Reflections on the binary-choice argument

I think there’s something quintessentially conservative about saying, in response to those on the Right who insist that a write-in vote this November is a vote for Biden and those on the Left who insist that it’s tantamount to pressing the Trump button, “I’m free to choose otherwise.”

It strikes me as being emblematic of the same sensibility that moved William Buckley to assert,

“I will not cede more power to the state. I will not willingly cede more power to anyone, not to the state, not to General Motors, not to the CIO. I will hoard my power like a miser, resisting every effort to drain it away from me. I will then use my power, as I see fit. I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth. That is a program of sorts, is it not? It is certainly program enough to keep conservatives busy, and Liberals at bay. And the nation free.”

The inside of my head is sovereign terrain, whatever the circumstances of the outer world. I reserve the right to frame my own set of possibilities.

Trumpists, at least the ones who still wish to appeal to actual conservatives rather than dismiss them, do so by appeals to seeing how dire the moment is. And they’re not wrong about the lay of the land on the left side of the spectrum.

It’s horrifying out there. Statues of not just Nathan Bedford Forrest and Stonewall Jackson are coming down, but those of abolitionists and saints. Abraham Lincoln. Demoralized cops in cities still reeling from the recent riots are now dealing with spikes in shootings. The Supreme Court takes the nation further down the path of pretending that there is not an architecture to the universe that has among its features two sexes, and no more, of the human species (indeed, most species). Professional athletes, sports announcers and editorial-page editors either get their minds right about what lives matter the most and the approved significance of the American flag or face ruin.

As I say, there are two gradations of Trumpism, at least with regard to the matter of endeavoring to persuade conservatives (I insist on making that distinction) to return to the Republican fold.

The ones who drank the Kool-Aid early on have largely given up on us. From the get-go, in some cases as early as the summer of 2015, they were full-throated enthusiasts, willing to defend the bombast and vindictiveness as necessary weapons in a time of intensifying tyrannical aims on the Left.

“I rather like his sharp elbows and crude tweets,” they say. “It’s such a welcome change to the go-along-get-along ineffectuality of the Republican Party in the last several decades.”

And there’s no denying it is a sharp contrast. And the Republican Party has been nearly useless from a conservative standpoint. The losing presidential candidates - Bush 41 the second time, Dole, McCain, and Romney - didn’t speak conservatism as their native language. They didn’t bring the core principles in undiluted form to the cases they made for their election. Even Bush 43, a man of depth, character and resolve, never framed his historic initiatives, good or bad, in conservative terms.

The legislative record during that time is profoundly disappointing. The debt and the deficit have continued to careen toward the edge of the cliff, and the unfunded liabilities of the “entitlements” which are the cause of the overall shortfall have gone unaddressed, save for Paul Ryan’s plan, which was tepidly presented. The Affordable Care Act was made law and proved impervious to reversal due to the fact that not one legislator had the guts to frame the matter as it needed to be framed - namely, asserting that health care by definition cannot be a right.

But three years into the Trump era, we can see that none of that has changed. The developments and trends enumerated in the above paragraph have not been reversed.

We still have the same lineup of enemies, adversaries and rivals we did 25 years ago: Iran, North Korea, Sunni jihadism, Russia, China, and Turkey. Their influence on the world stage is in most cases greater today.

Now, in addition to that set of circumstances, our allies regard us with confusion and resentment. Japan and South Korea are squeezed between North Korea and China, and Trump wants them to pay handsomely for hosting US bases, as if our Army was some kind of mercenary force. Trump has terrible relationships with the leaders of Canada, France and Germany.

More fundamentally - and this is an area outside the purview of government policy, but could be within the purview of a leader in tune with his country’s spiritual state - our culture’s rot has accelerated. No art is being made. Education has been supplanted by indoctrination. Church attendance and family formation are at record lows. Civic bonds have furthered deteriorated. We bowl alone more than ever. Colorblindness remains as elusive as ever.

The second type of Trumpist, the one who has kept lines of communication open with us and accorded us at least a modicum of respect, wishes to remind us of how fine such numbers as the GDP and the unemployment rate were as recently as January.

In light of the ills that beset us, would a return to that really be enough? Would poll questions about happiness and optimism about the future yield big upturns in positive answers?

I strive to keep the word “can’t” - as in “We can’t take four more years of Trumpism,” or “We can’t take four years of Leftist destruction” - out of my pronouncements about our prospects. Again, I think that reflects a conservative sensibility. Conservatism is about squarely facing what is in front of one. In fact, it’s often described as a tragic worldview. Conservatism takes as a given that fallen human beings will never construct a society that runs smoothly in perpetuity.

So, if, come November, our course is set in one or the other of two grim directions, how does one proceed in some manner other than resignation born of despair?

For me, the ability to muster a more productive manner of carrying on is rooted in not only the enduring order upon which conservatism is predicated, but in the acknowledgement of transcendence and revelation upon which the notion of the enduring order is predicated. Fatih in God, to put it succinctly.

“A lot of good all that pointy-headed abstraction is going to do us next year,” the Trumpist surely responds. My rejoinder is that without a firm grasp of what it is we’re preserving and defending, the war is ultimately lost.

The appeal of an incremental improvement in our material circumstances is insufficient for me. The decline in our spiritual health has gone on too long, and that’s the level on which we must see a moving of the needle.

The work we’ll have to do will have to be done against an even grimmer backdrop than we’re dealing with at present. Again, that’s where faith comes in - faith that the space for undertaking the work will be provided, even if it’s a bit cramped.

Limiting one’s thinking to the binary choice merely puts off this work. At some point, it must commence.