How To Destroy America in Three Easy Steps

The author is Ben Shapiro (2020).

I got turned onto this one because the author has a podcast that I enjoy very much.  Up front, he is a conservative Republican, so his views follow a certain set of norms.  Notwithstanding that, he is really sharp and logical in his explaining his positions.

This book is an overview of how the lefty lunatics, who he terms Disintegrationists, push ideas that deviate deeply from the founding principles of this country and undermine efforts to move the ball forward.  He poses this argument by contrasting his views (which he describes as Unionism) on American philosophy, culture and history against the way such matters are portrayed by the other side.

His view is that this country was founded on the basis of individual rights that preexist the government, and that such rights should trump government power and pure majoritarianism.  The Founding Fathers specifically strove to create a system where the government only had "powers enough to do what we would not mind it doing were the government controlled by those who disagree".  In other words, that "governments are instituted to protect rights, not a majority's definition of the 'good'".  Equality before the law might be the most succinct way to explain it.

On the other side, the Disintegrationists seem to believe that because there are disparities between people, which is of course nature, that equality before the law is actually unequal, and therefore prefer something that resembles equality of outcome.  Disparities are at all times treated as a systemic problem and chalked up to discrimination -- the evidence of such discrimination simply being the existence of inequality of outcome.  Natural rights do not exist, instead rights are simply what the government gives us.  It leads to growing entitlements, at the expense of actual rights in the name of the "common good", and the loss of equality before the law.  It means that free markets can be interfered with in the name of economic fairness, that free speech can be infringed upon because someone might be offended.  It means that what is good and moral is entirely subjective and dictated by the whims of the majority at any time, a foundation that can lead to tyranny.

Shapiro is clear that America's is not without its tragedies and dark moments -- but the basic point is that the light outshines the dark, and the mistakes are overcome over time.  Racism still exists, but it is a problem that becomes less pronounced and prevalent with every generation.  Income inequality exists, but even the poor now are better off than they were a generation or two ago.  To suggest that anything short of perfection is unacceptable is to deny progress.  It also is to deny history and to suggest that the only answer is disintegration, which is not an answer at all.

More

Following the election, I went through a few days of being compulsively attached to social media, like for hours at a time, down insipid rabbit holes, and re-living all my agita several times per day.  And, then, I simply decided, enough.  I deactivated all my social media accounts and felt it was time to move on.

Well, not completely.  I discovered and turned my attention to podcasts, mostly of a right-leaning variety.  In particular, among my favorites, is the Megyn Kelly Show.  She cuts through the bullshit in a manner consistent with my own thinking, and I like it.

I bring this up because today she had Dave Rubin as her guest, another like-minded individual.  And he said something that resonated.  I paraphrase, but the gist was that people on the right think the system is all screwed up and want to be left alone.  Folks on the left think the system is all screwed up, but the solution is let's give it more money, more power, and just get the right people in.

All of it reminded me of a passage from the book The Revolt Against the Masses by Fred Siegel:

"Liberal interests never reexamined their assumptions, even when faced with social and political failure.  They never asked why, despite the vast sums expended, poverty had become worse rather than better.  Instead, they pointed to shards of success and, more significantly, in the hopes of maintaining their grip, redefined the problem.  Great Society social programs originally designed to reduce if not eliminate poverty were now justified in terms of rights, racial justice, or diversity.  And then there was the fallback to the fallback: the insistence on good intentions rather than outcomes...Their claim to moral superiority rested more on self-image than real-world results."

A timeless comment.

Projection

So, as we face the likelihood of a Biden Presidency, the saving grace for me is that the Republicans maintained control of the Senate and picked up seats in the House.  That's good news, because it means on some level, the identity politics and socialist aspirations of the group which has coopted the message of the Democratic party has not gained as much traction as I feared.  There were definitely a lot of people who simply voted to get Trump out, but also recognize the glaring weaknesses of the extreme left agenda.

I bring that up, because too much of what you see in the media represents the worst of what the Democrats have to offer.  It is accusations of racism all around, framing all issues in the context of identity politics, and generally misleading their audience on what matters and why.

Let's take a few examples.

We had the Black Lives Matter movement and the subsequent systemic racism/defund the police outcry.  If you listened to CNN, or read the NYT or Washington Post, you would think that all minorities had subscribed to the views espoused under those banners.  And then the election comes, and Trump does better with minorities than any Republican since 1960.  How to reconcile?

Maybe, just maybe, it turns out that the folks who bear the burden of these trends are the minorities who live in the communities where policing and the presence of law enforcement is most important.  Maybe, just maybe, legal immigrants in Florida and Texas agree that people should enter this country legally.  Maybe, just maybe, demographics is not destiny, and the best ideas still win.  Maybe, just maybe, what Trump was talking about is not just racism, racism, racism.  Maybe, just maybe, the folks who come from socialist countries know just how shitty that reality really is, and the messaging of AOC, Warren and Harris really only appeals to woke white people who have no idea what these "wonderful", egalitarian ideas evolve into.

After the election, I saw a number of articles in "serious" newspapers that simply doubled down on the racism explanation.  Disregard all of the above and continue to let dumb ideas guide you, because the Republicans are going to get even more seats in 2022,  And, my guess, they will get the White House back in 2024.

What the lunatic left is really doing is projecting their own worst tendencies onto the political opposition.  Guess what, looks like Trump lost, and no one rioted.  We know who the retailers in NY and LA and DC were actually afraid of.  The left accuses people of intolerance because they themselves are intolerant.  I don't pretend to speak for everyone who shares my political views, but I am comfortable in accepting that other views exist.  What we have learned is that the people who don't agree with me don't really have that ability.  They have to explain and rationalize the opposition in the most deviant and evil ways possible.  It failed this time, and it will continue to fail in the future.

