The Assassination Attempt

Our Spanish Moment has come

You’ve all heard what happened, I presume, and seen the photo:

Photographer Evan Vucci pulled a masterful photo from this horror show, as did his colleague Doug Mills, who captured the bullet that grazed Trump’s ear:

I don’t want to write too much about this. It is easy in the flush of emotion to say things that will escalate the situation (not that I think my words are that important; they’re not).

But I will say one thing. If there are “liberals” out there, “moderates” who were appalled at what happened yesterday, but still think Trump is a “threat democracy” and his supporters “far-right” maniacs beyond the pale of normality, you need to ask yourself a question.

If you thought that, if given the power to do so, a “right-wing” president and his party, using the same legal means (not just elections and Congressional laws, but executive power, the courts and the adminstrative state) to undo many of the changes that have occurred in the last half-century plus—the rights revolution, the sexual revolution, the increasing attempts to remove religion from public life, mass immigration, all the massive changes initiated by the state in some form or another—would you accept that outcome? Mind you I am just talking about undoing the legal changes, not trying to re-engineer society itself.

Because if the answer to that question is no, then there is no way we can live at peace together. Part of the premise of self-government is you must be willinig to share power with those who might fundamentally agree with you on some very existential things. If you cannot accept that your opponents might use the power of the state to overturn the changes you have made, that they must be denied the legal power to do so, then the whole system is broken. Our disagreements can no longer be adjudicated through the normal channels of politics and law. That leaves only violence as a solution.

The problem is that the far left feels like these changes are permanent, because they reflect permanent changes in society. Again, those of us on the right do not agree they are permanent. The idea that one social movement or political party is “on the right side of history” and that anyone who opposes their political achievements undermines democracy, since one of its strengths is that it allows those on the losing end to hope they can change their situation with time. Take that away from your fellow citizens, and you no longer have fellow citizens, but subjects over whom you rule. The far left has taken this idea to its logical conclusion: anyone who opposes (insert whatever you like here: DEI, transgenderism, etc.) is illegitimate and must be destroyed, politically if not physically.

The reason why Trump frightens so many people on the Left is because they had convinced themselves that their work could simply not be undone, that “history” had already given them their permanent victory. If they are right, then the only way to deal with those who think, for example, tht gay marriage is wrong and should not be codified into law, or that immigrants should be deported, then our social contract really is broken.

And that means you will have to side with the far left, and with the person who tried to assassinate the former president. The far left has already made their choice. If you think I am being hyperbolic, I am not:

And this is not a “Rubicon” moment. We’ve long since passed that stage. Seven years ago, a deranged Bernie Sanders supported tried to kill GOP Congressmen on a baseball field. And that is just the tip of the iceberg:

If you are not aware, several months ago, Democratic reps in Congress tried to get Trumps’s Secret Service detail removed, and a staffer for one of them wrote on their Facebook page yesterday “I don't condone violence but please get you some shooting lessons so you don't miss next time ooops [sic] that wasn't me talking.”

I know that for most “liberals” they basically agree with the social and political goals of the far left but don’t agree with violence, and basically think those goals will be achieved through peaceful means over time. But what if that is not the case? What if those whose beliefs you thought were going away, didn’t, but became resurgent and overturned some of those changes you thought were permanent? Could you live with it?

Much depends on their answer. We are in a position very similar to that of Spain in the 1930s, where an ascendant left could not abide the existence of its conservative opponents, and used legal maneuvers to subjugate them. Liberals then were unable or unwilling to oppose their more radical political allies. I am very much afraid that is what is happening now.

I guess we are going to find out, aren’t we?