Glenn Reynolds: How David Brooks created Donald Trump

As a foreign observer, it seems to me that the partisan MSM coverage of the American New Left’s social agenda leads it to consistently malign all opposition to ‘racist’, ‘patriarchal’, ‘heteronormative’ and hateful motivations.  The swingeing charge is often clearly slanderous, and curtails all discussion.

It also fails to make any distinction between politics and a social agenda.  It represents the very thing that no conservative ever does in politics (which may be a sign that the Cultural Marxists have defined the terms of political discourse as pushing a social agenda).

In terms of electability, it limits the Democrats’ appeal to a very tightly-defined constituency, and rules out a broader appeal.  It has quite self-consciously left the working class voter, its historic constituency, behind.

Why has it happened?  It seems tactically useful for motivating its ideologically-defined voter block (identity groups).  The assumption, which immigration policies seem also designed to fulfill, is that this base would grow and become sufficiently large to belie its narrow partisan interests.

Have the Alinskyite tactics led to a failed strategy?

This article rightly notes that the indiscriminate and slanderous allegations about the Tea Party have effectively led to the rise of Trump and his less sensitive supporters.

Read the full story