Trump Derangement Syndrome Damages the Democratic Party (2)

In my last post, I looked at four ways in which progressives’ loathing of Donald Trump was damaging the Democratic Party. These were:

1. The Russian collusion delusion, charges of obstruction of justice, and the Ukrainian “quid pro quo” hoax leading to Trump’s impeachment.
2. A leftward lurch toward socialism. Although this rush toward the Left was reinforced as an opposition to Trump’s policies, it was also a natural evolution of progressives’ past beliefs.
3. Advocacy for increased taxes, especially on corporations, that would damage the economy.
4. Progressive lies about the effects of Trump’s policies on the economy’s performance.

In this post, we will examine two other ways that Trump derangement syndrome causes Democrats to put their party behind the political eight-ball. But first, let us ask why progressives are deranged by Trump in the first place. By extension, the reasons for progressive Trump derangement cause progressives to be deranged about Republicans in general.

Why Progressives Are Deranged

First, we should note that Trump derangement syndrome was never completely about Trump.  Trump was merely a convenient target in the progressives’ war against neoliberal ideas and ways of governing. [For those not conversant with the term “neoliberal”, it means a belief in classical liberalism – as invented by the British political philosopher John Locke – together with a belief in free-market capitalism. Most Americans described as “conservatives” are really neoliberals.] Trump derangement syndrome was also about progressives’ revulsion against all those who believe in a very limited government.  

In contradistinction, neoliberals believe the government lacks the competence to solve or even ameliorate most social and economic problems. In addition, they believe giving the  government more power to solve problems puts us on Friedrich Hayek’s  “Road To Serfdom.” This road would lead us ultimately to either fascism or communism. Progressives, on the other hand, have great faith in the government’s capabilities, provided it is given enough power and assets. 

Because Republicans would hinder the accumulation of government power to solve social and economic problems, Democrats conceive them to be morally corrupt. Rather than desiring the public good, Republicans are motivated by base desires. Most Democrats think Republicans have no desire to solve those problems. Instead, in their view neoliberal Republicans desire social privileges, hurting other citizens. It is a short step from this view to thinking of so-called American “conservatives” as racists, fascists, misogynists, xenophobes, and virtually anything else that is bad.

All of these accusations, untrue for most Republicans and other Trump supporters, hurt tremendously. In addition, the progressive hatred revealed by these accusations often generates a wave of answering anger and hatred. These accusations cause a greater polarization between the warring camps of progressives and neoliberals.

The charge that Republicans are fascists is particularly confusing, in addition to being insulting. Fascism is a form of socialism that is only slightly different from communism. A fascist state has a convenient fiction that “owners” of businesses actually control their companies. However, just as in communism, a fascist government totally controls the country’s economy, mostly through regulations. This kind of accusation is more descriptive of Democrats, who desire an increasing accumulation of economic power within the government.

Because progressives believe Trump and his supporters to be anathema and morally corrupt, they are led to oppose any Trump policies almost reflexively.

Opposition to Trump’s Foreign Policy and His International Trade Policies

In international affairs,  Trump derangement syndrome reigns supreme and is doing great damage to the Democratic Party. No matter what policy Trump adopts, the Democrats and their media allies are against it. If Trump insists on reciprocal trading conditions between the U.S. and other nations, using tariffs as a blunt weapon to command their attention, he is accused of being a mercantilist. [Truth in advertising: At one time, I too thought Trump a mercantilist. Now, given considerations of national security and the fact Ricardo’s Law of Comparative Advantage only works when the trading nations have free-markets, I have a better appreciation for Trump’s trade policies.] Yet, by threatening large tariffs, Trump has succeeded in getting a free trade agreement with the U.S., Mexico, and Canada; a free-trade agreement with Japan; and a phase I trade agreement with China (more a truce than a free-trade agreement). Next up will be a search for agreements with Great Britain after BREXIT and the European Union. So much for Trump being a mercantilist.

