from the fallout of their bad leadership. They are the architects and operators of the entrenched elite crony system and they are exposing their commitment to it by throwing their support to the ticket that wants to defend and protect it.
Donald Trump and his team are not in the least advocating "burning it all down." They are talking most definitely about dismantling the cronyism, which you yourself acknowledged is a true problem. I would say it is THE problem from which most others that plague America descend. Trump et al are talking about unleashing the energy and ingenuity of American citizens to rebuild and restore our nation and its prosperity, reworking the administrative branch to allow innovation and incentivize entrepreneurship that isn't hamstrung by government over-regulation and the crony culture it fosters. They are talking about a return to a middle America kind of capitalism that could Make America Great Again.
I have never been a fan of Trump. But I also know that he has been lied about and misrepresented in the most grotesque—and petty—of ways for the last 8 years. If you want a clear, unfiltered view of his intellect and knowledge, I seriously recommend taking the time to watch his interview on Joe Rogan. Watching that made me realize how much skeptical-me has bought into the nonsense of his caricature perpetuated by the press and his adversaries. You do have to sit through a bit of the self-congratulatory commentary here and there that he has practically patented, but beyond those moments the conversation he has with Rogan provides a completely different angle on the guy—nothing like he is in front of crowds or on a debate stage or facing a hostile press. Really, it is eye-opening. And impressive considering he's going on 80 years old. I think his recall abilities are better than mine.
I'm glad to hear that your first foray into politics has worked out well for you.
I do find the "people versus the elites" framing interesting though when combined with the reference to the men as "class traitors". You've rather hit on something there. Society doesn't function without elites, it degenerate into chaos. We do need them, so it's not entirely surprising that even a movement nominally AGAINST "The Elites" is led by a man famous for his wealth and another famous for his family's deep political legacy, two men who are themselves indisputably "Elites". Pretty much all social conflicts manifest as intra-elite conflicts.
I worry a little that people lose sight of that. Ultimately, we are not, and cannot be, fighting against "The Elites", anymore than we can or should be fighting against "Capitalism" rather than specifically against "Crony Capitalism". For treatment of the body politic to succeed, we must not lose the ability to differentiate between that which is functional versus that which is corrupted and must be excised. There remains a real risk that the populist movement will become anti-intellectual, rather than merely holding failed intellectuals to account, become anti-expertise, rather than merely holding bad science and empty indoctrination up to the rigors of public debate, and becoming reflexively anti-elite to the point of being anti-meritocratic rather than merely demanding that "public servants" ACTUALLY serve the public. Those who move to abolish an aristocracy entirely too often historically find themselves creating anarchy or tyranny in its place, when what was necessary was only to weaken the aristocracy and impose accountability for their performance.
This is why I'm bothered by the description of Trump as a "class traitor" and "people versus elites" framing. The problem isn't that we have elites. People need them. The problem is that "The Elite" has become such a defined "class" with separate interests and culture from "The People" that we CAN frame them as opposed groups and call people "class traitor" and have that actually mean something. I expect a great many good things from this realignment and the next administration... But I'm not sure that I expect nuance. Even if we win, I'm not sure I expect the class divisions to be blurred as they need to be. A triumph of "The People" against "The Elites", can only be a pyrrhic victory if it doesn't lead to elevating elites who are FOR "The People" to replace those we tear down for their corruption. It's a failure if we don't restore a system where members of "The People" are able to rise into being Elites on their talents and accomplishments (and conversely, where elites who fail then fall into being regular people).
The election isn't over, so maybe I'm getting too far ahead of myself, worrying about the pitfalls of victory while the fight is still ongoing, but one Trump term already wasn't enough. We're going to need to look forward further than each next election and avoid making mistakes now that will cause problems later.
Just reread your comment and you touch on some really intelligent and significant concerns for any populist movement.
I think Trump and Kennedy are viewed by their fellow elites as class traitors. I think the average American who is backing them views them as allies well-positioned to achieve their goals. But it's certainly important that we don't devolve into anti-intellectualism or anti-expertise... The key is to foster the value of critical thinking among the masses so that we get out of the rut of blind credentialism that's led to our institutions being corrupted right under our noses. The skill of problem-solving has been lost among large swaths of America, and that needs to be restored if we want a society that functions optimally with citizens able to exercise real judgment and contribute meaningfully to the body politic.
Beyond that, I am hopeful that this team Trump has put together—all of whom seem aligned on the basics of what has gone wrong and what needs doing to right the ship of state—will lend balance to offset each other's weaknesses. The fact that all of them demonstrate the basic humility that's imperative in a good public servant (yes, even Trump, who could never bring such a group together if he wasn't capable of collaborative leadership) says to me that nuance will not be lost with them.
With regard to Trump as a leader, Rogan's interview of him was SO useful to watch. It genuinely helped me to grasp the depth of Trump's knowledge and understanding of the world, politically and economically at least. It was quite reassuring and impressive. Then consider he's got Kennedy's depth of perspective on history, the law, and health, Musk's logistical vision and know-how, Vance's bridge view of the elite and working class experiences and ability to translate between them, Tulsi's depth of understanding about our military commitments and what they mean for everyday Americans, and the Means siblings' genuine expertise, both politically and medically, on tackling our fundamental health issues... Assuming Trump prevails in this election, I will confess I'm feeling true hope that the dream for America's success—equal opportunity, shared prosperity and health, and peace through economic strength—might be realized in a 21st century society.
