mead cohen berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn
Into The Future
Online Education at the End of History
Features Icon
Features
show comments
  • Fat_Man

    ““the greater and ultimately more serious threat [to liberal democracy] comes from the Right”

    Typical liberal garbage from the man who, very wrongly, predicted the end of history. No, Donald Trump is not a conservative, now, nor was he in the past when he was a major donor to Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and Hillary Clinton.

    And, No Adolph Hitler was not a right winger either. He was a socialist.

  • rpabate

    Fukuyama is wrong that the Right is more of a threat. The Right is a side show. Not only does the Left control the MSM, Hollywood and most other aspects of mainstream culture and the education establishment, it also controls “The Bureaucracy”, which writes the rules that increasingly encompass most every aspect of our lives. As a country we are evolving from the “rule of law” to the “rule by law”, which is what almost all totalitarian government practice. A excellent book on this subject is “The Rule of Nobody” by Phillip K. Howard.

  • Jim__L

    Vonnegut had this nailed years ago…

    http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html

    And I’m not sure why “the Right” is a threat to anything in particular, except the Very Truly Extremely Enlightened Rule of Ever So Superior Philosopher-Kings.

    • dave schutz

      Yes! I read the article and wondered how it could have been written without naming Harrison Bergeron.

      • vepxistqaosani

        Same here.

        Alas, Vonnegut never made it clear that his fable was a cautionary tale, not an instruction manual. But plenty of others — Orwell, Huxley, Koestler, Zamyatin — made the same mistake.

    • seattleoutcast

      I love that story! A friend of mine in high school was a libertarian and also loved it. Over the years he turned into a self-described bleeding heart liberal. I recently asked him his opinion of Harrison Bergeron and the silence was deafening.

      • f1b0nacc1

        Sad when that happens, isn’t it?
        Some of them do recover you know…don’t give up hope

        • FriendlyGoat

          Generally not. Those of us who flip from conservative backgrounds to liberal thought usually don’t go back. Hillary Clinton, for instance, now more-fully understands WHY she is no longer a Goldwater Girl. Having been in a conservative family, a conservative small town as a kid, employed in conservative places and in and out of several churches, I now actually know too many of the reasons why I am not a conservative.

          • seattleoutcast

            I used to be a democrat until I saw that those whom I looked up to were just as corrupt and self-serving as the so-called evil conservatives. I then realized that power corrupts all and those who are foolish enough to strengthen and centralize power with fallible humans are quite foolish.

          • FriendlyGoat

            I wish you weren’t telling me that there would be nothing foolish about Trump aligned with a GOP House, Senate and Supreme Court all at once, but based on our past conversations, I suspect you are.

          • seattleoutcast

            I don’t like Trump. I think he’s a democrat. As such, he probably enjoys power and the accumulation of it. If people had sense, they would realize the Founding Fathers were far smarter than us. They understood that factions were the reason for the destruction of previous democracies. But instead, they fall for the freebies and the “get even” mentality (especially against the rich.)

          • FriendlyGoat

            You know, in a fast five minutes I am talking to you, to Tom, and to f1b0macc1——all my debate opponents—–and all three of you are dissing Trump at once. As soon as you guys realize that conservatism in America has collapsed EXCEPT for Trumpism—–we are going to have a brighter future in the comment section.

          • f1b0nacc1

            You are generalizing….I have seen many flip the other way….in fact the whole neoconservative movement was founded by that sort. Not using that as an endorsement, but it clearly shows that it isn’t a one-way affair.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Yes, I am generalizing and relying on my own experience. Today, for example, I hear there are people willing to jump straight from support for Bernie Sanders to support for Donald Trump. My only explanation for that is their not knowing why they were ever in the Sanders camp.

          • f1b0nacc1

            I only know a few Bernie Bros (fortunately most of them were reasonably low-key), and while I rather doubt you are going to see many go from Bernie to Donald, I can easily picture a small subgroup (say 5-10%) who hate HRC so much that they are even willing to inflict Donald on the rest of us to get even with her. This is no more difficult to understand than what I see with a great many of the Never Trump types, though the motivations are superficially different. Note: I find both groups childish and unworthy of the franchise that they hold, but I suppose everyone has a right to be an ass.

