The claim by Trump and his supporters to conservatism remains a common one which may require swift debunking before you can begin to address the more significant political aspects of his presidency, such as the torrent of corruption and criminality involved. But just in case you’re in need of such a swift debunking, here it is.
The foundational author of modern conservatism was Edmund Burke, spokesman for (yes, you guessed it) the parliamentary opposition Whigs in the reign of George III. Burke differentiated between the resistance of American colonists to British taxation legislation culminating in the American Revolution and Declaration of Independence of 1776, and the French Revolution of 1789 which followed. Burke saw the American Revolution following the example of the British Glorious Revolution of 1688, where a decades-long contest between parliament and the crown over legislative authority and the Protestant settlement was resolved by the deposition of James II and the ultimate replacement of the Stuart dynasty by the Hannoverians. According to Burke the American iteration of this contest was a justified defence of the existing precedent and tradition of near-autonomy on behalf of the colonial assemblies.
By contrast, as outlined in his Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790), Burke viewed the French revolution as a violent overthrow of the entire social order of the day. Burke predicted that this revolution would proceed to annihilate any moderating checks and balances against populist mob violence, and would ultimately culminate in tyranny and military dictatorship. Sure enough, despite the initial jeering of his contemporary Whig fellow-travellers, Burke’s predictions came true as the French Revolution progressed from parliamentary limitation of absolute government though mass arrests, property confiscations and executions in the Reign of Terror, to the final rise to power of Napoleon. This gave Burke’s belief in gradually-managed reform of existing political institutions to preserve the wisdom of previous generations considerable traction with British and American politicians; indeed, Burke’s approach of political reform, conciliation and religious toleration (although including elements that Burke would not have been comfortable with) would essentially represent the progress of Whig history and Whig reform that dominated British politics in the 19th century. It would also influence American politics, perhaps most obviously in his popularity as a sort of proto-Orwell with American conservatives railing against the dangers of communism in the Cold War.
But the most relevant point for modern American Republicans is how Burke would have characterised their relationship with the mob. For Burke, the French National Assembly during the French Revolution barely merited the title, representing a clique of vexatious lawyers dominated by lynch mob ‘if they should deviate into moderation’. The Jacobins quickly realised the potential of this approach.
And this is where the modern Trumpists come in. Although most Republicans probably fear the potential of the Trumpist constituency to end their political career by primary challenges rather than execution by guillotine (although the violent threats and conspiracies made by some of them against Democratic government officials should not be forgotten), it should be clear that this Trumpist particular mob laying claim to the revolutionary heritage of 1776 are in fact embodying the the spirit and tradition of 1789.
People who like to wear paramilitary uniforms, parading around under a rhetorical claim of mystical nationalism which trumps lawful authority, and launching violent assaults against the established institutions and processes of democracy in the name of a Great Leader are not conservatives. Nor are they Patriots in the original sense of Whig Patriots understood by the American colonists of 1776 and their British colleagues like Burke; nor are they even a factional mob lead by populist demagoguery which would have been familiar to those same men. Such people are fascists.
American Republicans in the post-Trump era really need to re-learn that distinction if the post-Trump era really is to be a post-Trump era.
Der Whigphilosophie Der Geschichte 