Love this comment and agree 1000%! Gotta get ready for church now, but I’ll be back later with a couple of thoughts. Thanks for taking the time to share yours, Steven. 🙏🏻
This is gold, Leah, “Because history and logic both show that freedom is the precondition for truth to prevail—its guarantor, not its saboteur. History and logic both show that actual champions of truth and justice do not censor lies, they expose them. They do not seek to thwart the ability of citizens to access information, they protect it.”
Excellent article.
Thanks, Paige. The piece you quoted is, for me, the key truth for all Americans. As long as we have the freedom to express ourselves publicly, especially on politics, there is hope for change and justice. If we lose that freedom, hope will lie on its deathbed.
That said, I am heartened by the direction of things in this moment as I think a lot of people are waking up to the significance of this election, of its ability to bring us back towards responsible guardianship of our civil liberties.
Thanks for your shift in content, Leah! It is a blessing for all your continuing and ‘new’ followers. Steven’s post is fantastic and speaks to your upgraded Substack community. Keep it coming and may the ‘force’ be with us over the coming days!
This really is a remarkable piece. So well thought-out and written. Thank you.
Thank YOU!
I grew up in church. Whenever pastor did a good sermon, you’d get a few murmuring “amens” from the crowd. We had an older gentleman with a really deep voice who sat in the back. You knew pastor had really done a banger when you heard that booming “AAAAAY-MEN !” behind you. That’s how I feel about this article—a very low and loud AMEN 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Keep preaching sister! Damn the torpedoes and full steam ahead. Cheering you on.
You said that so very well! 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Home run, Leah .
Bottom of the ninth with bases loaded.
Than you.
Thank you for your pledge. I appreciate the compliment.
I find it hard to believe that Trump represents the Libertarian cause. I am sympathetic to your position on corporate cronyism, but fear this movement you hope is in motion has chosen a standard-bearer who will fail you badly and prove more authoritarian than those you denounce.
I do not doubt the core motivation of some of Harris' supporters on the right may be fear of loss of privilege upheld by the power structure you describe, but it is simplistic to impute that on the entire population. A valid alternative explanation for their support is that Trump simply is not disciplined or intellectually curious enough to consider the consequences of his actions on those aspects of U.S. institutions and global relationships that are, in fact, useful for serving the interests of everyone in the U.S. (not just the wealthy and powerful).
You impugn a lot of honorable people, including much-admired former generals and public servants who have unimpeachable conservative credentials. These are folks who have seen Trump operate up close and concluded he is unqualified. If, for the one sin of condemning Trump, you rashly group these folks with the villains of globalist capitalism, it may reflect ideology as extreme as the ideologies you condemn.
I have a 27 year-old son who voted for Trump in 2016 and who would be sympathetic to most of your analysis here. His reaction to the chaos of that administration (not the back and forth with hostile Democrats and media, but the workings within and the assessment of insiders) was to withhold his support in 2020. Actions after the election fully validated his evolving opinion. Trump may indeed "burn it all down" if elected, and there are no guarantees that what comes out on the other end will be anything like what you are hoping for.
There are other paths to getting the voice of the people to be truly heard and reforming our broken system. We should pursue those options before throwing another Trump Hail Mary pass.
Thanks for your civil disagreement, Dave.
To clarify a couple points, the opposite of authoritarianism on the vertical plane is not capital L libertarian, but small L—a movement that prioritizes individual liberty in the sense of egalitarianism, a truly level playing field such that the rights and opportunities of everyone, not just the elites, are respected and protected. It's a return to that fundamental principle of the Founders far more than it is the black-and-white "Freedom = Good/Government = Bad" rigid outlook of the Libertarian party platform.
I don't think the conservatives lining up behind Kamala are deeply principled people who are standing in integrity for the rights and wellbeing of the American people, so much as they are lining up to defend the Uniparty status quo that's allowed them to profit off of their own decisions and enjoy a level of privilege that insulates them from the fallout of their bad leadership. They are the architects and operators of the entrenched elite crony system and they are exposing their commitment to it by throwing their support to the ticket that wants to defend and protect it.
Donald Trump and his team are not in the least advocating "burning it all down." They are talking most definitely about dismantling the cronyism, which you yourself acknowledged is a true problem. I would say it is THE problem from which most others that plague America descend. Trump et al are talking about unleashing the energy and ingenuity of American citizens to rebuild and restore our nation and its prosperity, reworking the administrative branch to allow innovation and incentivize entrepreneurship that isn't hamstrung by government over-regulation and the crony culture it fosters. They are talking about a return to a middle America kind of capitalism that could Make America Great Again.
I have never been a fan of Trump. But I also know that he has been lied about and misrepresented in the most grotesque—and petty—of ways for the last 8 years. If you want a clear, unfiltered view of his intellect and knowledge, I seriously recommend taking the time to watch his interview on Joe Rogan. Watching that made me realize how much skeptical-me has bought into the nonsense of his caricature perpetuated by the press and his adversaries. You do have to sit through a bit of the self-congratulatory commentary here and there that he has practically patented, but beyond those moments the conversation he has with Rogan provides a completely different angle on the guy—nothing like he is in front of crowds or on a debate stage or facing a hostile press. Really, it is eye-opening. And impressive considering he's going on 80 years old. I think his recall abilities are better than mine.
.
It Is Now
Worse
To Be Compared
To Hillary
Than To Be Compared
To Hitler
.
Yikes. Not in my book.