Ex-GOP columnist: How a German political theorist explains Trump party’s 'terrible political morality'

26 January

New York Times columnist and former Republican, David French, in an op-ed published Sunday points to one German political expert to make sense of President Donald Trump supporters' unwavering loyalty.

"Over the last decade, I’ve watched many of my friends and neighbors make a remarkable transformation," French writes. "They’ve gone from supporting Donald Trump in spite of his hatefulness to reveling in his aggression."

However, he notes, "This isn’t a new observation. In fact, it’s so obvious as to verge on the banal. The far more interesting question is why," arguing, "When a person believes that he or she possesses eternal truth, there’s a temptation to believe that he or she is entitled to rule."

French writes:

There’s a difference, however, between yielding to temptation and developing an alternative morality. And what we’ve been witnessing in the last decade is millions of Americans constructing a different moral superstructure. And while it is certainly notable and powerful in Trumpism, it is not exclusive to Trumpism.

A good way to understand this terrible political morality is to read Carl Schmitt, a German political theorist who joined the Nazi Party after Hitler became chancellor. I want to be careful here — I am not arguing that millions of Americans are suddenly Schmittians, acolytes of one of the fascist regime’s favorite political theorists. The vast majority of Americans have no idea who he is. Nor would they accept all of his ideas.

One of his ideas, however, is almost perfectly salient to the moment: his description, in a 1932 book called 'The Concept of the Political,' of the 'friend-enemy distinction.' The political sphere, according to Schmitt, is distinct from the personal sphere, and it has its own distinct contrasts.

'Let us assume,' Schmitt wrote, 'that in the realm of morality the final distinctions are between good and evil, in aesthetics beautiful and ugly, in economics profitable and unprofitable.' Politics, however, has 'its own ultimate distinctions.' In that realm, 'the specific political distinction to which political actions and motives can be reduced is that between friend and enemy.'

Furthermore, French notes that Schmitt notes that "one of liberalism’s deficiencies is a reluctance to draw the friend-enemy distinction," and its failure "to draw it is a fool’s errand."

"An enduring political community can exist only when it draws this distinction. It is this contrast with outsiders that creates the community," French emphasizes.

The Times columnist suggests, "Because our civics depends on our ethics, we should be teaching ethics right alongside civics. Sadly, we’re failing at both tasks, and our baser nature is telling millions of Americans that cruelty is good, if it helps us win, and kindness is evil, if it weakens our cause. That is the path of destruction. As the prophet Isaiah said, 'Woe to those who call evil good and good evil.'"

French's full column is available at this link (subscription required).

From Your Site Articles