Issues such as Trump’s trade wars have led many to believe Trump was destroying the post-World War II international order. Yet, what is really damaging the liberal world order is the Western dirigiste elites‘ attempts to establish their statist policies on the international economy. In addition, for a long time, Western nations desperately hoped they could bring more autocratic countries into the liberal world order. Countries like China, Russia, and Iran would become more like the West by increasing economic and cultural ties. The resulting Western accommodation with those authoritarian regimes has led to the toleration of China’s mercantilist policies. It has led to ignoring Iran’s imperial ambitions and Iran’s cheating on the JCPOA.

Since Trump is challenging this dirigiste world-view, American progressives are howling he is a threat to Western civilization. Although he has indicated multiple times he wishes to withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan, some jihadist threat or other always causes him to postpone that withdrawal. Democrats then always accuse him of being a warmonger.

An important example of Democrats’ insistence that Donald Trump is a warmonger is the U.S. killing of Iran’s IRGC commander, Major General Qassem Soleimani, on January 3, 2020. As the commanding general of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Soleimani was in charge of the military expansion of Iran’s Middle East empire. Almost immediately, Democratic politicians and their media allies charged that Trump’s “reckless” action would bring war with Iran. In reply, the Trump administration cited intelligence that Soleimani was planning imminent attacks on American diplomats, personnel, and other interests in the Middle East. After a week of asserting imminent attacks as a justification, Attorney General William Barr declared the President had the right to act regardless of how imminent new attacks might be. This justification was due to the long history of the IRGC killing Americans and attacking American interests throughout the Middle East. This long history began with a car bomb attack on the Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon on October 23, 1983. This attack, which killed 241 Americans (220 being Marines), was perpetrated by the Iranian proxy Hezbollah. The driver of the car was believed to be an Iranian national.

So much for Democratic assertions that Trump did not have the right to attack General Soleimani. However, was the attack prudent for American interests? Did it bring us closer to war? The aftermath was far different from what American progressives expected. After an ineffective Iranian missile attack on U.S. bases in Iraq, the IRGC shot down a Ukrainian airplane departing from Tehran. Apparently, a low-level officer thought it part of an American counterattack. Eventually, Iran had to admit the mistake. This admission, together with other domestic grievances, led to wide-spread domestic protests against the Iranian regime. The entire episode, starting with Soleimani’s killing, has led to a significant reduction in Iranian domestic support. With additional U.S. economic sanctions, the Iranian economy can only grow weaker. Iran will have fewer assets to pursue their imperialist adventures.

The Democratic Party is putting itself in the position of the boy who called wolf one too many times. It can only damage itself in the 2020 elections if it constantly makes the wrong conclusions about international and security issues.

Resistance to Limiting Illegal Immigration

With Trump  advocating the elimination of illegal immigration, Democrats have even more motivation to be in favor of it. Of course, Democrats would be inclined to be for illegal immigration in any case. Democrats are not only generally in favor of open borders, but many are also in favor of a path to citizenship for those illegals. Progressive Democrats are ideologically inclined to those policies because of multiculturalism.  In addition, they believe such policies would entice Hispanic citizens to vote for them. Finally, with a path to citizenship, each illegal immigrant is a potential future Democratic voter.

As Trump began advocating policies to limit illegal immigration, his outraged Democratic opponents claimed the issue was no more than a politically manufactured crisis. Democrats claimed illegal immigration had plateaued at a relatively low level of under 10 million per year. Nevertheless, even that “low” level represents about 3.3 percent of the total U.S. population. Yet a Yale University study showed great uncertainty in the actual numbers. The curve showing the time evolution of the illegal immigrant population varied with different assumptions about a population that wanted to stay undetected. These assumptions involved the actual numbers of inflows and outflows. Using computer modeling and the different assumptions, the Yale study generated the possible curves shown below.

These curves all display the same general shape. They all show the number of illegals grew rapidly during the 1990s and early 2000s and plateaued around 2008. They then remained roughly constant until 2016. Also, they are all significantly above the most widely referenced blue curve. The largest estimate in 2016 at about 37 million represents about 11.3 percent of the total population, while the average at 22 million is around 6.7 percent of U.S. population. Those who said there is no crisis grossly underestimated the number of illegals.

Below is a Yale School of Management video in which the study’s authors explain how they came to their results.

