WhatFinger

If not of Trump himself.

William Voegeli's wonderful defense of Trump supporters



I am a big fan of William Voegeli, who is not a big fan of Donald Trump. Voegeli has been published in various high-profile places, but is best known as editor of the relatively low-profile Claremont Review of Books. With all due respect to the CRB, that's too bad, because America would be a better place if more people read Voegeli. And never more so than today, because he offers about the best explanation I've seen for why there's nothing hateful, dumb or crazy about the motivation behind those supporting Trump, even though Voegeli makes it quite clear Trump is not his guy.

I think you could best sum up his argument like this: People have a right to expect that government will take seriously the need to address certain issues in a serious way. When the government does not do that - as this government clearly has not - those who are part of it's culture can hardly blame people for preferring someone way outside what's considered the bounds of political acceptability:
The fact that Trump has become a credible contender despite, or even because of, his obvious faults argues, however, for taking his followers’ concerns seriously rather than dismissing them. It is not, in fact, particularly difficult to explain the emergence of Trumpismo in terms of legitimate concerns not addressed, and important duties not discharged. That such a flawed contender could be a front-runner tells us more about what’s wrong with the country than about what’s wrong with his followers. People have every reason to expect that their government will take its most basic responsibilities seriously, and every reason to be angry when, instead, it proves more feckless than conscientious. Governments are instituted among men to secure their inalienable rights, according to the Declaration of Independence. This means that when we and our rights are left avoidably insecure, government has failed in its central mission. We may, then, have reason to doubt that if Trump supporters were better informed and more temperate they would have reacted to the San Bernardino massacre with stoic resignation. Perhaps something other than a lack of insight into the way the world works accounts for their refusal to accept that the government that welcomed Tashfeen Malik to this country the year before she and her husband murdered 14 people was sufficiently vigilant about securing its citizens’ rights. Rights, of course, often need to be balanced against one another, and the indignant Trump voters fail to grasp the rationale that led the federal government to conclude that increasing risks to Americans was an acceptable trade-off for a policy that “prohibited immigration officials from reviewing the social media messages of all foreign citizens applying for U.S. visas.” The Cabinet officer in charge of Homeland Security, as the president understands that concept, favored the policy because he feared more aggressive scrutiny of visa applications might trigger “a civil liberties backlash and ‘bad public relations’ for the Obama administration,” according to ABC News.
Voegeli in no way glosses over Trump's less attractive qualities, but wonders why the political class finds these problems to be disqualifying while it continues to gloss over Obama's abysmal failure to actually do his job. I'd prefer a rude, crude, profane Obama who cares about protecting American citizens than the guy we have now - cool as the other side of the pillow but completely indifferent about real threats facing the nation. The political class sees it the other way around, and Voegeli rightly points out just how wrong that is. Around here, we debate the Trump question all the time. Herman has offered several very strong arguments for Trump both as a candidate and as a prospective president. Rob and I love the way Trump dominates and plays the media, and I think to some degree we both share Voegeli's view of the establishment's disdain for Trump - even as we remain concerned Trump could end up a long way from the 21st Century successor to Reagan that I think we'd really like to see. But the people who have given us $19 trillion in debt and the Visa Exception Program are in no position tell anyone they're stupid for supporting Donald Trump. The question is why anyone would support them.

Support Canada Free Press

Donate


Subscribe

View Comments

Dan Calabrese——

Dan Calabrese’s column is distributed by HermanCain.com, which can be found at HermanCain

Follow all of Dan’s work, including his series of Christian spiritual warfare novels, by liking his page on Facebook.


Sponsored