The weekend brought with it a third round of “No Kings” protests across the country. In light of the glowing press reports about them, it is well worth considering what the protests are really all about. Despite the name, the last thing the protests are about is overweening centralized authority. Quite the opposite in fact.
The animating spirit behind the protests is surely animus against the Trump administration. The animus is well deserved. The levels of corruption and incompetence displayed by the administration are way outside the boundaries of what we have come to expect.
However, the crowds (estimated at around 7 to 8 million) have not come to protest corruption and incompetence. Far from it. They have come to protest the fact that their guys are not the ones in charge of the corruption and incompetence. Or have I missed something?
When it comes to the massive corruption scandal that is unfolding in Minnesota, we haven’t heard much more than a whisper of complaint. And when it comes to President Joe Biden, those in the community of the sane are left to wonder if there is anyone left who actually still believes that Biden was competent and not suffering from senility.
Somehow or other I didn’t see a lot of protests surrounding the Biden presidency—except ones that were mostly organized by the left with the usual list of demands. Not to mention the intimidation that came with the territory, like that visited upon then Senator Jeff Flake. Or the Orwellian “Disinformation Governance Board” dreamt up by the Biden Administration.
The stated reasons for all the “No Kings” protests generally coalesced around the usual laundry list of issues. One had to do with the Trump administration’s tactics vis-vis illegal immigration. Another had to do with the War on Iran. Still another decried (however hypocritically) a lack of free speech during the Trump era.
As far as illegal immigration is concerned, the preferred dodge is that the protest is about the tactics that ICE employed. But as GK Chesterton said to his son about sex—the posture is ridiculous. By and large the protesters disagree with the policy being enforced; not the method of enforcement.
I personally am loathe to suggest that the Trump administration’s policy stance is correct. But let’s call it the way is really is.
The great majority of citizens are actually in favor of relatively severe immigration restrictions and of stricter enforcement than we have had in the past. For all the talk about democracy and the will of the people, we recently had an election in which immigration was a hotly contested issue. And the fact is the open borders contingent lost.
We move on to the focus on the Iran war. It is either astounding in its naïveté or laced with the same hypocrisy over the ICE protests. First though it must be said that Trump’s political management of the issue has been nothing short of appalling.
There is little question that Trump has handled the whole enterprise badly. He did not consult Congress ahead of time. Then he sent Marco Rubio to address Congress only after the fact. And Republicans in Congress (with the exception of Rand Paul) has denied Congress the opportunity to (symbolically) vote on the President’s war powers.
That being said though, the salient question is not one of process, although process is important not least in order to resurrect the separation of powers. However the chief question we face is this: Is the United States better off confronting Iran before or after it has acquired nuclear weapons?
There is really very little question about Iran’s quest to become a nuclear power. Not only would Iran likely engage in nuclear blackmail against the Gulf states; it would also probably attack Israel with its nukes, inviting nuclear retaliation. And its ballistic missals, which can already reach most European capitals including London, Paris and Berlin, would be aimed at the American heartland as soon as Iran developed the capability. So is that what the protesters desire?
And as for the feint that we could stop Iran from acquire nukes any other way—they said that about North Korea too. That North Korea would never be allowed to become a nuclear state. And here we are.
For a brief moment, a very very brief moment, let’s address the free speech argument. The moment will be very brief because of the unremitting hypocrisy of the players. All of them.
The keyboard warriors of the left and right have been ferocious in their attempts to silence the opposition. Or to substitute euphemisms for plain English to extirpate concepts that are fundamentally at odds with capital L Liberalism. Whether it is a Biden era Misinformation Governance Board, or organized cancellations of writers or a Nazi sympathizer like Nick Fuentes and his supporters hiding behind euphemisms and outright lies, free speech has been under assault.
The only people who have been willing to publicly commit to and defend free speech are libertarians. Most Republicans and Democrats have demonstrated a willingness to defend free speech only when it serves their parochial interests.
In short, the “No Kings” protests are really more like a group therapy session. Everybody gets to feel good and nothing gets accomplished. Sure the participants get to feel good about themselves, but so what?
There is no cohesive theory underlying the protests. It is really only about personnel. The protesters are more than happy to trade their “principles” for power.
A pox on all their houses.
JFB