Youtube / Yale School of Management

But then the flow of Central American immigrants began to swell enormously sometime during Trump’s administration, probably in 2018. The probable cause for this growing flood was the increasingly dysfunctional nature of those countries’ governments. This dysfunction resulted from the so-called Latin American “pink tide” that began in the 1990s. Trump’s policies appear to have greatly reduced illegal immigration from Mexico and Central and South America in 2020, judging from U.S. Border Patrol statistics on illegal alien apprehensions. These are shown below for fiscal years 2015 through 2020 to date.

Illegal immigration through our southern border appears to be declining to levels last seen in 2016. However, given the Yale University study cited above, that still leaves an enormous problem.

Already homelessness is a growing problem in sanctuary cities and counties like San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego County, and Seattle. To be sure, much of this problem has been due to government policies that make housing increasingly costly. That condition combines with a lack of good-paying jobs for people with low skills and with increasing drug addiction to drive people into the streets. Notably, most immigrants from Central America are individuals with limited skills. Many can not even speak English. Not surprisingly, many of them end up homeless.

Homelessness is only one problem exacerbated by the increasing flood of immigrants. The fiscal burden on all levels of government naturally rises as well because of new demands for law enforcement, education, social services, and other government services. In addition, drug cartels engaging in human trafficking and drug smuggling using immigrants are well documented. To recognize these facts does not mean a person is a racist. It is merely a recognition of reality.

By refusing to recognize the scale of the problem and its very dreadful effects, progressive Democrats are lying to the American people. Even worse for Democrats, those lies are becoming even more obvious.

Political Damage to the Democratic Party

One can lie  or misrepresent the truth only for so long before people start to disbelieve anything the liar says. The declining trust of Americans in Democratic politicians is becoming clear even to some of those selfsame politicians. Democratic Congressman Max Rose (D-NY) is quoted as saying the American people “don’t trust Democrats as far as they can throw them.” A 2018 NBC News – Wall Street Journal poll found the Democratic Party to be out of touch with the American people. Just 33 percent thought the Democratic Paty to be in the mainstream; 56 percent thought them to be out of step with the country.

A September 2019 Gallup poll found the distrust extended to the mass media, which has mostly supported the Democrats. While 69 percent of Democrats trusted the media, only 15 percent of Republicans and 36 percent of independents had such a trust. Gallup published the following graph of percent media trust by political affiliation.

These plots show Democratic trust in the media never was below a majority and has jumped significantly during the Trump years. However, over the 22 year period, trust by both Republicans and independents has fairly steadily declined, especially among Republicans. Trust from independents has fallen 17 percentage points from 53 percent to 36 percent; Republican trust has fallen 26 percentage points from 41 percent to 15 percent. Apparently, becoming the propaganda arm of the Democratic Party does not sit well with either Republicans or independents.

Consider just the issues in which Democrats play fast and loose with the truth discussed in this post and the previous one:

1. The Russian collusion and obstruction of justice hoaxes, and the Ukrainian quid pro quo controversy, which led to Trump’s impeachment. Although Trump was ultimately exonerated, the entire affair wasted a great deal of Congress’ time.
2. Democratic support for socialist projects, such as the Green New Deal and Medicare for All. A part of this left-ward lurch is the desire to remove much power to govern from the political branches of government to the independent government agencies of the administrative state. This repositioning of power lets unelected technocrats govern, insulated from the influences of the people.
3. Advocacy for increased taxes, especially on corporations. The interaction of the Rahn Curve with Hauser’s Law tells us such a policy would hurt everyone economically.
4. Progressive lies about how Trump’s economic policies have affected the economy.
5. Democratic opposition to any Trump foreign policy or international trade policy.
6. Democratic resistance to limiting illegal immigration.

For each of these issues, a copious amount of empirical data can be marshaled to show how misguided progressive Democrats are. Yet, progressives are driven to follow these positions by their loathing and hatred of Donald Trump in particular, and of neoliberal Republicans in general. Eventually, the electorate will notice how far Democratic opinions are straying from social reality.

Views:  6,585

GO TO HOME

Sharing is caring!