Javier Milei’s speech to the WEF makes me suspect something uncanny is happening. Why is it that we abruptly have such powerful rhetoricians emerging on the right? Aside from Milei, Meloni in Italy is, as far as I can judge in translation, a powerful and witty speaker. Trump is masterful, able to entertain a crowd extempore for hours. Ramaswamy has also now emerged as a great communicator. Poilievre in Canada is brilliant. The UK’s Farage is delightful. One might add RFK Jr. to this list.
Some of course worry that this is the rise of personality cults, the opening for dictatorships. “Trump will be a dictator.” But there are critical differences between these folks and a Hitler or a Mussolini.
First, the fascist dictators, and demagogues generally, played to anger, worked their audiences up emotionally in sprays of spittle. These new Demosthenes’s of the right are strikingly calm, cool under fire, speaking, for example, while munching an apple, and rely on humour.
Second, William Shirer observed that Hitler’s speech was always tailored to his audience. He read the crowd and told them whatever they wanted to hear. Famously, he told Chamberlain whatever he wanted to hear. Milei just did the opposite: he chose the most hostile crowd for his speech. Ramaswamy, Farage, Trump, Meloni, are famous for doing the same thing. Farage rose to fame by haranguing the European Parliament on how awful they were. Poilievre, Trump, or Ramaswamy are celebrated for how they handle hostile questioners.
Third, the whole point of fascism was to concentrate power in the government and the leader. The actual programme these modern rhetoricians are calling for is the exact opposite, cutting the size and powers of the government. This is what Trump actually did, and Milei is actually doing, when in government.
Fascism or totalitarianism is not coming from this corner.
One might protest that we have also seen good communicators on the left, and recently. Obama is given credit for great oratorical ability. Bill Clinton was always convincing; he could charm himself out of any scandal. Justin Trudeau is credited with being a good campaigner.
But there is a difference. Obama was tied to the teleprompter: he was simply good at reading a speech and giving it cadence; the tones of an evangelical preacher, actually. This is acting ability, not rhetorical ability. Trudeau, or Clinton, are also primarily actors, able to give an impression of the desired emotion, rather than rhetoricians. Strikingly, Trump, Poilievre, Ramaswamy, are instead at their best in speaking off the cuff, handling hecklers or hostile journalists. They write their own best lines, and are not rehearsed.
If I may point it out, the skills and approaches of a Clinton or a Trudeau are closer to demagoguery. Clinton echoes to his audience or questioner what they want to hear; Trudeau commonly resorts to feigned anger, whipping up the crowd against his opponents.
This is a general truth of the modern right versus the modern left: the left lacks humour and spontaneity. “The left can’t meme.” “NPCs.” The right seems to have a corner on both.
With perhaps the current exception of RFK Jr., who is still theoretically on the left. Although moving right, as so many are recently. Like Tulsi Gabbard, Joe Rogan, Elon Musk, and so many others, he seems to be getting “red-pilled” in real time.
This seems to me to be the working of the spirit: the spirit of prophecy. Just as in the Hebrew Bible, when governments or cities grew corrupt, a prophet would arise. God does not abandon his people. And we are still his people. He is not done with the US or the “West.”
The arts have grown moribund since the 1960s—since JFK or MLK or Diefenbaker spoke with the spirit of prophecy. Inspiration has abandoned us, as our societies have grown corrupt.
Now we see prophets arising. First in the desert; but now loudly in the public square.
Interestingly, perhaps unexpectedly, they seem to be arising in the political realm sooner and stronger than in the arts. It upends Breitbart’s famous formula: “politics is downstream from culture.” But perhaps that was always wrong. Everything starts in God, then in religion and philosophy, and spreads next either to the culture or to politics, depending on the current circumstances. When government and politics become too intrusive, they strangle culture. That stranglehold must first be broken in the political arena in order to allow artistic voices to speak.
No comments:
Post a Comment