The modern conservative movement has a built-in ratcheting-up mechanism, so that even when Republicans win, they act like they're losing and the country is on the verge of collapse. Even Democrats long for the days of responsible, Main Street conservatives. But today's GOP is racing headlong into authoritarianism, and the fever is not going to break until we defeat it. Rick Perlstein joins Tim Miller.
show notes:
Rick on Project 2025
Rick on abortion
Rick on the "authoritarian ratchet"
I'm writing from the Left here, although that's not the dramatic admission that it might once have been, now that I'm committed to finding more in common with "liberals" in the broader sense than with the illiberal Left. I concur with Andrew Hazlett's remarks, below. I _enjoy_ Perlstein's writing, but he's chosen glibness as a style and therefore as a substance. Some more serious writers on the subject of the illiberal Right might be John Ganz and David Austin Walsh. Walsh, IIRC, pointed out on the Know Your Enemy podcast that Willis Carto had more subscribers than WFB. This does _not_ mean Carto was what conservatism was all about. It simply means that unsavory crackpots like him were far more important than even liberal historians of the Right acknowledged until recently ("recently" meaning since 2020).
Ganz in particular could talk about technofascism: https://www.unpopularfront.news/p/the-enigma-of-peter-thiel. Peter Thiel is a fascist. End of story. Maybe you and he could compete to see who hates Marc Andreessen more. I sort of have to live with Andreessen, since I may very well have to feign excitement at the prospect of going to work for a startup that he funds. I've heard him speak about Ross Perot, and I have to say, our memory of this guy as an amiable crank is wrong. I used to work at a stamping plant, and I remember the shop guys praising him in populist-authoritarian terms, so Trump's appeal to the _white_ working class was not a surprise to me.
You can't hate Peter Thiel more than I do. I worked at Palantir for eight years, which I'm not entirely ashamed of, but the memory of seeing my coworkers cozy up to this guy, or talk about him as a deep, deep, deep thinker is almost nauseating to me.
At some point, I need to write something about my resentment of Rick Perlstein and others who see a seamless continuity from Reagan to MAGA. Trumpism is different in degree and kind from what came before. Those of us who came up in the old conservative movement would not be so frightened and passionate about defeating Trump if he was just a blunter Romney. I will concede *a lot* of blind spots, willful ignorance, an excuse making over the years, but there has been a fundamental shift. Why do think Liz Cheney was more aggressive than the Biden DoJ and many congressional Democrats? Why do you think people like Bill, Tim, Sarah, etc. are willing to chuck aside decades of friendships, professional networks, and all the comforts of conformity? Among other problems, I think Perlstein's damn-them-all characterization enables progressive complacency. If Trump is not a break with the past, then you think you can endure another four years of GOP rule and then the pendulum will swing back again. In truth, under Trump 2.0, it could get a hell of a lot worse than the worst of the Iraq War and the Great Recession. Even Democrats can't seem to imagine the global aggression that would seize on a weakened NATO. Nor do people seem willing to face the crimes against humanity that will unfold under the "Mass Deportations Now" banner. Such things were not the secret wishes of, say, George H.W. Bush or his voters. We now need the broadest coalition, one that includes sincere, good-willed people who cannot be dismissed as self-deluding proto-MAGAs.
Well stated. Long ago I voted Reagan as a better alternative to the projected international weakness and national malaise of late '70s Democratic leadership. Since then I varied my support between conservatives and liberals, triangulating towards centerist policies.
However, Trumpism and MAGA isn't conservative.. it's a category error, an evil movement, and NOT the: "natural outcome of conservative policies" as some are want to tell us.
Tim, I’ll have to take you to task on one point in this podcast. You give Marc Andreessen entirely too much credit when you say he’s smart. He’s a clown who *thinks* he’s smart. He still has a flamethrower though.
He, his wife and the others like them who have such inflated ideas about themselves are also vulgar and humanly repelling.
I do believe there is credibility in the argument that the right has been moving in this direction for decades, and Rick probably made other points I agree w/. But he's so obnoxious I just couldn't watch very much or even listen to this whole thing. He's so full of himself, he repeatedly interrupted and talked over Tim, he wouldn't keep his laptop still so it made me nauseous, etc.
I'm a lifelong Dem, and if he'd respectfully and humbly presented his arguments that would've been fine w/ me. But Tim LEFT THE RIGHT when the MAGAts took over, remember? He's doing everything he can to keep them from power. And Rick came across to me as not only sticking the knife in, but twisting it as well. I saw absolutely no graciousness on his part at all. I was glad Tim pushed back on some stuff.
