Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
To the extent that it exists, where is the best place to get an intellectual/highbrow MAGA perspective that isn't merely anti-anti-Trump? The American Affairs publication, N.S. Lyons' substack, as well as Scott Greer and gummibear737's Twitter account, look to be good places to start. Michael Pettis is a name I frequently hear from people engaging in trade war apologetics. Any other person/publication worth checking out?
I consider myself a moderate country-club Republican sympathetic to Doug Burgum and Jeb Bush who wants the war on fracking to cease, though more of a reliable "hold my nose for Trump" type at that than a Lincoln Project/Bulwarker that isn't meaningfully conservative and is gung-ho on reflexively swallowing progressive tropes and validating the most extreme elements of the other side of the aisle. Being temporarily based in a blue-collar European town and seeing people cursorily reading the headlines of state-owned media while being unable to criticize Trump on his merits has made me inadvertently more sympathetic to him, with me making post-hoc rationalizations of untenable policies as they keep gish-galloping and I don't want to give them credit where it happens to stick.
I have seen MAGA defined by putting Trump over the party; if that’s accurate, you’ll have a hard time finding Trump-agnostic MAGA Republicans. I think that definition is probably a little uncharitable, and there is some constituency who have picked up the slogan without any strong feelings about the man.
The principled MAGA perspective derives from national self-interest. Defense, trade, foreign aid: Americans as a people are selling ourselves too cheap, and should act as a people to get a better deal.
For obvious reasons, this will not be very appealing to random Europeans.
More options
Context Copy link
Mystery Grove's substack, IM-1776, Shakes' post history.
Hmm, my impression of the former two is that they latched on to the MAGA/America First brand while superimposing their esoteric philosophical framework that Trump himself and most of MAGA have no appetite for. @Shakes do you happen to have any recommendations to add?
Mystery Grove was the first name that came to my head too tbh. IM1776 is also good. Justin Lee at First Things. (Not to be confused with Justin Lee the gay activist.) Frontier Magazine. The American Mind?
What I would argue contra your perception is that MAGA is like the Bible, it speaks to both the high and the low. There's a version with ornamented deep explications and theory and there's a simpler hellfire and brimstone that speaks to the base. And actually, in a way, the simpler version is more important and it's often the intellectuals who don't understand because the beautiful elaborations are actually less powerful than the simple truth. As implausible as it sounds to many, I really think Trump is speaking at a deeper register of truth when he talks about hating communism than when the intellectuals dress it up with all sorts of abstractions and theory.
But if you want the elaborations, let's see.... A lot of the best stuff remains on twitter, you kind of have to just follow a few accounts and see how they play with and argue with the same ideas over time. Off the top of my head I would put a word in for Malmesbury Man, Covfefe Anon, Ben Braddock (of IM-1776), Bronze Age Pervert (yes, unironically), Jeff Clark, Jeremy Carl, Lomez... I don't know I could recommend all sorts of others but I don't think a normal man can really take too much of this stuff without starting to roll his eyes. For instance I like an account by the name of Kaiser Lohengramm (after a character from a TV Show called Legend of the Galactic Heroes) who writes decent longform but even I can only take so much of the character schtick before I start to tire.
I can console myself that a lot of the Founders wrote their best works anonymously as well and I don't think there's any shame in admitting that's the form we're still stuck with.
I do think a lot of the best content on Trump remains locked up in this form. I think there's a lack of "serious" writing about Trump. I've thought about addressing it myself, but I think there are too many people writing slop about Trump already to throw my hat in the ring. Maybe I could be cajoled into it. But if you're willing to tolerate this anonworld contentslop, the best actually comes from an obscure forum now locked behind a $20 paywall called "My Posting Career". Oldheads remember.
If you want more serious writers, let's see... Michael Anton is good, Victor Davis Hanson is a serious historian, Newt Gingrich has some decent content on Trump actually. (His best stuff is when he's been interviewed in his capacity as a historian about Trump, his books fall somewhat in the political memoir camp genre.)
There's another part of me that just wants to say actually watch Trump speeches and Trump interviews instead of the headlines and the press. Trump is much smarter than people give him credit for and I believe he's outperformed all his detractors and critics and everyone who imagines that they've conceived of a better way. I feel the same way about Steven Miller, who is usually coaching his arguments in terms that sound extremely partisan as red meat for the base -- but he's at least intelligent and you may as well drink from the firehose instead of reaching for the diet coke. But then sometimes I think that precisely because they're speaking at that register that their arguments and ideas bounce off most of the smart set and intellectually-minded as something less than they really are.
Thank you for such a thoughtful response!
I am familiar with Anton and Davis Hanson. Unfortunately I cannot say I'm particularly impressed with the two; Anton's Flight 93 essay sounded like a histrionic rhetorical piece, he called Taiwan a "Cold War relic" that is not in America's interest to defend while ignoring entirely the TSMC and Taiwan being a test case for America's deterrence and maritime capability, and he didn't sound particularly knowledgeable in his interview with Eli Lake. Hanson was a serious historian in the 80s and 90s, but shifted to full-time punditry around the 00s, which is why his field has seemingly moved past him.
Will take a look at the other people you mention.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Claremont Review of Books
Eh, their caliber has decayed since 2016. Haven't been too impressed with many of their recent essays that have leaned heavily on strawmen and woke-right sophistry.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link