          • FriendlyGoat

            I wish the people of any party or all parties who claim to hate Hillary were really a “small subset”——–but I kinda sorta appreciate your realization that Donald indeed is something being “inflicted” on our country. The question now arising would be why you have had the Freudian slip into such language while generally supporting the side seeking to elect him.

          • f1b0nacc1

            Why do you think it is Freudian….I am not a fan of the Donald, and I have told you this often enough….it isn’t about approval….the alternative is far, far worse, so I am being pragmatic. I preferred several other candidates to Donald, but they didn’t win, so I have made my peace with this.

            Donald is indeed being ‘inflicted’ upon the country, in part by the GOP political class (who you should know I have little love for) who tried to impose another Dem-lite on us, and refused to support anything other than that. In part from a Democratic-centric media that systematically destroyed every GOP candidate for 20 years (they tried with GW Bush, and nearly succeeded) by comparing people like Romney (a mild-mannered Morman of impeccable character) to bloodthirsty Nazis, until the only survivor of the process was someone utterly immune like Donald. I blame the American people who embraced this choice when far better was available FROM BOTH PARTIES. And yes, I blame the Democrats, who nominated (and mindlessly support) HRC so the only alternative to Donald (who is *likely* awful) is HRC (who *IS* awful).

            You typically reject the notion that there can be principled opposition to the Democratic talking points, so this is probably beyond your understanding, but had the Dems nominated someone reasonably moderate (consider Evan Bayh, for instance), or even someone with marginally acceptable ethics, they would be mopping the floor with Donald, and many of us (possibly myself) would have sat it out. Of course in fairness I point out that the death of Scalia has forced the issue of the SCOTUS, and the Democratic insistence that any potential judicial appointee be completely subservient to the various demands of the Left (please don’t tell me the GOP is like that too….Roberts, Souter, and Kennedy all have deviated from the orthodoxy far, far more than RBG, Sottomayor, Breyer, and Kagan, who vote in a monolithic bloc with tedious regularity) has raised the stakes to the point where I would have found it hard to personally abstain. My broader point stands though….HRC was an epically bad choice, even if she wins. Donald is a marginally less bad choice, and that is the dynamic that is being played out.

            Regarding your being a Bernie Bro wannabe, I wonder about him being less likely to win. Against Donald, perhaps he might actually do better…he was not nearly as obnoxious to many of the GOP voters the way that HRC is, but I will concede that isn’t a bet I would care to make. Elizabeth Warren gets the Left excited, but she is simply HRC with better health insurance, and I rather doubt she would have more luck. Andrew Cuomo (a loathesome creep if you ask me, but certainly a viable candidate) might have been able to pull it off. The Dems have a much bigger problem though, as HRC has systematically destroyed virtually any serious opposition on her deathmarch to the nomination, so the bench is perilously thin. If she loses, the Dems are going to have some real problems in 2020…. The GOP has some potential candidates who can unify the party, but their political elite are going to have to give up their cultural dislike of the base first…the jury is out on that. If Donald wins, I suspect that the GOP will eventually work out its issues, if he loses, the civil war within the part might become far, far less civil

          • FriendlyGoat

            I was okay with Bernie being a “socialist” because I understood that he is not a Hitler/Stalin/Marx “socialist”—–but some dwelt-upon semantic detail like that is too easy to lose on in games of 52/48.

            Elizabeth Warren first of all does not have the correct depth of experience (outside her specialty of consumer financial protection) to be president, and secondly, she is actually valuable in the Senate pursuing her specialty.