I saw what you saw and also didn’t like it, but cut him some slack in my mind because he is clearly another suffering boomer like me, seriously disappointed on how things have turned out. I give him high marks for having tracked Andreeson to his burrow and reported back to us what he saw and felt. We are all on the same side here basically, is how I took Rick and what he wanted to convey. But like you, I felt he could have used better manners because he was talking to a sympathetic, respectful and trustworthy person—someone who could get it and relate. I appreciated Tim’s graciousness too. And thanks, @differentdrummer for sharing your take.
Romney saying “at least I didn’t need to show my birth certificate” in 2012 is an early example of Mitt prostrating himself to Trump, to his shameless racism, helping normalize whole cloth lies to galvanize racists in the party, and something I’ll be generous and assume Mitt now horribly regrets saying. Awkward dad joke my ass.
Here is Bibi the "fascist". It does a disserevice to actual proto-fascists like Trump and Vance to lump Bibi in with them or for that matter, every Republican since the beginning of time. I could not disagree with this guest more.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wSttkKdkYg
T Jefferson wrote ( under pen name) complaining that GW was concentrating too much power in the Gov and NY Banks. We had no standing Army and only Treasury had a staff to speak of. He wanted to keep power in the states ( actually he wanted to be President ). He felt farmers were the true folk. ( not sure how running a plantation is farming). So absurd thinking is nothing new. But neither wanted a King. It’s hard to say who was really on the right or the left-in those days- But it’s not so hard today. Wanting to be a King/Dictator is unAmericqn, unless we are going to revive the Tory Party. But the current king of England is not very exciting.
Really great conversation !!! The historical context is so important and interesting:it’s brilliant to better understand the threads running from the 60’s (and even before) to what is happening now! I’m so grateful for your thoughtful enthusiasm to discuss these topics.
Trumpism inherited and doubled down on half the FDR era Democratic coalition, ie Dixiecrats and blue collar whites, so it's silly to claim it descended exclusively from, say, Edmund Burke, or even Bill Buckley and Barry Goldwater.
Not to mention that lots of Trumpists voted for Obama. Twice. Chronic messianism, much?
Anyway, Trumpism in America is like Peronism in Argentina. In fact, it looks as if American political culture is becoming a lot like Argentinian political culture. Has Peronism in Argentina been permanently dispensed with thanks to the recent fortuitous victory of Javier Milei? I wouldn't bet on it. Ditto, Trumpism in America if Harris wins this round.
BTW, it ironically took a military coup to displace Peron the first time, and he still came back twenty years later.
In 2017, I proposed the Trump-Peron comparison to a colleague from Argentina. He said he didn't see it. But two years later he told me he had changed his mind - that Trump did resemble Peron.
Tim, I cannot wait to listen to this episode but you got me stuck on CSN&Y after Brownstein interview. Thanks for the politics and musical entertainment!!!
Perlstein is 1000% about the endgame theory/right wing ratchet, in my opinion.
The linear quality of McCarthyism - John Birch Society - Goldwater - Reagan - Buchanan - Gingrich - Tea Party - Trump is difficult to deny.
The GOP was still putting decent men up as their presidential nominees into the 21st Century, up through 2012 - but every one of them had to contort themselves to ply the culture war & appeal to the nascent MAGA base.
Mitt Romney, for example, while he was running for president, publicly sounded a lot more like a conservative media personality than the reasonable, moderate politician we know now.
I can easily deny your linear list. If you were to remove Goldwater and Reagan, you might have something. Goldwater actually colluded with Buckley to kill the influence of the John Birch Society.
An even more direct line: McCarthy, Roy Cohn, Trump.
Rick Perlstein defines the problem perfectly: "You know what the opposite of making every fraction of a second of conflict into something that occupies all your energy as a fight you have to win - the opposite of that is...wisdom." Listening to the Bulwark keeps me sane.
Tim, didn’t know best place to contact you. May I suggest you interview Kristopher Goldsmith of Taskforce Butler? Bulwark readers and viewers may not know the danger of the white supremacist/neo-nazi groups growing in this country.
Us average listeners 45% is giving us too much credit on dumb luck Tim!
Tim,
As always thank you for a provocative podcast. The pro-democracy coalition is multifaceted, and I appreciate the need to agree to disagree civilly and maintain a common cause to beat back the throes of authoritarianism. Make no mistake we must work together. Having said that, we don't need to agree upon everything, While I find Mr. Perlstein knowledgable, I think his understanding of what he calls "conservatism" to be flawed. Essentially what was conservatism as practiced here in the US was nineteenth-century liberalism, the belief in the free movement of labor, personal probity, the belief in institutions that sought to modify the worse instincts of people, free trade, the exercise of the franchise, a limited government constrained by laws,, and the inherent belief of the philosophical underpinnings of Locke as manifested in the Declaration of independence as summarized in the Gettysburg Address.
