thenation--2020-10-12--What History Tells Us About Trump’s Implosion and Biden’s Opportunity

A few weeks after the November 2016 election , I called Yale political scientist Stephen Skowronek to get his reaction to Donald Trump ’ s astonishing victory .
Earlier that year I had read Skowronek ’ s landmark 1993 work , The Politics Presidents Make , which spans American presidential history , tracing the roughly 40–60 year cycles of what he calls “ political time.
” First , a transformative or “ reconstructive ” president inaugurates a new regime ( most recently , FDR and Ronald Reagan ) , that is succeeded by an alternating cast of regime-supporting “ affiliates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and JFK/Lyndon Johnson ; for Reagan , the Bushes ) and “ preemptive ” regime-challengers ( Dwight Eisenhower , Richard Nixon ; Bill Clinton , Barack Obama ) who suggest an outline of something new , before the regime finally proves incapable of responding to new problems and collapses under the helpless watch of a “ disjunctive ” president , an ambivalent adherent of the party ’ s original orthodoxy ( Jimmy Carter ; Trump ? )
.
You can and should read that conversation here .
In a bewildering historical moment , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ theory to the shocking event that had just taken place .
He did not predict Trump ’ s victory , but as he reiterated when we spoke again last week , his analysis of past historical cycles suggested it was unlikely Obama would be able to hand off power to his chosen successor .
He hadn ’ t done nearly enough to repudiate the existing Reagan-founded regime , much less to establish a new one .
A Hillary Clinton victory would have defied Skowronek ’ s theory—or at least required a more complicated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
What that more complicated explanation would have entailed has to do with the oft-neglected second strand of Skowronek ’ s theory .
He calls this “ secular time , ” a term of social-science art referring to processes that are not cyclical but linear ; they continue in a single direction over time .
Skowronek is particularly interested in the growing power of the presidency—each occupant ’ s increasing ability to communicate directly with voters , bypass the gridlocked legislative process in favor of executive orders , and personally control the thousand-tentacled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ story also helps explain why , though all the pieces seem to be in place for Trump ’ s defeat this November—the final repudiation of a bankrupt Reaganism and the rise of a new Democratic regime—he could still win .
Should Trump manage to hold on to office , it will be due to his use and abuse of these augmented presidential powers .
Witness his attempt to bribe a foreign head of state to intervene in the 2020 election by opening a baseless investigation of a political rival or his brazen undermining @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to keep opposition ballots from being counted .
The catastrophe most of us refer to as “ Trump stealing the election ” can be understood within Skowronek ’ s centuries-spanning schema as the moment when the linear developments of “ secular time ” —the steady accrual of more and more power in the presidency—overtake the cyclical dynamics of “ political time ” that have otherwise held throughout American history .
A transformative , regime-inaugurating breakthrough may not occur even when other structural conditions suggest it should be in the offing .
What happens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , though in our conversation , Skowronek offered a few .
We also discussed how Trump has resembled and differed from past “ disjunctive ” presidents ; “ late-regime affiliates , ” as Skowronek calls them , who presided over the collapse of creaky , obsolescent regimes ; and whether Joe Biden has what it takes to become an era-shaping leader who transforms American politics .
Whatever happens , something genuinely new seems to be at hand .
“ We ’ re racing toward one of those classically American political flash points , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re in the midst of a historic pivot.
” His account of the past and present offers a few suggestive hints as to where we might end up Skowronek ’ s next book , Phantoms of a Beleaguered Republic : The Deep State and the Unitary Executive , will be published by Oxford University Press in March 2021. ichard reitner : How has Trump ’ s presidency been reminiscent of previous disjunctive presidents like Herbert Hoover or Jimmy Carter ?
tephen kowronek : Trump represents the fourth incarnation of a conservative order @ @ @ @ @ @ @ By 2016 , the collective project had grown stale and fractious , the movement was splintering , and the Obama administration had shown how weak the grip of the old solutions was .
The Republican establishment wasn ’ t really in control of its own fate , and that ’ s what Trump exploited .
In how he came to power , Trump is typical of a late-regime affiliate .
He was a loner with unorthodox views .
He had only tenuous connections to the dominant party and conducted a hostile takeover of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ old order from itself .
Usually , by the time you get to the fourth incarnation of a regime , things are tattered and in flux .
But what we know about late-regime affiliates—Carter , Hoover , [ Franklin ] Pierce/ [ James ] Buchanan , John Quincy Adams—is that they never fix things up .
They enter office promising repair and rehabilitation , but instead they expose the regime ’ s serious vulnerabilities and drive a nationwide crisis of legitimacy .
They have political impact as potent agents of change , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make it clear the old regime is beyond repair , and thus lay it open to direct repudiation as the very source of the nation ’ s problems .
We see this clearly in Trump .
Again , it ’ s almost too perfect .
He has alienated core constituencies , endangered political allies , and shrunk the party ’ s base .
And now we have this devastating finale , the coronavirus pandemic , which has become a summary judgment on the entire Reaganite operation , laying the system open to total @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump defined or even understood his historical moment ?
How much has he controlled events rather than been controlled by them ?
SS : I think that Trump thinks—to the extent that he thinks about it at all , or perhaps it ’ s just Steve Bannon—that this is a reconstructive moment and that he has the potential to take control and define American politics for years to come .
And indeed it does seem to be a pivot point ; an old regime is disintegrating and something new is forming .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ affiliates in the past didn ’ t have new ideas .
John Quincy Adams offered a completely new approach to government ; Jimmy Carter thought he was going to transform the system .
These late-regime affiliates have a sense that the old order is beyond repair and they have to do something .
It ’ s not surprising , therefore , that we would see in Trump all these portents of reconstructive leadership .
But what do reconstructive leaders do ?
It ’ s not just that they implement a policy agenda .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , they build durable majorities , new parties , maybe with the same label but it ’ s a new coalition .
And they dislodge the existing political infrastructure .
This often takes the form of court battles , or in Jackson ’ s time the “ bank war , ” or in Lincoln ’ s time , obviously , the dismantling of slavery .
They get rid of institutions that supported the politics and policies of the past .
On the face of it , that is what Trump is doing .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ gutting institutions , even packing the courts .
That looks like reconstruction .
But can a president who is nominally affiliated with the dominant party of the previous regime reconstruct ?
History tells us no .
Instead , they implode , and they bring the whole regime down with them .
To me , it looks like that is what is happening .
Yet I also see things that resonate with reconstruction : The old order has collapsed , and the question is : Who will reconstruct it ?
It could be Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be quite profound and systemic .
That ’ s what everyone is warning about .
RK : You said in our 2016 conversation that Trump was more like Carter than Jackson , and if so , “ Paul Ryan is Ted Kennedy circa 1978 ” —an intraparty challenger waiting in the wings .
But of course no Republican contested Trump for the 2020 nomination , and Ryan retired from politics .
What explains Trump ’ s ability to keep his own party in line , despite having ascended to office in large part @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
SS : It ’ s astounding how the party has rolled over and the people who challenged him have retired .
That gives me pause .
Thinking institutionally and historically about patterns rather than personalities , I think we can attribute this in part to the gradual rise of presidentialism in America .
That is , presidents have increasingly become independent political actors , effectively their own political organizations , and much less accountable to any collective project .
They ’ re also less dependent on Congress to govern , and more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the bureaucracy .
With past late-regime affiliates , the bond of affiliation has been to their party , which holds them to the old commitments .
But those bonds of party have weakened .
We saw this in the Obama years with Organizing for America , or Organizing for Action , however many different permutations there were of his own machine .
Trump has used Twitter to forge a direct relationship between himself and his followers ; it enables them to follow him through every twist and turn .
It also stifles alternative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about what the regime ’ s true commitments were .
Instead of the party holding him to account , he holds fellow partisans to account by threatening to run candidates loyal to him in primary elections .
That is a difference with Trump , and not an insignificant one .
It ’ s quite brilliant the way he has been able to pull Republicans along by giving them just enough to keep them in the fold—tax cuts , deregulation , judges .
People want to say he doesn ’ t know what he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ m not sure that ’ s the case .
It ’ s been quite impressive .
Historically , this has been an almost impossible leadership position , and that makes his performance all the more remarkable .
What Time Is It ?
Here ’ s What the 2016 Election Tells Us About Obama , Trump , and What Comes Next RK : Following our 2016 conversation , I took comfort from your comment that after Trump a new Democratic-led political reconstruction would likely take hold , led by “ somebody like Bernie Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the idea to console friends and family .