            As for the past, present or future “civil war” in the GOP, compassionate conservatism has been shot a long time ago along with candor and credibility in policy proposals, religious fervor in candidates (aka Cruz, Huckabee and Bachmann) has been rejected, and the base has been re-trained to expect a “real” showman. If Trump loses, you are correct that right-side civility may take another dive to the depths——but it will be taking a dive to the depths if he wins. Meanwhile, HRC is more centrist than she is given credit for being and actual government might be more centrist than anyone thinks. Bill compromised with the right on lots of things, we recall.

          • f1b0nacc1

            We will have to disagree on Bernie…his own public statements show him to be pretty much a hard-core socialist of the worst sort. Not a Hitler/Marx type, certainly, but close enough to a Chavez/Maduro type (remember, he has publically voiced support for that ugly regime often enough) that I rather doubt he had much viability. As for Lieawatha, she manages to combine Bernie’s open dislike of capitalism with Hillary’s lack of charisma and ethical challenges. Running in MA she is likely safe enough, but on a national stage she doesn’t have a bright future. I don’t see many other Dems with a huge national following, and Obama is leaving behind nothing of any substance to suggest that he has added much to the ‘bench’. We shall see, I suppose….
            The GOP has been pronounced DOA many times before, yet they seem to keep coming back. They have a deep bench, a very good pipeline of new people coming up from the statehouses (Obama has presided over a serious decimation of Democratic control at the state and local level), and while I think that there will be a serious fight for the future, I am optimistic. If nothing else, the GOP political class has been unable not only to stop Trump, but they failed to put their own favored candidates into even a plausible position for another run at the presidency in 2020. Jeb is finished, Rubio is likely done for as well on the national level at least, and while there is always another Chamber of Commerce zombie waiting in the wings, I suspect that there is little taste for that in the immediate future.
            You suggest HRC is more centrist than she is given credit for, which is quite frankly laughable. Perhaps her instincts are (debateable, I have read her policy papers, have you?), but she has been dragged far to the left by Bernie, and her lack of any real core beliefs other than greed and naked ambition ensure that she will likely stay there. Yes, Bill did compromise, but only AFTER the 1994 massacre when he was confronted with a GOP majority that was in no mood to accommodate him. Even so, he did compromise and even prosper politically, but unfortunately for her, HRC does not enjoy even a fragment of her husband’s political talent or his intellect.

          • FriendlyGoat

            The Dems are short of a bench reserve, but the GOP “always has another Chamber of Commerce zombie waiting in the wings”.
            You have a way with words. Yesterday you correctly answered your own questions with respect to Europe and today you have correctly assessed what Republicanism is and who is available in it.

          • f1b0nacc1

            Well, lets see what happens, and watch the aftermath. The GOP *POLITICAL CLASS* always has another zombie waiting in the wings, not the GOP as a whole (please, work on your reading comprehension), and I have already repeatedly stated that I have little patience or love for that group of Democrat wannabes. They don’t define Republicanism, as much as you would like to argue that they do…
            Keep trying though, you will get it eventually…

          • seattleoutcast

            Maybe they hate liars and statists. Most Bernie supporters I know despise Hillary.

          • Boritz

            There is really only one reason — all that money other people think they earned and think they own that could be used so much more wisely.

          • FriendlyGoat

            That’s the kind of lying that keeps me from wanting to fraternize with you fellows. Par for the course in your party these days.

        • seattleoutcast

          He is quite libertarian on sex, but only sex. Why is that with the left?

          • f1b0nacc1

            Libertarians are more often than not statists who want to get high (or laid, or both)….rarely (not never…I have many libertarian leanings myself…I am referring to many of the ‘professional libertarians’ here, the Reason crowd, for instance) do they give up the idea that state power is OK when used for the ‘right’ reasons

  • TGates

    Yes, Academia, as the useful dupes, have always looked at the “right” as the problem as it aides the “left” in tinkering with human nature’s compulsion toward self-interest, power and greed. How has that worked out over the past century?

  • ljgude

    Ah, how delicious! The most lefty, leftist university of them all has been outflanked by the DOJ who has pinned the ableist label on their twee little donkey hindquarters.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2016 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service