If I may turn his argument on the ratchet on its head for a moment,, does that mean that all who believe in egalitarianism and equality more than liberty, will always become Mao, Pol Ppt, or other totalitarian leftists? By no means! The ratchet theory presupposes that Western Liberalism is always about turning back the clock. That is a flawed understanding. It is not reactionary by its nature. It merely moves cautiously and with consensus during times of change as to solve ills but not to create further unknown ills. Can lit ike anything else it get warped? Of course, it can, but that does not mean that its inevitable end is tyranny.
Finally, during the show, Mitt Romney, and other modern type politicians were mentioned as being liars and that tall history of Western Liberalism ends with Mr. Trump. I ask this, were Jack Kemp, Bill Buckley, Jean Kirkpatrick, George HW Bush, Gerald Ford, Howard Baker, James A. Baler IIII and assuredly Dwight Eisenhower reflective pf a march toward totalitarianism? I hasten Mr.. Perlstein considers that Mr. Trump is truly the byproduct of right wing populism typified by Huey Long and (pre-conversion) George Wallace (who were under no definition "conservative.")
Keep up the good work!
So the use of lethal force against someone with two knives who is about one second away from stabbing an innocent civilian is unjustified? I guess the fact that he had mental problems would make the stabbing hurt less for the victim? Believe me, I understand that there have been many cases such as George Floyd where the police have acted terribly and committed murder. But criticism of law enforcement when they use lethal force to save someone else's life is ridiculous. I sure hope that if a knife or gun wielding assailant is attacking me or one of my loved ones that the police would use lethal force.
Which reminds me why, even though I will never vote for Trump or MAGA, I am definitely not a liberal.
I read an Atlantic article a few days back about how primaries are actually a bad way to select candidates (and also historically fairly recent), and ever since then, everywhere I go I see support for the argument.
Here, for example, Perlstein talked about how conservative radio slagged out Romney for being a sellout, then got right in line as soon as he was the nominee. And I thought "hm, the primary process kinda incentivizes hypocrisy across the board, doesn't it?"
I could rant about the need for constitutional reform to end the tyranny of the minority for HOURS, but actually, maybe in this one specific case of picking nominees, less democracy *would* be better...
That was a particularly interesting interview. I had only read Perlstein and appreciate having the opportunity to see him talk through his ideas. I hope you will invite him back. If you don't I should check out where else he shows up. Practitioner takes on politics are helpful, but a more scholarly analysis can deepen the dialogue.
It's been a while since I read Perlstein's "despair" column, but my hit at the time was that his lamentations seemed to be more grounded in the toxicity of social media than the left per se. Not that the left doesn't get tribal, e.g., I've been seeing quite a bit of that lately in the run up to Biden stepping aside. However, I think it is important to not lose sight of how the social media can fuel what Tristan Harris has called “human downgrading” (he could be another interesting guest if you haven't had him on before).
A couple quick thoughts: first I respect Perlstein as a historian and I am a fan of his work, but he is a classic doomer. Second, his analysis is okay-to-poor. And finally, he claims Democrats have done such a poor job on politics for 20 years and I would disagree with the last eight although we’ve suffered some setbacks.
Tim, I'm not sure why you thought Perlstein had an interesting take on the right. To me, he sounded like a standard issue Twitter Progressive. The left is good. The right is bad and has always been bad. Nothing interesting about that.
Not sure I agree. Partisan? Sure. But he has a point about conservatives constantly ratcheting up the stakes and then moving on to the next crisis when the country doesn't crumble into dust.
I don't have a problem with partisanship. My problem is that when Tim pushed back saying Dems do this too, he could not admit it. Also, he could not admit that there was a difference between Romney or McCain and Trump or Vance.
Have you read any of his books or articles?
No and that podcast left me with no desire to do so.
I appreciate you and Rick digging into bits of Project 2025. A few months ago, about a day before p2025 was released to the public (I wasn’t even aware of it before then) someone sent me a pdf titled Project 2025 The Heritage Foundation. I opened it to the TOC followed by a page and a half list of contributors - seemed like hundreds of names. There was an intro that made my blood run cold. I was 100 pages of gut wrenching terror. I started to read the education chapter and wondered if the document was real. I sent it to my son who tried to open it and messaged me back that he couldn’t open it. I went back to my files and found that the document was alas, an error message. Went to a browser looking for a doc with the same title and found something that seemed the same topic, but very different in tone. It was written in advertising public relations language. I compared the education chapter, which now had only two authors and very different language, refined, but still terrifying. Somehow someone must have messed up and sent out the working version by mistake. I can’t be the only recipient of the working copy. Maybe you, Tim, and Rick, are able to dig it up. It haunts me. The public must have a chance to see the full list of contributors and the honest draft before the PR folks got hold of it.
RE: Rick Perlstein's point about culture-embedment (if there is such a word) of rural whites.
I just listened to an interview with a historian on a radio show on the Dallas public station, KERA's program "Think," with a fill-in host for the usual Krys Boyd (on the level of WHYY's Terry Gross).