But reading the interview now , I see you go on to suggest that the Democrats would have to come up with “ something much broader than the current left alternative , ” something more than “ old-school left-liberalism…a totally different configuration.
” As you noted , earlier transformative presidents didn ’ t “ just come in with the opposite of what was there before , ” but rather “ created this new thing that hadn ’ t been anticipated in the previous set of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up with a radically new alternative to Reaganism or New Deal liberalism explain the messiness of the Democratic presidential primary and the party ’ s eventual settling on the choice it did solely as a kind of default , a last resort ?
Or , the nominee aside , do you indeed see the beginnings of such a new regime taking shape on the horizon ?
SS : You ’ re right that the Democratic Party has yet to articulate something beyond the opposite of Trumpism ; Most of what they are offering @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And that is a serious problem for a Democratic reconstruction .
Even if many of the policies that the party will be committed to look familiar—health care , student debt , and so on—something in the argumentation has to change .
I don ’ t see that , and that is a liability for them .
Mostly , the Democratic Party looks like a mirror image of the Republican Party : “ They are against environmental protection ; we are for it.
” I don ’ t think Democrats have articulated a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same time , however , we are seeing from the Sanders/Warren wing of the party serious talk about structural reforms that would alter the very terrain on which politics plays out .
Not just policies , but changing the game .
They ’ re talking about what to do with the Supreme Court , getting rid of the filibuster , admitting the District of Columbia as a state , passing a new Voting Rights Act .
All of this suggests interest in building a kind of institutional bulwark that would be supportive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ These structural reforms no longer seem completely beyond the pale ; they are not being rejected out of hand or repudiated by the nominee .
And those are just the kinds of things that could change the playing field of American politics .
Joe Biden is possibly the least likely reconstructive leader you can imagine , and yet I ’ m not giving up on him completely .
A lot will depend on the size of the victory .
In some ways , having a moderate with a reconstructive movement or coalition at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be .
RK : To what extent do the prospects of a new Democratic regime hinge on the party ’ s ability to blame not only Trump for the country ’ s present crises and catastrophes , but the Reagan Republican regime more broadly ?
SS : What distinguishes reconstructive leaders is their authority to repudiate—and to repudiate not just the previous incumbent but the old order itself for a failed and illegitimate response to national problems .
My question about Biden right now is why he is personalizing this .
Why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contemporary politics to a more systemic collapse of the old formulas ?
There ’ s a pressing need to rethink basic modes of the old common sense , to tag the Republican Party as responsible , not just Trump .
This idea that Trump represents an aberrant moment of time , that we just need to return to normalcy , really squanders the opportunity at hand—the possibility of taking advantage of an implosion .
That ’ s what worries me .
Even if Biden wins and the Democrats retake the Senate , you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We ’ ll get to see his skill and ability to take advantage of the historic opportunity passed to him by Trump ’ s implosion .
I can ’ t say automatically that he is going to be a reconstructive leader simply because he is in these circumstances .
He needs to be thinking systemically , and I don ’ t know that Biden is , though there are hints every once in a while that maybe he is open to recognizing that the political world in which he grew up and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Stories We Tell About Class For Tara Raghuveer , ‘ Every Eviction Is an Act of Violence ’ RK : You write in a chapter on Trump in the updated edition of Presidential Leadership in Political Time that given the president ’ s growing independence from party affiliation , we may be witnessing the “ washing out ” of presidential cycles and the emergence of a “ perpetual political pre-emption.
” What would this look like ?
SS : Preemptive leaders are opposition leaders who come to power in resilient regimes .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrat in a resilient conservative regime .
He comes to power and articulates this sui generis position : “ third way , ” not conservative or liberal but both and also neither , a “ New Democratic Party.
” It ’ s an idiosyncratic formula , and it ’ s attractive ; preemptive presidents tend to get reelected .
But the downside is that the alternative they articulate never sticks , and they never pass power on to a designated heir .
The idea they offered in the moment just doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s harder and harder to reconstruct .
If reconstruction is gutting the residual institutions of the old order , those institutions are becoming more resilient , harder to destroy .
These days you can ’ t just destroy a central bank , the way Jackson did .
Now it ’ s the backbone of an interdependent industrial economy !
We may already be seeing this collapse of the presidential cycles and a convergence toward the preemptive type : They arise , are fairly independent , they do their thing , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , because the next president comes along and offers a new one .
There ’ s no durability , and thus no reconstruction .
It ’ s a much more volatile world .
It ’ s also not a particularly effective form of government , because no commitments are stable .
Everything is up for grabs and uncertain .
I still think we ’ re a long way from that .
What ’ s remarkable to me is that I ’ ve been talking about this alternative scenario , the washing out of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But this conservative Reaganite regime has played out remarkably true to form .
The historical patterns seem to be holding .
Trump is a late-regime affiliate , and I am beginning to suspect that all the complications are just noise .

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
A few weeks after the November 2016 election, I called Yale political scientist Stephen Skowronek to get his reaction to Donald Trump’s astonishing victory. Earlier that year I had read Skowronek’s landmark 1993 work, The Politics Presidents Make, which spans American presidential history, tracing the roughly 40–60 year cycles of what he calls “political time.” First, a transformative or “reconstructive” president inaugurates a new regime (most recently, FDR and Ronald Reagan), that is succeeded by an alternating cast of regime-supporting “affiliates” (for FDR, Harry Truman and JFK/Lyndon Johnson; for Reagan, the Bushes) and “preemptive” regime-challengers (Dwight Eisenhower, Richard Nixon; Bill Clinton, Barack Obama) who suggest an outline of something new, before the regime finally proves incapable of responding to new problems and collapses under the helpless watch of a “disjunctive” president, an ambivalent adherent of the party’s original orthodoxy (Jimmy Carter; Trump?).
You can and should read that conversation here. In a bewildering historical moment, Skowronek was remarkably lucid in applying his theory to the shocking event that had just taken place. He did not predict Trump’s victory, but as he reiterated when we spoke again last week, his analysis of past historical cycles suggested it was unlikely Obama would be able to hand off power to his chosen successor. He hadn’t done nearly enough to repudiate the existing Reagan-founded regime, much less to establish a new one. A Hillary Clinton victory would have defied Skowronek’s theory—or at least required a more complicated explanation than did Trump’s win.
What that more complicated explanation would have entailed has to do with the oft-neglected second strand of Skowronek’s theory. He calls this “secular time,” a term of social-science art referring to processes that are not cyclical but linear; they continue in a single direction over time. Skowronek is particularly interested in the growing power of the presidency—each occupant’s increasing ability to communicate directly with voters, bypass the gridlocked legislative process in favor of executive orders, and personally control the thousand-tentacled bureaucracy.
The “secular time” story also helps explain why, though all the pieces seem to be in place for Trump’s defeat this November—the final repudiation of a bankrupt Reaganism and the rise of a new Democratic regime—he could still win. Should Trump manage to hold on to office, it will be due to his use and abuse of these augmented presidential powers. Witness his attempt to bribe a foreign head of state to intervene in the 2020 election by opening a baseless investigation of a political rival or his brazen undermining of the Postal Service in a bid to keep opposition ballots from being counted. The catastrophe most of us refer to as “Trump stealing the election” can be understood within Skowronek’s centuries-spanning schema as the moment when the linear developments of “secular time”—the steady accrual of more and more power in the presidency—overtake the cyclical dynamics of “political time” that have otherwise held throughout American history. A transformative, regime-inaugurating breakthrough may not occur even when other structural conditions suggest it should be in the offing. What happens after that is anyone’s guess, though in our conversation, Skowronek offered a few. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann
We also discussed how Trump has resembled and differed from past disjunctive presidents (“late-regime affiliates,” as Skowronek sometimes calls them, who presided over the collapse of creaky, obsolescent regimes), and whether Joe Biden has what it takes to become an era-shaping leader who transforms American politics. Whatever happens, something genuinely new seems to be at hand. “We’re racing toward one of those classically American political flash points,” Skowronek told me. “We’re in the midst of a historic pivot.” His account of the past and present offers a few suggestive hints as to where we might end up.
Skowronek’s next book, Phantoms of a Beleaguered Republic: The Deep State and the Unitary Executive, will be published by Oxford University Press in March 2021.
—Richard Kreitner Current Issue View our current issue
R ichard K reitner: How has Trump’s presidency been reminiscent of previous disjunctive presidents like Herbert Hoover or Jimmy Carter?
