September 10, 2015

Rockwell: “Trump Will Be President”

By In Blogs, C.Jay Engel

Lew Rockwell writes:

Says one of my respected political sages. “Of course, Trump will win the nomination. That has been clear for some time.But now I am saying he will be the next president. Hillary will be knocked out, and Biden will be the Democratic nominee. And does he have skeletons!”

If you are right, and you are seldom wrong, what does that mean for the rest of us?

“Though he will lift some of the regulatory burdens on business, and cut some business taxes (while raising them on businesses he doesn’t like), he will be very bad for the cause of freedom and the free market. The US will become more protectionist and mercantilist. It’s hard to believe that the police state could get worse, but it can and will.

“There is only one unalloyed happy note. Trump will rein in the empire. Even the power elite realize the empire has gotten out of hand. Under Trump, who is, after all, not  a neocon, there will be fewer wars, maybe no US wars. Call his governing philosophy ‘antiwar fascism’.”

I was completely anticipating the opposite; that the GOP establishment would aid in Trump’s crash and burn.  But I’m no political forecasting expert like Rockwell and his connections.  I defer to his authority, though I remain skeptical for the time being.

But the ending there was interesting: “Even the power elite realize the empire has gotten out of hand.”

Bionic Mosquito wrote last year that in his estimation the Establishment needs a peace candidate in the next election to rein things in a bit:

Another clue will be offered by the next US presidential election; will a war hawk be chosen (there are many candidates) after the relative respite of Obama, or will it be one with a slightly more passive, yet acceptable tone?

I suggest it will be the latter.

The recognition of overextension is becoming increasingly obvious by the Power Elite. It’s difficult to control a rogue foreign policy like the United States’.  BM considered years ago that possibly Rand Paul would be the choice, that he was being groomed– hence the Romney endorsement, hence the Time Magazine cover, among other things. Robert Wenzel at one point asked “Who’s Running Rand?”  Now Rand has completely crashed in the polls.

But could Trump perhaps fulfill the same potential role?

Another thought is that Donald Trump is sort of the perfect character to pull things back from the Establishment’s perspective.  See, if things fell apart with Rand in the White House, they could say: “see what libertarianism hath wrought?”  But with Donald, they can say: “see what a Capitalist hath wrought?” They can blame his ego, his controlling personality, is dogmatism, his not “taking things seriously,” his “unpresidential” character.  They would want, it seems to me, someone who they can point the finger at without the boobouise reflecting on the roots of our problems: the Federal Reserve’s monetary (dis)order and a reckless foreign policy.

I can see this angle for sure, though admittedly it caught me by surprise. We shall see.

I hope Bionic says something about all this. I’d love his thoughts.

Written by C.Jay Engel

Editor and creator of The Reformed Libertarian. Living in Northern California with his wife, he writes on everything from politics to theology and from culture to economic theory. You can send an email to reformedlibertarian@gmail.com
  • bionic mosquito

    Here you go – and thank you for remembering my history on this topic!

    http://bionicmosquito.blogspot.com/2015/09/never-in-field-of-political-conflict.html

    • C.Jay Engel

      Thanks! Good thoughts.

  • Jim Carroll

    Obama a “respite?” Despite Iran, Obama is incredibly hawkish. Weapons through Libya to Syrian rebels, the creation of ISIS, drone strikes against American citizens, police militarization, etc.

    Trump is so belligerent I suspect he’ll be worse than even Hillary, unless you’ve heard him make a clear statement about foreign policy (or anything else for that matter).

    I’m voting Optimus Prime. If we have to have a fascist military dictatorship I’d rather be ruled by a benevolent robot.

    • C.Jay Engel

      I agree he has been very hawkish and very pro-war. I think though, that as bad as he was, McCain would have been worse (bombed Iran). I completely agree though that Obama has expanded Bush’s empire. Im sure BM would agree too.

      Trump has generally been less hawkish than Hillary, especially in regards to the middle east. I don’t really agree with Rockwell that Trump will be an antiwar fascist. Thats an odd statement.

    • bionic mosquito

      Obama only compared to Hillary or McCain if either was elected in 2008.

      Has Obama continued and gone further than Bush’s wars? Certainly. My comment is only a speculation about what the slope of the line might have been had one of the other two been elected instead of Obama.

  • Patrick T. McWilliams

    What a depressing post. 🙁