Some Thoughts

Biden probably won, but the legal process will have to play itself out.  Nevertheless, some thoughts in the aftermath...

-"STOP THE VOTE!"...if you are not allowing Republican poll watchers in.

-"COUNT THE VOTES!"...before calling Arizona.

-The Pennsylvania Supreme Court did something unconstitutional and the vote in that state is going to be the epicenter of legal battles.  To explain, the Court unilaterally changed the election law, passed by the legislator in that state, such that ballots that arrived after 8pm on Election Day could still be counted.  There are multiple concerns here.  First, all authority to set election rules in that state are vested with the legislature, so a problem with what the court did to change a rule which is unambiguously clear in its intent.  Second, the law which they overturned also stipulated that the provisions were not severable, so if one portion failed, the whole law becomes invalidated.  Needless to say, this will make its way to the US Supreme Court, and I expect them to rule that the ballots received and counted after 8pm on November 3 should not be included, and the state flips back to Trump.  And for those wondering, the Republicans challenged the change before the election, and the USSC simply said that it would not rule on this matter before November 3.

-To say there is election fraud does not mean that Trump will win.  The second condition is that the fraud has to have meaningfully changed the outcome.  We should be allowed to find out whether both conditions have been met.

-Gore in 2000: Hero.  Stacey Abrams in 2018: Hero.  Trump in 2020: Wahhhhhhhhh!

-"They don't hate you because they hate Trump.  They hate Trump because they hate you."

Symmetry

I recall coming to this blog about 4 years ago to express my apprehensions about what was coming next.  At the time, it mostly manifest as concern that Hillary Clinton would become the next President.  And, that, even though I had no intention of voting for Donald Trump.

This time around, the same angst exists about a probable Biden victory, with the key difference being that I voted to re-elect the President.

I live in New York.  It is as blue as blue can get.  And amongst a largely educated set that I can interact with, the best explanation I get for supporting the Biden/Harris ticket is that it is not Trump.  To me, it is a position that is foolish and shows an inability to distinguish what matters from what doesn't.

What matters is policy that helps the economy to grow, particularly as so many remain unemployed.  We should be heralding 33.3% GDP growth in the third quarter (the largest such increase in our nation's history -- and a number that puts to shame any tepid recovery under Obama/Biden during the Great Recession).  But, we do not.  What do we think happens if you introduce higher taxes, greater regulation and put everyone back into lockdown in this environment?

What doesn't matter is Trump's trolling and wannabe stand-up comedian schtick.  I don't think he's racist (at least, no worse than any of his predecessors), and I do think that he has done a lot more in the form of criminal justice reform and empowerment of black communities than any President in recent memory.  Meanwhile, the party which likes to feign tolerance, and espouses that race and gender don't matter, selected a Vice President nominee entirely because of her race and gender (note that she did not hit 1% during the Democratic primaries for a reason, and bowed out before her party even voted in her home state of California -- although she did stick around long enough to call Joe Biden a racist).  It is the same party where its Presidential candidate and celebrity enablers tell black people who they can vote for and still be considered black.  That, by the way, is what racism looks like and is the underlying mentality -- that people of color have no agency and should just listen to us -- which leads to a failed welfare state.

As for COVID, I come from this as someone with two parents who fall within the demographic that is most vulnerable.  There is nothing that I wouldn't do to keep them safe.  But, when the mentality of the Democrats is that we should just listen to Dr. Fauci and that's it, it represents the worst form of single variable analysis you can fathom.  He is an infectious disease expert, but he also focuses on one thing to the exclusion of anything else and is not elected to run he country.  And in a country of 300+ million, you need to recognize the multiple moving parts and not act like everything stops in its tracks with a disease that becomes less and less fatal with every positive case.

But, moving beyond any single issue, my real fear is that the election of the Democrats represents the true empowerment of intolerance.  Whatever aspersions may be cast, it is the party of Biden which cancels those who disagree with them, calls everyone a racist or deplorable, riots in the streets, looks for injustices where they may not exist, and takes every opportunity to politicize.  They literally change the meaning of words.

When Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away, the idea that Trump would nominate a new justice was decried as unconstitutional.  Quite literally, Joe Biden uttered those words.  A representative from his campaign said exactly the same thing while being interviewed on CNN by Jake Tapper.  For the record, it is not.  If there is a vacancy, the President can nominate a replacement.  And, if you have the votes in the Senate (the big difference from when Obama nominated Merrick Garland), you can get that person confirmed and scream from the hilltops that you just did something extremely constitutional.  By contrast, the Democrats deemed it court packing because Trump filled vacancies pursuant to the rules in place.  Come again?  Kamala Harris called it court packing during the VP debate because Donald Trump has not put enough people of color on the bench.  First off, whether true, that's still not court packing.  Second, what she is really doing is race hustling.  Do the Democrats like justices simply because of their race, as if that should be the sole qualification?  Why don't we ask Kamala how she feels about Clarence Thomas?  Meanwhile, it seems entirely likely that a President Biden would look to pack the court by expanding its numbers -- in effect, turning the judiciary, which is only supposed to interpret the laws, into another legislature.  So much for respect of the institutions.

People are prone to hyperbole at times like these, but I don't think my fears are unwarranted.  The Democrats are becoming the party of AOC, Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris.  Their ideas run counter to the essence of our country -- we are about equality of opportunity, they are about equality of outcome.  The latter is what failed states throughout history are made of,

So, there you have it.  I guess I don't think it matters whether I like President Trump on a personal level -- in fact, as someone who comes from the real estate world, I used to root against him in that arena.  But, as President, as far as policy, he has largely gotten it right.  And that's why I voted for him.  And that's why I think the very crude logic of Biden supporters is going to lead us down a dark path.