S tephen S kowronek: Trump represents the fourth incarnation of a conservative order ushered in by the Reagan Revolution. By 2016, the collective project had grown stale and fractious, the movement was splintering, and the Obama administration had shown how weak the grip of the old solutions was. The Republican establishment wasn’t really in control of its own fate, and that’s what Trump exploited.
In how he came to power, Trump is typical of a late-regime affiliate. He was a loner with unorthodox views. He had only tenuous connections to the dominant party and conducted a hostile takeover of it. He promised to save the old order from itself.
Usually, by the time you get to the fourth incarnation of a regime, things are tattered and in flux. But what we know about late-regime affiliates—Carter, Hoover, [Franklin] Pierce/[James] Buchanan, John Quincy Adams—is that they never fix things up. They enter office promising repair and rehabilitation, but instead they expose the regime’s serious vulnerabilities and drive a nationwide crisis of legitimacy. They have political impact as potent agents of change, but the change is uniformly implosive. They make it clear the old regime is beyond repair, and thus lay it open to direct repudiation as the very source of the nation’s problems.
We see this clearly in Trump. Again, it’s almost too perfect. He has alienated core constituencies, endangered political allies, and shrunk the party’s base. And now we have this devastating finale, the coronavirus pandemic, which has become a summary judgment on the entire Reaganite operation, laying the system open to total repudiation.
RK: How well has Trump defined or even understood his historical moment? How much has he controlled events rather than been controlled by them?
SS: I think that Trump thinks—to the extent that he thinks about it at all, or perhaps it’s just Steve Bannon—that this is a reconstructive moment and that he has the potential to take control and define American politics for years to come. And indeed it does seem to be a pivot point; an old regime is disintegrating and something new is forming.
It isn’t the case that late-regime affiliates in the past didn’t have new ideas. John Quincy Adams offered a completely new approach to government; Jimmy Carter thought he was going to transform the system. These late-regime affiliates have a sense that the old order is beyond repair and they have to do something. It’s not surprising, therefore, that we would see in Trump all these portents of reconstructive leadership.
But what do reconstructive leaders do? It’s not just that they implement a policy agenda. That’s secondary. More importantly, they build durable majorities, new parties, maybe with the same label but it’s a new coalition. And they dislodge the existing political infrastructure. This often takes the form of court battles, or in Jackson’s time the “bank war,” or in Lincoln’s time, obviously, the dismantling of slavery. They get rid of institutions that supported the politics and policies of the past.
On the face of it, that is what Trump is doing. He is building a new party, gutting institutions, even packing the courts. That looks like reconstruction. But can a president who is nominally affiliated with the dominant party of the previous regime reconstruct? History tells us no. Instead, they implode, and they bring the whole regime down with them. To me, it looks like that is what is happening. Yet I also see things that resonate with reconstruction: The old order has collapsed, and the question is: Who will reconstruct it? It could be Trump. If so, the reconstruction would be quite profound and systemic. That’s what everyone is warning about.
RK: You said in our 2016 conversation that Trump was more like Carter than Jackson, and if so, “Paul Ryan is Ted Kennedy circa 1978”—an intraparty challenger waiting in the wings. But of course no Republican contested Trump for the 2020 nomination, and Ryan retired from politics. What explains Trump’s ability to keep his own party in line, despite having ascended to office in large part due to his explicit repudiation of it?
SS: It’s astounding how the party has rolled over and the people who challenged him have retired. That gives me pause. Thinking institutionally and historically about patterns rather than personalities, I think we can attribute this in part to the gradual rise of presidentialism in America. That is, presidents have increasingly become independent political actors, effectively their own political organizations, and much less accountable to any collective project. They’re also less dependent on Congress to govern, and more able to do so through control of the bureaucracy.
With past late-regime affiliates, the bond of affiliation has been to their party, which holds them to the old commitments. But those bonds of party have weakened. We saw this in the Obama years with Organizing for America, or Organizing for Action, however many different permutations there were of his own machine. Trump has used Twitter to forge a direct relationship between himself and his followers; it enables them to follow him through every twist and turn. It also stifles alternative voices who previously could speak with authority about what the regime’s true commitments were. Instead of the party holding him to account, he holds fellow partisans to account by threatening to run candidates loyal to him in primary elections. That is a difference with Trump, and not an insignificant one.
It’s quite brilliant the way he has been able to pull Republicans along by giving them just enough to keep them in the fold—tax cuts, deregulation, judges. People want to say he doesn’t know what he’s doing, but I’m not sure that’s the case. It’s been quite impressive. Historically, this has been an almost impossible leadership position, and that makes his performance all the more remarkable. Related Article What Time Is It? Here’s What the 2016 Election Tells Us About Obama, Trump, and What Comes Next Richard Kreitner
RK: Following our 2016 conversation, I took comfort from your comment that after Trump a new Democratic-led political reconstruction would likely take hold, led by “somebody like Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren.” I even used the idea to console friends and family. But reading the interview now, I see you go on to suggest that the Democrats would have to come up with “something much broader than the current left alternative,” something more than “old-school left-liberalism…a totally different configuration.”
As you noted, earlier transformative presidents didn’t “just come in with the opposite of what was there before,” but rather “created this new thing that hadn’t been anticipated in the previous set of alternatives.” Does the failure to come up with a radically new alternative to Reaganism or New Deal liberalism explain the messiness of the Democratic presidential primary and the party’s eventual settling on the choice it did solely as a kind of default, a last resort? Or, the nominee aside, do you indeed see the beginnings of such a new regime taking shape on the horizon?
SS: You’re right that the Democratic Party has yet to articulate something beyond the opposite of Trumpism; Most of what they are offering is the same old, same old. And that is a serious problem for a Democratic reconstruction. Even if many of the policies that the party will be committed to look familiar—health care, student debt, and so on—something in the argumentation has to change. I don’t see that, and that is a liability for them. Mostly, the Democratic Party looks like a mirror image of the Republican Party: “They are against environmental protection; we are for it.” I don’t think Democrats have articulated a way out of that stalemate.
At the same time, however, we are seeing from the Sanders/Warren wing of the party serious talk about structural reforms that would alter the very terrain on which politics plays out. Not just policies, but changing the game. They’re talking about what to do with the Supreme Court, getting rid of the filibuster, admitting the District of Columbia as a state, passing a new Voting Rights Act. All of this suggests interest in building a kind of institutional bulwark that would be supportive of a new set of commitments. These structural reforms no longer seem completely beyond the pale; they are not being rejected out of hand or repudiated by the nominee. And those are just the kinds of things that could change the playing field of American politics.
Joe Biden is possibly the least likely reconstructive leader you can imagine, and yet I’m not giving up on him completely. A lot will depend on the size of the victory. In some ways, having a moderate with a reconstructive movement or coalition at his back is exactly where you want to be.
RK: To what extent do the prospects of a new Democratic regime hinge on the party’s ability to blame not only Trump for the country’s present crises and catastrophes, but the Reagan Republican regime more broadly?
SS: What distinguishes reconstructive leaders is their authority to repudiate—and to repudiate not just the previous incumbent but the old order itself for a failed and illegitimate response to national problems.
My question about Biden right now is why he is personalizing this. Why is he not attributing the failures of contemporary politics to a more systemic collapse of the old formulas? There’s a pressing need to rethink basic modes of the old common sense, to tag the Republican Party as responsible, not just Trump. This idea that Trump represents an aberrant moment of time, that we just need to return to normalcy, really squanders the opportunity at hand—the possibility of taking advantage of an implosion. That’s what worries me.
Even if Biden wins and the Democrats retake the Senate, you can’t force him to reconstruct. We’ll get to see his skill and ability to take advantage of the historic opportunity passed to him by Trump’s implosion. I can’t say automatically that he is going to be a reconstructive leader simply because he is in these circumstances. He needs to be thinking systemically, and I don’t know that Biden is, though there are hints every once in a while that maybe he is open to recognizing that the political world in which he grew up and made his mark no longer exists. The Q&A Should the United States Stay United? Jessica Suriano The Stories We Tell About Class Tal Milovina For Tara Raghuveer, ‘Every Eviction Is an Act of Violence’ Nawal Arjini
RK: You write in a chapter on Trump in the updated edition of Presidential Leadership in Political Time that given the president’s growing independence from party affiliation, we may be witnessing the “washing out” of presidential cycles and the emergence of a “perpetual political pre-emption.” What would this look like?
