By Kelly Sloan | Contributing Commentary, Rocky Mountain Voice
We are now a week past election day, and it is time for a bit of circumspection.
Donald Trump won, convincingly, both the electoral college and the popular vote. He is due his victory lap, as are Republicans in general, after having endured months of being called every rotten thing in the book. And yes, there is, in that vein, some amusement to be had at the expense of those on the left who are –- to put it mildly — not handling the results well.
But schadenfreude is an emotion best indulged in small doses, lest it eventually corrupts the soul. The Democrats are forced to undergo a considerable degree of introspection as they travel their post-election “Via Dolorsa”. But conservatives too, after the celebratory fireworks have subsided, need to take a step back and review the scene with a critical and unyielding eye to hold the second Trump administration accountable, not only to deliver on the beneficial items promised, but to offer a check on populist impulses that could divert from the path.
Good things can certainly come from a second Trump presidency –- extension of the 2017 tax cuts, reversal of Biden’s climate excesses, a renewed paring of the administrative state, more appointments to the judiciary of men and women faithful to the constitutional role, and, of course, a more secure border and enforcement of immigration laws. These are all things to look forward to, among more. Conservatives ought to be willing to keep Trump to these promises. His appointment of Susie Wiles as Chief of Staff was a good, reassuring call.
I hate, then, to be the one to drop an inkblot on the bridal whiteness of this moment, but is the perennial duty of the conservative to proceed with caution, cast a doubting glace where warranted, counsel against imprudence, and to always be prepared, as William F. Buckley said, to stand athwart history yelling STOP! regardless of who is directing that charge of history.?
One arena in which such caution ought to be advised is in Trump’s promised tariffs. The tariff threat will have both practical and political implications. It is not only an economically imprudent sacrifice to the gods of protectionism, but risks the working class coalition that helped get Trump elected. Tariffs are second only to inflation as being something of a universal tax, and the resultant price increases will not go over well with a voting populace which voted as they did largely on the basis that the economic policies of the last four years made them poorer.
Trump can repair the mistakes of the previous administration by loosening the shackles on the free market, encouraging smart monetary policy, and reducing inflationary public spending, not by abandoning the core tenet of the free market -– free trade -– in an attempt to centrally-plan domestic manufacturing into existence.
Speaking of spending, that will be another issue upon which conservatives will want to exert some influence on the new administration. The populist impulses of J.D. Vance, the new VP, will incline the administration strongly toward adopting a new interventionist economic policy. Its priorities would be different from those of the previous administration, but soft state socialism can have many faces. Milton Friedman’s wisdom applies, whomever may occupy the White House. Trump received a mandate to rein in inflation, which cannot happen without reining in the government spending that created it.
Conservatives should also be skeptical of the extent of freedom given to RFK Jr. in a Trump administration. There is room for new thought on public health, and especially space for reform following the excesses of the public health politburo during COVID, but Kennedy represents the other extreme; his brand of nutty, left-wing Boulder-hippy nonsense may be amusing in the abstract, but will be dangerous on several levels when married to the organs of government.
Of course, foreign policy is where presidents exert the most impact. Here we are confronted with mixed signals. The appointment of Elise Stefanik as ambassador to the U.N. could be profitable in bringing some much-needed disruptive correction to that maleficent den of scoundrels. A Trump Presidency promises to be more supportive of Israel, and should spur NATO allies into contributing a more reasonable share of the cost of the collective defence of the West. On the other hand, Trump and Vance’s myopia concerning Ukraine, Europe and the geopolitical threat posed by Russia offer reasons for pause. The preliminary rejection of Nikki Haley and Mike Pompeo for consideration in any foreign or defense post suggests that they may be pursuing a purge of Republican defense hawks for reasons extrinsic to – and at the expense of – national security. It is also a worrisome question of whether Trump’s zealous pursuit of some sort of “deal” with Communist China would come at the cost of sacrificing Taiwan –- and with it any hope of containing Chinese expansion.
It is good to redirect American foreign policy back to being more in line with John Adams exhortation that Americans be friends of liberty everywhere, but custodians only of their own. But adequately safeguarding our own liberty means having a realistic and assertive external view – particularly toward Russia, China, North Korea and Iran. Democratic administrations for at least the last 50 years have proven inadequate to the task; if Republicans cannot be trusted to be strong on national security, we are all in a world of trouble.
Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in commentary pieces are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the management of the Rocky Mountain Voice, but even so we support the constitutional right of the author to express those opinions.