Rob Chrisman: Looking past hatred of Trump
What do most never-Trumpers complain about? Well, it took me all of three minutes on Twitter to find a Tweet that was pretty much all-inclusive, to wit: “Psycho, whiny, self-centered, pathological, pitiful, dangerous, lying, infantile, traitorous, misogynistic , racist, abusive, narcissistic, illiterate, crook.”
The negative expressions and actions surrounding this president are exponentially greater than anything in recent memory. The people holding these opinions ( and they are mostly that — opinions) do harm to our polity, first by such clear overstatement that it demeans not just the person, but stains the office as well, and second, more importantly, sets the stage for the accession to power of people like Biden-Harris, whose policies are likely to be toxic.
If you believe even a small percentage of what is expressed above, I would ask you to step back twenty paces, no a hundred paces, and try to experience a wider view of what has happened and why so many are affected.
I submit that the most likely reason for such behavior is that from day one, Donald Trump was perceived by those in high positions to be a disruptor, someone likely to promote changes that interfere with their own welfare in some way. A new discipline called Public Choice Theory reminds us that when people are elected (or selected ) to positions of authority, they still continue to be the self-interested persons they were all along. There are plenty of areas that a president can affect that are positively dreaded by this power elite.
One such area is war and peace. If your policy is to banish the endless wars, then a whole army of military-industrial-intelligence “professionals” is at risk of losing their positions of influence. For the four years of Trump, there was no new war, and should he have continued, the next four years would likely not have seen one either, making it the only eight-year period in recent times not to have included a major conflict. To say “So what?” is utter nonsense. Ask the families who needlessly lost members in these wars, beginning with Vietnam.
The other group that resents new policies imposed by Trump is the vast bureaucracy of the Administrative State, that panoply of agencies that regulates our lives down to the smallest detail. His rollback of regulation presages possible loss of their positions, should we learn that if most regulation (close to 90%), were to disappear, which would barely be noticed. And all that money to create this ongoing edifice, which persists with the same elitist leaders from one administration to the next, both creates unsustainable debt and takes resources from the average productive citizen to impoverish him. The rules it imposes are several steps removed from any democratic consent you might have, and so its eventual disappearance is something devoutly to be hoped for. Also, the advent of unionization of government employees adds to the problem — even FDR realized that you can’t have a situation in which employees sit as negotiators on both sides of the table. He said: “All government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining as usually understood cannot be transplanted into the public service.” This caveat was not observed.
But the most concerning thing of all is the set of policies (and their underlying principles) that the alternative Democratic administration will try to implement, including Medicare for All, the Green New Deal, a return to climate change alarmism, etc. You should read in detail about all of the above to see how they implement not only the title line, but manage to include many layers of long-desired leftist policies. Should the Senate change hands, there will be no stopping it. Is this what you wanted just so you could banish the “Orange Man” and his Tweets? Are you unwilling to step back far enough to see the bigger picture — the unmitigated growth of government, the exaltation of non-governmental entities (Big Tech and News Media) that have frankly gone way over the line to serve and promote leftist and Democratic Party demands by acting as censors and unapologetic shills? The degree of bias recently shown by these entities is chilling.
Finally, the much-discussed notion of income inequality should be viewed through the lens of the crony capitalists, CEOs and others who directly benefit from government actions to enhance, support, bail out and subsidize their accumulation of wealth. Most regulatory actions are actually lobbied for by one business faction against some other group. Democrats will not change this.
Rob Chrisman lives in Nevada City.
Support Local Journalism
Support Local Journalism
Your donation will help us continue to cover COVID-19 and our other vital local news.