SS: Preemptive leaders are opposition leaders who come to power in resilient regimes. Take Bill Clinton. He is a Democrat in a resilient conservative regime. He comes to power and articulates this sui generis position: “third way,” not conservative or liberal but both and also neither, a “New Democratic Party.” It’s an idiosyncratic formula, and it’s attractive; preemptive presidents tend to get reelected. But the downside is that the alternative they articulate never sticks, and they never pass power on to a designated heir. The idea they offered in the moment just doesn’t have legs.
With permanent preemption, it’s harder and harder to reconstruct. If reconstruction is gutting the residual institutions of the old order, those institutions are becoming more resilient, harder to destroy. These days you can’t just destroy a central bank, the way Jackson did. Now it’s the backbone of an interdependent industrial economy!
We may already be seeing this collapse of the presidential cycles and a convergence toward the preemptive type: They arise, are fairly independent, they do their thing, but then the alternative they offer just disappears, because the next president comes along and offers a new one. There’s no durability, and thus no reconstruction. It’s a much more volatile world. It’s also not a particularly effective form of government, because no commitments are stable. Everything is up for grabs and uncertain.
I still think we’re a long way from that. What’s remarkable to me is that I’ve been talking about this alternative scenario, the washing out of political time, since the early 1990s. But this conservative Reaganite regime has played out remarkably true to form. The historical patterns seem to be holding. Trump is a late-regime affiliate, and I am beginning to suspect that all the complications are just noise.


thenation--2020-10-12--The Far Right Holds a Grip on European Campuses

Halfway through the public lecture that Dr. Daniel Wutti had spent weeks organizing at Klagenfurt University in rural Austria in 2017 , 15 male protesters burst through the doors .
Some were dressed as stereotypical Muslim women in black niqabs .
One man was wearing traditional Austrian lederhosen , and as the “ women ” unfurled large banners reading “ Stop immigration ” and “ Integration is a lie , ” they began throwing stones at him .
“ It was confusing at first , ” says Wutti , who had organized the lecture on integration to coincide with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scheme for refugees in the region .
“ Then people in the audience started shouting , and someone tried to grab a megaphone from the ringleader.
” He adds : “ I think it was quite obvious what point they were trying to make.
” The stunt , which was organized by the local branch of the far-right Identitarian movement and attracted global media attention , resulted in ringleader Luca Kerbl being found guilty of assault after he punched the university headmaster while leaving the hall .
Several refugee students who witnessed the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ therapy , including one from Afghanistan who said it reminded him of the Taliban ’ s actions at his old university .
The incident was one of the most high-profile examples of a growing issue on campuses around Europe : an increased presence of far-right groups and their activities .
“ There have always been far-right students at universities , but now it seems they are being emboldened , ” says Judith Goetz , a political scientist who has been asked by a number of student bodies in Germany and Austria to run @ @ @ @ @ @ @ situation .
“ Some students , particularly left-wing ones , are very afraid .
They worry what will happen if they know their addresses and personal information.
” And with free speech on campus a hotly debated topic lately , handling extremism has become a tricky subject for university staff .
The Identitarian movement , also known as Generation Identity , has been one of the most prominent groups on European campuses in recent years .
It was originally founded in France and has groups all over the world .
Members espouse the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its Austrian leader , Martin Sellner , is currently being investigated for links to Christchurch shooter Brenton Tarrant .
Earlier this year , they were ordered by authorities to leave Greece after protesting migrant arrivals in the country .
Identitarians explicitly borrow from left-wing protest culture and cite groups such as Greenpeace as an inspiration .
Goetz has recorded dozens of campus stunts by the group in Germany and Austria , ranging from sticker campaigns to aggressive actions such as the incident at Klagenfurt .
Identitarians are also known to have targeted students @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including pamphleteering at the University of Liverpool in the UK and the opening of a “ community house ” in Budapest , Hungary .
Recently , the group ’ s ability to organize has been severely curtailed thanks to the Christchurch investigation .
Its social media accounts have been deleted , it is difficult for the group to accept donations , and prominent supporters have even declared the brand to be “ tainted.
” However , senior members are already regrouping under new names .
In Austria , leaders are organizing protests and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Die Österreicher ( The Austrians ) DO5 .
The group espouses the same ideology as The Identitarians , yet appears to be modelling itself on citizen-led movements , such as Fridays for Future .
The rebranding offers insight into how nimbly far-right groups get around restrictions , and how they continue to co-opt features of progressive movements in order to appeal to young people .
The Identitarians first gained notoriety in Germany in 2017 , when they opened a four-story house close to the University of Halle in the east .
Members gave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the “ liberal ” culture of universities and hosted events featuring prominent members of the international far right .
Residents claimed to be nonviolent and intellectually superior to traditional Nazis , despite group leader Mario Müller ’ s having a well-documented history with NPD , the German neo-Nazi party .
However , a total of 31 violent incidents linked to the house were recorded by the government-supported counseling centers for victims of right-wing violence , including an incident where Identitarians attacked two off-duty police officers with mace and batons after mistaking them for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trial .
According to students , the rates of low-level intimidation and provocation were even higher .
“ Last summer , I was getting harassed really regularly , like every fortnight , ” says Katherina Hindelang , who says she became known to the Identitarians after they spotted her on a demo .
“ They ’ d shout ‘ leftist bitch ’ or catcall.
” Other students claim members of the group have come to their homes and harassed them or left far-right stickers and flyers at their doors .
The Identitarians claimed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2019 after both local activism and increased surveillance by Germany ’ s security services curtailed their activities , although an affiliated group , Ein Prozent , remained inside .
The house appears to have been fully vacated in June 2020 .
This thwarting of the far right ’ s attempts to create a neighborhood stronghold is solid evidence that nonviolent anti-fascist activism can work .
However , the group ’ s prolonged presence has arguably emboldened far-right activity in the university town .
Since May this year , far-right groups have been regularly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ square , protesting against coronavirus restrictions and disseminating other extremist propaganda .
The template for the Identitarians ’ activities was developed by the Italian group CasaPound , which combines far-right ideology with far-left tactics such as squatting social centers and staging banner drops .
Blocco Studentesco , its student body , was founded in 2006 and at one point gained control of the national assembly of students .
“ They pushed the cultural dimensions of collective action , music and graphic communication without explicitly referring to fascism , ” says Emmanuele Toscano , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Marconi .
“ It allowed them to grow amongst younger groups without directly facing fascist issues.
” Its official numbers have waned since its director Francesco Polacchi was charged with a number of violent attacks in 2017 , but according to Italian journalist and far-right expert Paolo Berizzi ’ s recently published book The Education of a Fascist , a number of informally affiliated student groups are still active and campuses remain an important recruitment ground for extremists in Italy .
For as long as the far-right has existed , the recruitment of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ growth .
From Hitler Youth to Mussolini ’ s Opera Nazionale Balilla , young people give early fascist movements energy and longevity .
Throughout the 20th and 21st centuries , right-wing groups consistently evolved , co-opting subcultures such as punk , metal and , more recently , online cultures such as gaming in order to attract new recruits .
Targeting campuses gives groups a veneer of intellectualism , helps them access those who may become future leaders in society , and also creates a recruitment funnel for mainstream right-wing parties .
Universities , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strong leftist and anti-fascist movements , so another tactic of far-right survival is to quickly and nimbly rebrand after being exposed or having their organizing curtailed .
In Austria and Germany in particular , far-right groups have a long and violent history on campuses .
All-male student fraternities known as Burschenschaften , many of which were founded on nationalist principles , have been active since the 19th century .
During the 1930s , some of them became an integral part of the Nazi movement , particularly in Austria , with certain members holding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the end of the Second World War but many regrouped in the 1950s .
Today , they offer cheap or free accommodation to male students and have strong links with both the Identitarians and mainstream far-right political parties .
“ [ Burschenshaften ] consider themselves the academic backbone of the Austrian [ far-right ] Freedom Party , ” says Bernhard Weidinger , a researcher on the far right , who explains that the party used the student groups to recruit for staff roles while part of a coalition government from 2017 to 2019 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as Identitarians a safe space to regroup , rebrand , and hold events .
Burchenschaften in the German cities of Dresden and Düsseldorf recently hosted “ patriotic rap ” concerts by Identitarian member Kai Naggart , who now performs under the alias PrototypNDS .
At the University of Vienna in Austria , where one far-right Burschenschaft holds a weekly march , clashes broke out in January after the university allowed a professor with nationalist views , Lothar Höbelt , to hold a series of open lectures .