Their blurb:
"As our nation teetered on the brink of the Civil War, the certification of the election of Abraham Lincoln wasn’t a certainty. Author Erik Larson joins guest host John McCaa to discuss the presidential election of 1860, how Southerners labeled it a “hostile act,” and the chaotic months that followed before the first bullets flew at Fort Sumpter. His book is “The Demon of Unrest: A Saga of Hubris, Heartbreak, and Heroism at the Dawn of the Civil War.”
https://think.kera.org/2024/07/12/did-the-1860s-make-the-civil-war-inevitable
The discussion gives an in-depth discussion on the "philosophy of egalitarianism" in the Antebellum South...the onward thrust of Jim Crow, the Tea Party, and now MAGA.
Really bright guy, a little blind to his own blind spots, but that's all of us. His gift-of-gab needs to be nerfed though. It's too overpowered. I feel like if we got into a conversation I'd be trapped in it for eternity like the Kryptonians in those pieces of glass floating through outer space.
Joshua, I was thinking the same while listening to the podcast: a little too glib, very quick to make pronouncements as if they were accepted facts, etc. I liked listening to him, he's obviously smart and makes some interesting observations but I couldn't swallow everything he was putting out. My antennae were out the whole time.
Tim- Running my fingernails down a chalkboard to recover from today’s pod.
Tim, please get a more thoughtful guest from the left. As far as I could see he was hyper partisan no different from the MAGA clowns.
Really? No different? The MAGA clowns are running around screaming "Civil War," trying to overturn elections based on a lie, and telling everyone that will listen about "limited government" while they use the government to enforce their beliefs.
The thing I detest most in the current political environment is blind tribalism. MAGA engages in the “we are good they are evil”. He does exactly the same thing painting with a broad brush. I am and have always been a Never Trump conservative. He was attacking the conservative governing philosophy. Let me be clear neither Trump nor MAGA are conservative they are populist with an authoritarian streak.
His writing doesn't strike me as tribal, even if he perhaps sounded that way on this podcast. I'm not a conservative, although I think I hold what would have been conservative values on some topics, so his criticism doesn't bother me on a personal level. Maybe they aren't "true conservatives" - whatever that is - but they're leading the movement and the party.
Don’t confuse the Republican Party with conservatives. The party abandoned conservatives when its voters chose Trump in 2016. We live out here in the political wilderness.
Oooohhh Lord Tim got spicy when defending Mittens. Honestly kind of sweet to see.
I want a Perlstein/JVL debate on how Reagan was actually terrible.
If it's a debate you want, Mona might be better than JVL.
Awesome interview and thank you Tim for getting me into the band Bully, they are so damn good!!
she is awesome! I need to find a Bully outro song that fits...
It’s a tough pick!! Girl has one amazing voice. Days move so slow is tight
You made my day, Thank you☺️
To steal from JVL and AB on Monday. the D's need to blanket the world with a ten second ad: "Are you tired of felonies and old people, golf and grifters? Vote Harris/Beshear."
Beshear is from McConnell land...he brings no useful connection to the election.
Need someone from the Rust Belt...and it can't be another woman. Hard enough floating one Black/Asian Woman!
Unfortunately, Shapiro (PA) and Pritzker (IL neighbor to Wisconsin and Michigan) have to deal with the anti-Semitism.
I could hear it now in rural Indiana and other parts of the rural Rust belt --- "So the Dems are asking me to vote for a (C*nt) and a (K*ke)...surprised they didn't choose Mexicans!
Blazing Saddles:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYTQ7__NNDI
I agree Christopher …. But I also foolishly think that voters who would think (and speak ) like that are probably MAGAts anyway… their votes are “lost to us” at the get-go. Or, they are racist and bigoted enough to never vote for any ticket beyond ultra conservative white Christians. I am still wondering how they excuse Clarence Thomas and Trump’s Jewish son in law as well as his henchman, Stephen Miller
Yes. Very curious indeed!
Excellent points.
Really? Old people? The people who always vote? Can’t think of a more ridiculous ad. Spoken like an annoying youngster. That previous statement either makes you feel lousy or pisses you off, yes? That’s kinda the point. Dividing and generational pissing doesn't win. Building coalitions wins.
Yeah, find a different word than "old." Maybe something like "worn-out politicians with worn-out ideas."
Me likey!
I just realized Kamala Harris shares a birth year with me and Dan Savage.
In the White House. We're tired of old people in the White House.
And by "we," I hope I speak for everyone.
I know I am.....
Very interesting pod today. On another note, I'd love to hear Charlie as a guest!
I second the request for a visit from Charlie. He needed time to separate himself from The Bulwark, and Tim needed time to establish himself as the host of this podcast. I think it has now been long enough to allow both of those conditions to be met.