With that return in mind, Flake envisions a less populist and blustering and bigoted party, which would offer Ã¢Â€Âœthe simple, strong ideas of limited government and economic freedom.Ã¢Â€Â His imagined G.O.P. would no longer need to Ã¢Â€Âœascribe the absolute worst motivesÃ¢Â€Â to liberals, Ã¢Â€Âœtraffic in outlandish conspiracy theories,Ã¢Â€Â or otherwise engage in the kind of demagogy that informs, well, Dinesh DÃ¢Â€Â™SouzaÃ¢Â€Â™s recent work.
DÃ¢Â€Â™SouzaÃ¢Â€Â™s latest plea-for-attention title isnÃ¢Â€Â™t false advertising: His book really does attempt to pin just about every crime in our nationÃ¢Â€Â™s history, plus certain famous German crimes as well, on the left and Democrats (categories used interchangeably and ahistorically throughout).
Because DÃ¢Â€Â™Souza has a debaterÃ¢Â€Â™s gifts, his wild argument is piled atop a legitimate foundation. The historical relationship between progressive politics and various evils Ã¢Â€Â” racism, anti-Semitism, imperialism, eugenics, authoritarianism Ã¢Â€Â” that liberals prefer to pin exclusively on the right is complicated and sometimes damning, and that ideological history shapes progressivism still.
But because DÃ¢Â€Â™Souza has become a hack, even his best material basically just rehashes Jonah GoldbergÃ¢Â€Â™s Ã¢Â€ÂœLiberal FascismÃ¢Â€Â from 10 years ago, and because DÃ¢Â€Â™Souza has become a professional deceiver, what he adds are extraordinary elisions, sweeping calumnies and laughable leaps.
To pick just one example: It would be nonsense at any juncture to argue that because famed Indian-fighter Andrew Jackson was a Democrat and the Nazis admired the expulsion of the Indians, contemporary Democrats are basically Nazis. To make the argument during a Republican presidency that has explicitly laid claim to Andrew Jackson even as Democrats disavow Old Hickory is so bizarre that the term Ã¢Â€Âœbig lieÃ¢Â€Â might be usefully applied.
So DÃ¢Â€Â™SouzaÃ¢Â€Â™s book embodies the outrageous right-wing style that FlakeÃ¢Â€Â™s book condemns. Which makes it all the more striking when DÃ¢Â€Â™Souza, the Trump-defending huckster, comes around to many of the same economic policy prescriptions as Flake, the Trump-abjuring would-be statesman. Whether in the name of honorable libertarianism or frenzied, Ã¢Â€ÂœIÃ¢Â€Â™m not saying theyÃ¢Â€Â™re Nazis, but theyÃ¢Â€Â™re NazisÃ¢Â€Â anti-liberalism, the senator and the demagogue both think that conservatives need to Ã¢Â€Â¦ cut social programs in order to cut taxes on the rich.
That striking agreement distills conservatismÃ¢Â€Â™s crisis. As FlakeÃ¢Â€Â™s sharpest critics on the right have pointed out, a simple Ã¢Â€Âœcut the safety net to pay for upper-bracket tax cutsÃ¢Â€Â agenda is both wildly unpopular and a non-response to our present socioeconomic problems.
Indeed, its unpopularity and anachronism is precisely the reason that Trump, with his Jacksonian populism, was able to defeat so many of FlakeÃ¢Â€Â™s fellow Republicans on his way to the G.O.P. nomination Ã¢Â€Â” because he alone was not bound by right-wing ideological correctness. But now, as a weak and corrupt and unpopular president, those constraints have come to imprison him as well.
So long as they are not broken, the G.O.P. has two options. It can follow FlakeÃ¢Â€Â™s lead and be a high-minded party of small-government principle, disavowing bigotry and paranoia Ã¢Â€Â” and it will lose elections, because purist libertarianism plus supply-side economics is not a winner in the current crisis.
Or it can follow DÃ¢Â€Â™SouzaÃ¢Â€Â™s lead (and TrumpÃ¢Â€Â™s, now that his populist agenda seems all-but-dead) and wrap unpopular economic policies in wild attacks on liberalism. With this combination, the Republican Party can win elections, at least for now Ã¢Â€Â” not because most Americans can be persuaded that liberals are literally Nazis, but because liberalismÃ¢Â€Â™s intolerant and utopian tendencies make people fear the prospect of granting progressives political power to match their cultural hegemony.
Winning this way is a purely negative achievement for the right, a recipe for failed governance extending years ahead.
But for Republicans to escape this future, they need their leaders and activists and donors to have an intellectual epiphany, and to realize that the way up from Trumpism requires rethinking the policies where Jeff Flake and Dinesh DÃ¢Â€Â™Souza find a strange sort of common ground.