A professor of modern history , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about Holocaust denier David Irving and has a long history with the Freedom Party .
“ When [ the student union ] found out [ about his activities ] last November we began protesting his lectures , ” says one student activist , Julia Spacil .
“ Then the Identitarians [ including leader Martin Sellner ] , Burschenschaften members , and young Freedom Party members decided to ‘ defend ’ his lectures.
” Identitarians organized the action under the new name “ The Austrians.
” Spacil describes the sight of right-wing extremists lined @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hall as “ intimidating ” and says she believes the university should have intervened .
However , events such as these pose a conundrum for academic freedom .
“ I think the university is in a tough spot here .
In my opinion , he was a bad choice for a professor .
But now he is there , the university can ’ t just kick him out , ” says Weidinger .
“ Whenever conflicts like this pop up , the university seems helpless .
It says that on academic soil people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conflicts rhetorically .
That ’ s simply a naive approach to a clash between anti-fascists and right-wing extremists.
” The University of Vienna didn ’ t respond to The Nation ’ s request for comment .
Goetz says she doesn ’ t believe universities are taking enough preventive action against far-right activity .
“ My experience is they usually only react after something happens , ” she says .
“ I think they could help lecturers prepare for situations so that people know in advance what to do.
” She adds that it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how to react , because far-right groups “ thrive off the attention.
” As universities tentatively reopen following the coronavirus pandemic , there ’ s a high chance far-right groups could be looking to exploit students ’ anxieties as they face a looming recession and continued restrictions on their social lives .
At Klagenfurt , Wutti says the university reacted “ very positively ” in the aftermath of the stunt .
“ E-mails were sent to all students explaining the university did not agree with non-tolerant and non-democratic actions and that they were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ A lot of information was circulated about them and what they believe , and many guest speakers came to talk about who they were.
” Security presence was also increased and classrooms were kept locked between lectures .
However , Wutti believes that something more “ sustainable ” should be in place permanently , given that far-right groups still have a presence .
“ It could happen again , ” he concludes .
“ I think we should have permanent , ongoing courses on right-wing extremism so students know who these @ @ @ @

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
Halfway through the public lecture that Dr. Daniel Wutti had spent weeks organizing at Klagenfurt University in rural Austria in 2017, 15 male protesters burst through the doors. Some were dressed as stereotypical Muslim women in black niqabs. One man was wearing traditional Austrian lederhosen, and as the “women” unfurled large banners reading “Stop immigration” and “Integration is a lie,” they began throwing stones at him.
“It was confusing at first,” says Wutti, who had organized the lecture on integration to coincide with the launch of an “inclusion buddy” scheme for refugees in the region. “Then people in the audience started shouting, and someone tried to grab a megaphone from the ringleader.” He adds: “I think it was quite obvious what point they were trying to make.”
The stunt, which was organized by the local branch of the far-right Identitarian movement and attracted global media attention, resulted in ringleader Luca Kerbl being found guilty of assault after he punched the university headmaster while leaving the hall. Several refugee students who witnessed the stunt felt traumatized and had to seek therapy, including one from Afghanistan who said it reminded him of the Taliban’s actions at his old university.
The incident was one of the most high-profile examples of a growing issue on campuses around Europe: an increased presence of far-right groups and their activities. “There have always been far-right students at universities, but now it seems they are being emboldened,” says Judith Goetz, a political scientist who has been asked by a number of student bodies in Germany and Austria to run workshops on how to respond to the situation. “Some students, particularly left-wing ones, are very afraid. They worry what will happen if they know their addresses and personal information.” And with free speech on campus a hotly debated topic lately, handling extremism has become a tricky subject for university staff. The Rising Right The ‘Great Replacement’ Is a Genocidal Playbook John Feffer
The Identitarian movement, also known as Generation Identity, has been one of the most prominent groups on European campuses in recent years. It was originally founded in France and has groups all over the world. Members espouse the racist “great replacement” theory and its Austrian leader, Martin Sellner, is currently being investigated for links to Christchurch shooter Brenton Tarrant. Earlier this year, they were ordered by authorities to leave Greece after protesting migrant arrivals in the country.
Identitarians explicitly borrow from left-wing protest culture and cite groups such as Greenpeace as an inspiration. Goetz has recorded dozens of campus stunts by the group in Germany and Austria, ranging from sticker campaigns to aggressive actions such as the incident at Klagenfurt. Identitarians are also known to have targeted students in other countries across the continent, including pamphleteering at the University of Liverpool in the UK and the opening of a “community house” in Budapest, Hungary. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann
Recently, the group’s ability to organize has been severely curtailed thanks to the Christchurch investigation. Its social media accounts have been deleted, it is difficult for the group to accept donations, and prominent supporters have even declared the brand to be “tainted.” However, senior members are already regrouping under new names. In Austria, leaders are organizing protests and creating social media content under the name Die Österreicher (The Austrians) DO5. The group espouses the same ideology as The Identitarians, yet appears to be modelling itself on citizen-led movements, such as Fridays for Future. The rebranding offers insight into how nimbly far-right groups get around restrictions, and how they continue to co-opt features of progressive movements in order to appeal to young people. Current Issue View our current issue
The Identitarians first gained notoriety in Germany in 2017, when they opened a four-story house close to the University of Halle in the east. Members gave media interviews claiming they wanted to target the “liberal” culture of universities and hosted events featuring prominent members of the international far right.
Residents claimed to be nonviolent and intellectually superior to traditional Nazis, despite group leader Mario Müller’s having a well-documented history with NPD, the German neo-Nazi party. However, a total of 31 violent incidents linked to the house were recorded by the government-supported counseling centers for victims of right-wing violence, including an incident where Identitarians attacked two off-duty police officers with mace and batons after mistaking them for left-wing activists. They are currently awaiting trial.
According to students, the rates of low-level intimidation and provocation were even higher. “Last summer, I was getting harassed really regularly, like every fortnight,” says Katherina Hindelang, who says she became known to the Identitarians after they spotted her on a demo. “They’d shout ‘leftist bitch’ or catcall.” Other students claim members of the group have come to their homes and harassed them or left far-right stickers and flyers at their doors.
The Identitarians claimed to have left the house in December 2019 after both local activism and increased surveillance by Germany’s security services curtailed their activities, although an affiliated group, Ein Prozent, remained inside. The house appears to have been fully vacated in June 2020.
This thwarting of the far right’s attempts to create a neighborhood stronghold is solid evidence that nonviolent anti-fascist activism can work. However, the group’s prolonged presence has arguably emboldened far-right activity in the university town. Since May this year, far-right groups have been regularly taking up space in the main market square, protesting against coronavirus restrictions and disseminating other extremist propaganda.
The template for the Identitarians’ activities was developed by the Italian group CasaPound, which combines far-right ideology with far-left tactics such as squatting social centers and staging banner drops. Blocco Studentesco, its student body, was founded in 2006 and at one point gained control of the national assembly of students. “They pushed the cultural dimensions of collective action, music and graphic communication without explicitly referring to fascism,” says Emmanuele Toscano, a sociology researcher at the University of Marconi. “It allowed them to grow amongst younger groups without directly facing fascist issues.” Its official numbers have waned since its director Francesco Polacchi was charged with a number of violent attacks in 2017, but according to Italian journalist and far-right expert Paolo Berizzi’s recently published book The Education of a Fascist, a number of informally affiliated student groups are still active and campuses remain an important recruitment ground for extremists in Italy.
For as long as the far-right has existed, the recruitment of young people has been essential to its growth. From Hitler Youth to Mussolini’s Opera Nazionale Balilla, young people give early fascist movements energy and longevity. Throughout the 20th and 21st centuries, right-wing groups consistently evolved, co-opting subcultures such as punk, metal and, more recently, online cultures such as gaming in order to attract new recruits. Targeting campuses gives groups a veneer of intellectualism, helps them access those who may become future leaders in society, and also creates a recruitment funnel for mainstream right-wing parties. Universities, of course, also tend to harbor strong leftist and anti-fascist movements, so another tactic of far-right survival is to quickly and nimbly rebrand after being exposed or having their organizing curtailed.
In Austria and Germany in particular, far-right groups have a long and violent history on campuses. All-male student fraternities known as Burschenschaften, many of which were founded on nationalist principles, have been active since the 19th century. During the 1930s, some of them became an integral part of the Nazi movement, particularly in Austria, with certain members holding senior regime positions. Most dissipated after the end of the Second World War but many regrouped in the 1950s. Today, they offer cheap or free accommodation to male students and have strong links with both the Identitarians and mainstream far-right political parties.
