Stump for Trump

It seems I forgot to post this Amazon review…

Phyllis Schlafly, the unofficial doyenne of the US conservative movement, passed away the day before this book was published. In it, Schlafly and her co-authors Ed Martin and Brett Decker stumps for Donald Trump, the controversial Republican nominee. But then, Schlafly was never a stranger to controversy herself! At least according to political legend, she was behind both the Goldwater campaign and the defeat of the ERA (for which feminists and other liberals still hate her). During the GOP primaries, Schlafly´s organization, the Eagle Forum, split due to the leader´s support for Trump. A dissident faction wanted to support Ted Cruz instead.

“The Conservative Case for Trump” is a somewhat peculiar book. For starters, Donald Trump himself is a de facto co-author, since half of the book contains speeches by Trump or interviews with him. Second, Schlafly never really argues her case, except in passing. Rather, the book simply repeats Trump´s talking points, sometimes verbatim. It´s as if The Donald himself was speaking. I had expected a more sustained, ideological argument for why traditional conservatives, despite obvious differences with Trump, should vote for him anyway. I was only half-joking when I called Trump “a liberal Democrat who sounds like Pat Buchanan” in another review…

In order to adapt to Trump´s program, Schlafly takes several unexpected positions. Perhaps she always had these positions. However, they do sound unusual for an American conservative. Schlafly expresses support for Social Security, but perhaps it´s easier for a conservative to support a system based on payroll taxes than “pure” welfare where the recipients haven´t paid anything in advance. Even so, Social Security is an enormous federal program. Schlafly also supports Trump´s economic protectionism, while simultaneously calling for more free market solutions and less regulations domestically. This is a contradiction I´ve seen before among some US conservatives. Another contradiction, found in both Trump and Schlafly, concerns foreign policy. Despite constant calls to put “America First”, neither sounds truly isolationist. ISIS, Al-Qaeda and other terrorist networks can only be smashed by global engagement and alliance-making. The calls to put pressure on China don´t sound particularly isolationist either.

One difference between Schlafly and Trump is that the latter consciously avoids “culture war” issues, while Schlafly doesn´t entirely do so. However, even she plays down the “culture war” (at least compared to how virtually all conservative factions have sounded hitherto) to the point of reprinting Trump speeches in which the Republican nominee calls for LGBT rights! While I don´t think anyone can confuse the Eagle Forum with the gay movement, it *does* look a bit weird... Another difference is that Schlafly wants confrontation with Russia as well as China, but this could be taken from Trump´s own book “Crippled America”. In his speeches (including one reprinted in this volume), Trump rather calls for a thaw in Western-Russian relations.

Incidentally, this isn´t intended as “criticism” of Schlafly´s book (although I´m closer to Lincoln, FDR and ERA than the Eagle Forum), but as an honest assessment. I was intrigued by this work! I admit that it´s better written than Trump´s semi-official campaign book “Crippled America” (now rebranded “Great Again”).

The major similarity between Trump and Schlafly is the immigration issue, which is argued in some detail in the book. It´s interesting to note that Schlafly references Pat Buchanan, interesting since Paleo-Pat´s populist-isolationist-protectionist brand of conservatism is somewhat closer to Trump´s moonshine version than to mainstream US free market/minimal government conservatism. I also noted that Schlafly constantly compares Trump to Ronald Reagan, something Trump is occasionally doing himself, although he mostly leaves the comparisons to his admirers. I understand that Reagan´s name still has powerful symbolic resonance on the American right. This is somewhat ironic, given that the Reagan years led to huge deficits, more big government and the arming of one Osama bin-Laden. Schlafly is appealing to the Reagan myth rather than the reality.

I have noted that Phyllis Schlafly and her organization have inserted themselves into the political plot. It was the Eagle Forum which aided Trump in finding and assessing Supreme Court nominees. Schlafly introduced Trump at a rally in her home state of Missouri, and the Republican nominee was at her funeral. This may or may not explain the true believer “Trumpista” character of “The Conservative Case for Trump”.

Ultimately, I believe Schlafly and her co-authors boarded the Trump Train for two reasons. First, Trump´s opposition to immigration and globalism makes him closer to the Old Right than any other established candidate for decades, despite his views on other issues. Second, Hillary Clinton represents the last push of the “liberal” elites to completely transform the United States in their likeness, through mass immigration, executive orders and SCOTUS activism. (Interestingly, Schlafly opposes a constitutional convention, fearing it will be dominated by the liberal Democrats!) The GOP establishment´s surrender to Clinton makes Trump the only possible choice for those who want to turn the tide.

With that, I end my review of Phyllis Schlafly´s case for Donald Trump.