“[Burschenshaften] consider themselves the academic backbone of the Austrian [far-right] Freedom Party,” says Bernhard Weidinger, a researcher on the far right, who explains that the party used the student groups to recruit for staff roles while part of a coalition government from 2017 to 2019.
Burchenschaften also give far-right groups such as Identitarians a safe space to regroup, rebrand, and hold events. Burchenschaften in the German cities of Dresden and Düsseldorf recently hosted “patriotic rap” concerts by Identitarian member Kai Naggart, who now performs under the alias PrototypNDS.
At the University of Vienna in Austria, where one far-right Burschenschaft holds a weekly march, clashes broke out in January after the university allowed a professor with nationalist views, Lothar Höbelt, to hold a series of open lectures. A professor of modern history, Höbelt has contributed to a commemorative book about Holocaust denier David Irving and has a long history with the Freedom Party.
“When [the student union] found out [about his activities] last November we began protesting his lectures,” says one student activist, Julia Spacil. “Then the Identitarians [including leader Martin Sellner], Burschenschaften members, and young Freedom Party members decided to ‘defend’ his lectures.” Identitarians organized the action under the new name “The Austrians.”
Spacil describes the sight of right-wing extremists lined up at the back of the lecture hall as “intimidating” and says she believes the university should have intervened. However, events such as these pose a conundrum for academic freedom. “I think the university is in a tough spot here. In my opinion, he was a bad choice for a professor. But now he is there, the university can’t just kick him out,” says Weidinger. “Whenever conflicts like this pop up, the university seems helpless. It says that on academic soil people should sit down and sort out their conflicts rhetorically. That’s simply a naive approach to a clash between anti-fascists and right-wing extremists.” The University of Vienna didn’t respond to The Nation’s request for comment.
Goetz says she doesn’t believe universities are taking enough preventive action against far-right activity. “My experience is they usually only react after something happens,” she says. “I think they could help lecturers prepare for situations so that people know in advance what to do.” She adds that it would be helpful to train lecturers on how to react, because far-right groups “thrive off the attention.” As universities tentatively reopen following the coronavirus pandemic, there’s a high chance far-right groups could be looking to exploit students’ anxieties as they face a looming recession and continued restrictions on their social lives.
At Klagenfurt, Wutti says the university reacted “very positively” in the aftermath of the stunt. “E-mails were sent to all students explaining the university did not agree with non-tolerant and non-democratic actions and that they were against the Identitarians,” he explains. “A lot of information was circulated about them and what they believe, and many guest speakers came to talk about who they were.” Security presence was also increased and classrooms were kept locked between lectures.
However, Wutti believes that something more “sustainable” should be in place permanently, given that far-right groups still have a presence. “It could happen again,” he concludes. “I think we should have permanent, ongoing courses on right-wing extremism so students know who these people are.”


Stanley Crouch, 1945–2020

Ever since the impassioned music critic and combative cultural gadfly Stanley Crouch booked passage with the ancestors on September 16 after 74 years on this earth , there has been a steady rolling wave of deep sadness , much of it coming from people with whom he pointedly , sometimes violently , disagreed .
There are a few disgruntled holdouts to the mourning .
But their grievances needn ’ t be catalogued here , largely because the disputes were often about the same thing : his stringent , fiercely patrolled standards for African American music , deportment , and collective @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was fashionably edgy or doctrinaire at a given moment .
Among his perpetual antagonists : avant-garde jazz musicians , in whose company Crouch once counted himself until he became a committed apostate to their cause ; hip-hop artists , especially those engaged in the “ gangsta-rap ” subgenre ; and Black nationalists whose cultural and political provocations he believed to have undermined the humanist values of the civil rights movement .
His truculent attacks on these groups in particular led to counterattacks : that Crouch was pandering to neoconservatives and even white supremacists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( or wasn ’ t ) , you couldn ’ t call him doctrinaire on anything , political , cultural or otherwise .
After the non-guilty verdict in the 1994 O.J .
Simpson murder trial , for instance , Crouch was notable among those African American pundits extolling the masterly legal jiujitsu performed by Simpson ’ s lead lawyer , Johnnie Cochran , over what Crouch and others saw as the overmatched prosecutors Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden .
Conservatives , neo- and otherwise , likely preferred he take out his wrath on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
As the title of his 2005 essay collection , The Artificial White Man , suggested , Crouch also took issue with white writers ’ grasping for what they took as the “ authenticity ” of African American culture as they found it in Black stars in sports and pop music .
One ’ s imagination tingles at the impossible-to-ever-be-fulfilled prospect of Crouch taking on fellow pugilist-author Norman Mailer in a live debate over the latter ’ s 1959 essay , “ The White Negro , ” which both celebrates and diminishes the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stature of hipster outlaw .
A dabbler in alternate history would have endless fun wondering how long the two of them would have shouted back and forth at each other on Manhattan ’ s Town Hall stage before one or both of them threw an uppercut .
As much as I found Crouch ’ s grandstanding over-the-top , I also understood it to be a necessary evil in late-20th century New York City ’ s cultural precincts to shout and declaim as loud and proud in your antagonists ’ direction to get the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And if people were paying close attention , they would find Crouch to be among the most eloquent and steadfast defenders of what was once known as the social contract .
Much like one of his literary idols , Saul Bellow , Crouch embraced the necessary complications of personality over the reductive demarcations of identity .
The jazz music Crouch loved and promoted throughout his life celebrated an ongoing process of self-realization , collective and personal , and his own personality , with all its harsh contours and urbane graces , challenged superficial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ why even many of those who at times wanted to throttle Crouch have been saying how much they will miss him now that he ’ s gone .

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
Ever since the impassioned music critic and combative cultural gadfly Stanley Crouch booked passage with the ancestors on September 16 after 74 years on this earth, there has been a steady rolling wave of deep sadness, much of it coming from people with whom he pointedly, sometimes violently, disagreed. There are a few disgruntled holdouts to the mourning. But their grievances needn’t be catalogued here, largely because the disputes were often about the same thing: his stringent, fiercely patrolled standards for African American music, deportment, and collective action, in perpetual conflict with whatever was fashionably edgy or doctrinaire at a given moment.
Among his perpetual antagonists: avant-garde jazz musicians, in whose company Crouch once counted himself until he became a committed apostate to their cause; hip-hop artists, especially those engaged in the “gangsta-rap” subgenre; and Black nationalists whose cultural and political provocations he believed to have undermined the humanist values of the civil rights movement. His truculent attacks on these groups in particular led to counterattacks: that Crouch was pandering to neoconservatives and even white supremacists. But whatever else Stanley Crouch was (or wasn’t), you couldn’t call him doctrinaire on anything, political, cultural or otherwise. Related Article Crouching Tiger Gene Seymour
After the non-guilty verdict in the 1994 O.J. Simpson murder trial, for instance, Crouch was notable among those African American pundits extolling the masterly legal jiujitsu performed by Simpson’s lead lawyer, Johnnie Cochran, over what Crouch and others saw as the overmatched prosecutors Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden. Conservatives, neo- and otherwise, likely preferred he take out his wrath on the Black jurors voting to exonerate Simpson. As the title of his 2005 essay collection, The Artificial White Man, suggested, Crouch also took issue with white writers’ grasping for what they took as the “authenticity” of African American culture as they found it in Black stars in sports and pop music. One’s imagination tingles at the impossible-to-ever-be-fulfilled prospect of Crouch taking on fellow pugilist-author Norman Mailer in a live debate over the latter’s 1959 essay, “The White Negro,” which both celebrates and diminishes the Black man by assigning him/us the archetypical stature of hipster outlaw. A dabbler in alternate history would have endless fun wondering how long the two of them would have shouted back and forth at each other on Manhattan’s Town Hall stage before one or both of them threw an uppercut.
As much as I found Crouch’s grandstanding over-the-top, I also understood it to be a necessary evil in late-20th century New York City’s cultural precincts to shout and declaim as loud and proud in your antagonists’ direction to get the rest of society’s attention. And if people were paying close attention, they would find Crouch to be among the most eloquent and steadfast defenders of what was once known as the social contract. Much like one of his literary idols, Saul Bellow, Crouch embraced the necessary complications of personality over the reductive demarcations of identity. The jazz music Crouch loved and promoted throughout his life celebrated an ongoing process of self-realization, collective and personal, and his own personality, with all its harsh contours and urbane graces, challenged superficial judgment and easy conclusions. Which is why even many of those who at times wanted to throttle Crouch have been saying how much they will miss him now that he’s gone.


thenation--2020-10-12--President Quack Is Ready to Hawk His Magic Elixir

The best thing a snake oil salesman can have going for him is a personal story , especially one he himself believes .
If you can tell with conviction a tale about how you were stricken by a near-fatal disease—and then miraculously cured—a whole world of possibilities opens up for winning over the gullible .
Donald Trump has long been a con man , with his entire business career built on shady enterprises , hype , and impossible-to-deliver promises .
When he shifted to politics , he continued being a fraudster , winning support by lies like birtherism and fantasies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pay for .
In February 2016 , Marco Rubio denounced Trump as a “ con artist.
” But it ’ s a measure of Trump ’ s success that Rubio , like most other Republican luminaries , soon ended up endorsing Trump .
The ultimate triumph of a mountebank is getting the support of people who know they are being swindled .
Thanks to his recent struggles with Covid-19 , Trump can now turn his con game into a personal narrative that goes beyond the fictional financial success he has touted in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recovery with the help of an experimental antibody cocktail developed by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals , Trump can sell a personal story that touches even closer to the heart : a narrative of triumphing over death itself .
On Saturday , White House physician Dr. Sean Conley released an optimistic but hedged memo saying Trump had been “ fever-free for well over 24 hours and all symptoms improved ” and could now end isolation .
The statement did not , however , say Trump had received a negative test for Covid-19 .
Nor has the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last negative test was .
Pence Looks Normal Only in Comparison to Trump This Is Your President on Drugs Playing off Dr. Conley ’ s taciturn and ambiguous statement , Trump has been arguing that he ’ s near a full recovery .
On Sunday , he phoned Fox News and said , “ It seems like I ’ m immune.
” Taking a swipe at Joe Biden , Trump added , “ So I can go way out of a basement—which I would have done anyway and which I did because you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have to get out of the basement—and it looks like I ’ m immune for , I don ’ t know , maybe a long time , maybe a short time.
” Trump claimed he had a “ protective glow.
” In the same call , Trump implied that Biden is sick with Covid-19 .
“ If you look at Joe , he was coughing yesterday horribly and grabbing his mask , as he ’ s coughing , ” Trump asserted .
“ And I don ’ t know what that was all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get much press.
” Later that day , Trump tweeted , “ A total and complete sign off from White House Doctors yesterday .
That means I can ’ t get it ( immune ) , and can ’ t give it .
Very nice to know !
!
!
” Twitter flagged the tweet for violating its rules against spreading misinformation about Covid-19 .
The simple fact is , even someone who has recovered from Covid-19 can ’ t claim to be immune , since we don ’ t know yet how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s no reason to think Trump has recovered .
On Sunday morning , Eric Trump went on ABC ’ s This Week and claimed that his father was cured by “ vaccines ” he had helped create .
“ It goes to speak how good some of these vaccines that are being created are and what my father ’ s done on the vaccine front no one could have done , ” the presidential offspring said .
“ My father literally started day one creating this vaccine , he worked to push @ @ @ @ @ @ @ took it and you see how well he got over it.
” Needless to say , Eric Trump is talking nonsense .
The elder Trump was never given a vaccine .
He received treatment with therapeutic medicines , which , although they seem to have helped to alleviate his condition , are not cures .
Significantly , Leonard Schleifer , the CEO of Regeneron Pharmaceuticals , threw cold water on such hype about the experimental cocktail his firm developed .
“ The president ’ s case is a case of one , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case report , ” Schleifer told CBS News .
“ And it is evidence of what ’ s happening , but it ’ s kind of the weakest evidence that you can get.
” Schleifer ’ s caution is salutary , but , as Eric Trump ’ s words indicate , is unlikely to be heeded by the Trump campaign .
With a little over three weeks left in the election , Trump needs a miracle to help close the polling gap with Biden .
A heartfelt personal story about being saved from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ final push .
As Axios reports , “ President Trump has asked his campaign to put him on the road every single day from now until Nov. 3.… His team is in the process of scheduling events to make that happen , two sources familiar with the discussions tell Axios .
But not everyone thinks this is a good idea .
One adviser said , ‘ He ’ s going to kill himself.
’ ” A sick and still recovering president killing himself campaigning would be a national tragedy , but it pales @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he can kill with his antics .
If Trump and surrogates like son Eric push a narrative of a miraculous recovery through the experimental cocktail ( or fictitious “ vaccines ” ) , the consequences could be dire .
Millions of Trump followers would be emboldened to ignore social distancing and masking rules because they ’ ll have false confidence in a nonexistent cure .
At a rally in Panama Beach , Fla. , a Trump supporter named Diane Vitale told the AP she ’ s not worried about Trump : “ He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beyond human.
” She added , “ COVID will disappear on Nov. 4 .
It ’ ll be gone .
You see me ?
I ’ m 74 years old .
I ’ m not wearing a mask .
I don ’ t believe in any of that .
”

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
The best thing a snake oil salesman can have going for him is a personal story, especially one he himself believes. If you can tell with conviction a tale about how you were stricken by a near-fatal disease—and then miraculously cured—a whole world of possibilities opens up for winning over the gullible.
Donald Trump has long been a con man, with his entire business career built on shady enterprises, hype, and impossible-to-deliver promises. When he shifted to politics, he continued being a fraudster, winning support by lies like birtherism and fantasies like the border wall that Mexico would pay for. In February 2016, Marco Rubio denounced Trump as a “con artist.” But it’s a measure of Trump’s success that Rubio, like most other Republican luminaries, soon ended up endorsing Trump. The ultimate triumph of a mountebank is getting the support of people who know they are being swindled.
Thanks to his recent struggles with Covid-19, Trump can now turn his con game into a personal narrative that goes beyond the fictional financial success he has touted in the past. Seemingly on the path of recovery with the help of an experimental antibody cocktail developed by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Trump can sell a personal story that touches even closer to the heart: a narrative of triumphing over death itself.
On Saturday, White House physician Dr. Sean Conley released an optimistic but hedged memo saying Trump had been “fever-free for well over 24 hours and all symptoms improved” and could now end isolation. The statement did not, however, say Trump had received a negative test for Covid-19. Nor has the public been told when Trump’s last negative test was. More From Jeet Heer The Indigenous Roots of Robbie Robertson’s Rock and Roll Revolution August 14, 2023 Why Does This Racist Keep Getting Silicon Valley Money? August 11, 2023 When Phallocrats Go Limp August 4, 2023
Playing off Dr. Conley’s taciturn and ambiguous statement, Trump has been arguing that he’s near a full recovery. On Sunday, he phoned Fox News and said, “It seems like I’m immune.” Taking a swipe at Joe Biden, Trump added, “So I can go way out of a basement—which I would have done anyway and which I did because you have to run a country, you have to get out of the basement—and it looks like I’m immune for, I don’t know, maybe a long time, maybe a short time.” Trump claimed he had a “protective glow.”
In the same call, Trump implied that Biden is sick with Covid-19. “If you look at Joe, he was coughing yesterday horribly and grabbing his mask, as he’s coughing,” Trump asserted. “And I don’t know what that was all about, and it didn’t get much press.” Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann
Later that day, Trump tweeted, “A total and complete sign off from White House Doctors yesterday. That means I can’t get it (immune), and can’t give it. Very nice to know!!!” Twitter flagged the tweet for violating its rules against spreading misinformation about Covid-19. The simple fact is, even someone who has recovered from Covid-19 can’t claim to be immune, since we don’t know yet how long immunity lasts. Further, there’s no reason to think Trump has recovered. Current Issue View our current issue
On Sunday morning, Eric Trump went on ABC’s This Week and claimed that his father was cured by “vaccines” he had helped create. “It goes to speak how good some of these vaccines that are being created are and what my father’s done on the vaccine front no one could have done,” the presidential offspring said. “My father literally started day one creating this vaccine, he worked to push this vaccine and now my father just took it and you see how well he got over it.”
Needless to say, Eric Trump is talking nonsense. The elder Trump was never given a vaccine. He received treatment with therapeutic medicines, which, although they seem to have helped to alleviate his condition, are not cures.
Significantly, Leonard Schleifer, the CEO of Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, threw cold water on such hype about the experimental cocktail his firm developed. “The president’s case is a case of one, and that’s what we call a case report,” Schleifer told CBS News. “And it is evidence of what’s happening, but it’s kind of the weakest evidence that you can get.”
Schleifer’s caution is salutary, but, as Eric Trump’s words indicate, is unlikely to be heeded by the Trump campaign. With a little over three weeks left in the election, Trump needs a miracle to help close the polling gap with Biden. A heartfelt personal story about being saved from death is perfect for Trump’s final push.
As Axios reports, “President Trump has asked his campaign to put him on the road every single day from now until Nov. 3.… His team is in the process of scheduling events to make that happen, two sources familiar with the discussions tell Axios. But not everyone thinks this is a good idea. One adviser said, ‘He’s going to kill himself.’”
A sick and still recovering president killing himself campaigning would be a national tragedy, but it pales in comparison to the many more people he can kill with his antics. If Trump and surrogates like son Eric push a narrative of a miraculous recovery through the experimental cocktail (or fictitious “vaccines”), the consequences could be dire. Millions of Trump followers would be emboldened to ignore social distancing and masking rules because they’ll have false confidence in a nonexistent cure.
At a rally in Panama Beach, Fla., a Trump supporter named Diane Vitale told the AP she’s not worried about Trump: “He’s strong. He’s beyond human.” She added, “COVID will disappear on Nov. 4. It’ll be gone. You see me? I’m 74 years old. I’m not wearing a mask. I don’t believe in any of that.”


thenation--2020-10-12--Lindsey Graham’s Desperation Is Getting Deadly

When Senate Judiciary Chair Lindsey Graham refused to take a Covid test last week , before a scheduled debate with surging Democratic challenger Jaime Harrison , his motives were obvious .
The health of his Senate colleagues be damned : Graham wasn ’ t willing to risk a positive test that could delay Amy Coney Barrett ’ s Supreme Court confirmation , which begins Monday .
Sunday came word that Harrison raised a record-breaking $ 57 million in the third quarter .
Since Graham has twice gone on Fox News and cried about his trouble fundraising—he raised only $ 8.4 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 15 million on hand as of June 30—this is terrible news .
Meanwhile , Harrison is clobbering him when it comes to spending , according to Politico , having spent $ 52 million on TV and digital advertising this year versus $ 19 million for Graham—and from here to Election Day , Harrison has reserved more than $ 16 million , Graham $ 4.8 million .
Shockingly , the race has been statistically tied since August , and reputable polling sites consider it a toss-up .
Which raises two questions : Is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can ’ t be elected to the US Senate from South Carolina , and/or confident in a last-minute cash infusion from party leaders and his corporate backers , that he can afford to crater in fundraising and stay in Washington , D.C. , until barely a week before Election Day ?
Or is Graham , exhausted by what it takes to sell his soul , almost daily , to a man he once mocked as a “ kook , ” “ crazy ” and “ unfit for office , ” finally giving up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shot at a conservative legacy ?
I ’ m at least beginning to wonder if it ’ s the latter .
Republicans have South Carolina wired , so it ’ s too soon to declare Graham dead politically—though not spiritually .
Of course , Graham is risking not just his own health ( and political career ) but also that of his Senate colleagues—including Republicans—and staffers .
Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell , who recently boasted that he hadn ’ t visited the White House since August because he was dismayed by its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all Judiciary Committee members to get tested—Republicans Thom Tillis and Mike Lee have already tested positive—but , of course , he hasn ’ t .
On Sunday , a clip resurfaced of McConnell on Fox News , cackling like a caricature of Satan about his role in blocking so many of Barack Obama ’ s court nominees ; he wants this confirmation as much as Graham .
The Kentucky senator is unlikely to lose his race for reelection , but let ’ s hope he loses his position as Senate majority leader , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this debacle .
GOP Judiciary Committee member Joni Ernst , who is trailing in her Iowa reelection race , said over the weekend that she believed all members should be tested before hearings begin .
Ernst could jeopardize the committee ’ s vote on Barrett if she boycotted the hearings to back up her very appropriate demand .
But the motorcycle-riding Iowa farmer who once boasted of castrating hogs won ’ t stand up to her leadership , apparently , even if she loses her Senate seat .
Meanwhile , media bigwigs continue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ refusal to answer questions about whether he ’ s willing to expand the Supreme Court—what journalists and Republicans call “ court packing ” —until after the election .
“ The only court packing going on right now is going on with Republicans , ” Biden told reporters on Saturday .
Biden doesn ’ t need to answer a hypothetical , when the answer depends on so many variables , including the Democrats ’ ability to take the Senate .
So it looks like the confirmation hearings will begin as planned .
But I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as predicted .
Barrett currently has the votes to be confirmed , on the committee and on the Senate floor .
Still , if Senate GOP leaders ’ risking public health ( oh , and their own integrity , having denied Obama nominee Merrick Garland a hearing in 2016 ) shifts public opinion—or if , God forbid , Barrett ’ s nomination occasions yet another GOP elite super-spreader event—you might see some Senate Republicans , especially vulnerable incumbents , find their long-lost spines .
I ’ m not counting on it , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , either .

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
When Senate Judiciary Chair Lindsey Graham refused to take a Covid test last week, before a scheduled debate with surging Democratic challenger Jaime Harrison, his motives were obvious. The health of his Senate colleagues be damned: Graham wasn’t willing to risk a positive test that could delay Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court confirmation, which begins Monday.
Sunday came word that Harrison raised a record-breaking $57 million in the third quarter. Since Graham has twice gone on Fox News and cried about his trouble fundraising—he raised only $8.4 million in the second quarter and had $15 million on hand as of June 30—this is terrible news. Meanwhile, Harrison is clobbering him when it comes to spending, according to Politico, having spent $52 million on TV and digital advertising this year versus $19 million for Graham—and from here to Election Day, Harrison has reserved more than $16 million, Graham $4.8 million. Shockingly, the race has been statistically tied since August, and reputable polling sites consider it a toss-up.
Which raises two questions: Is Graham just so sure a Black Democrat can’t be elected to the US Senate from South Carolina, and/or confident in a last-minute cash infusion from party leaders and his corporate backers, that he can afford to crater in fundraising and stay in Washington, D.C., until barely a week before Election Day? Or is Graham, exhausted by what it takes to sell his soul, almost daily, to a man he once mocked as a “kook,” “crazy” and “unfit for office,” finally giving up, and claiming Barrett as his final shot at a conservative legacy?
I’m at least beginning to wonder if it’s the latter. Republicans have South Carolina wired, so it’s too soon to declare Graham dead politically—though not spiritually.
Of course, Graham is risking not just his own health (and political career) but also that of his Senate colleagues—including Republicans—and staffers. Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell, who recently boasted that he hadn’t visited the White House since August because he was dismayed by its cavalier attitude toward Covid, could require all Judiciary Committee members to get tested—Republicans Thom Tillis and Mike Lee have already tested positive—but, of course, he hasn’t. On Sunday, a clip resurfaced of McConnell on Fox News, cackling like a caricature of Satan about his role in blocking so many of Barack Obama’s court nominees; he wants this confirmation as much as Graham. The Kentucky senator is unlikely to lose his race for reelection, but let’s hope he loses his position as Senate majority leader, in part because of his handling of this debacle.
GOP Judiciary Committee member Joni Ernst, who is trailing in her Iowa reelection race, said over the weekend that she believed all members should be tested before hearings begin. Ernst could jeopardize the committee’s vote on Barrett if she boycotted the hearings to back up her very appropriate demand. But the motorcycle-riding Iowa farmer who once boasted of castrating hogs won’t stand up to her leadership, apparently, even if she loses her Senate seat.
Meanwhile, media bigwigs continue to harp on Joe Biden’s refusal to answer questions about whether he’s willing to expand the Supreme Court—what journalists and Republicans call “court packing”—until after the election. “The only court packing going on right now is going on with Republicans,” Biden told reporters on Saturday. Biden doesn’t need to answer a hypothetical, when the answer depends on so many variables, including the Democrats’ ability to take the Senate.
So it looks like the confirmation hearings will begin as planned. But I wouldn’t count on them ending as predicted. Barrett currently has the votes to be confirmed, on the committee and on the Senate floor. Still, if Senate GOP leaders’ risking public health (oh, and their own integrity, having denied Obama nominee Merrick Garland a hearing in 2016) shifts public opinion—or if, God forbid, Barrett’s nomination occasions yet another GOP elite super-spreader event—you might see some Senate Republicans, especially vulnerable incumbents, find their long-lost spines. I’m not counting on it, but I’m not ruling it out, either.