David Brooks argues that the phenomenal rise of Trump and Carson among Republicans, Sanders among Democrats, and Corbyn among British Labourites, are all examples of civic decay and declining respect for voluntary institutions (in this case, parties). I think that Brooks is right about the case of Trump, but not in the way that he seems to think.
I think that the reason for the Trump surge has to do with the decline of civic institutions outside of the political parties. If you look at the polls, Trump’s support is fairly broad. It includes tea partiers who want to shrink the size and power of government. It includes social conservatives. It includes working-class moderates. All of these groups have plenty of reason to disagree with Trump (or Trump’s past stated positions) and each other. There are also plenty of social conservatives, tea partiers and moderates who don’t support Trump.
What all these groups have in common (and I suspect this is especially true of the members of those groups that are attracted to Trump), is the sense that they are being constantly outmaneuvered by the Republican party’s business interests and the lobbyist/campaign operative/consultant class. It isn’t just about Bush family members running for President until the crack of doom. You might have liked Marco Rubio in 2010, but then he goes and supports the establishment’s immigration plan the moment you turn your back. Walker now talks tough about immigration, but anybody can see that he doesn’t mean it. You find a politician that you think is different, and it turns out that he thinks just like all the rest.
Immigration is where it is clearest, but you can see it on abortion. The Washington Republican leadership would prefer relatively obscure fights about the Export-Import Bank than winning public relations battles over late-term abortion. The leadership would like to pretend that there are no winning public relations battles over abortion.
But this is where the civic decay really matters. The business lobbies are organized. They aren’t just organized in Washington. They are organized at the town and city level. They don’t just have money (though they have money). They are the ones who host luncheons in which they explain to rising politicians about how our dynamic economy needs comprehensive immigration reform. They have social capital, and they think that they will outsmart and outwait their more poorly organized (and poorer) intraparty rivals. And they might be right. Like Charles Murray pointed out, the decline of social capital has been uneven. Lots of Americans know that they are at a disadvantage and have no clear methods of organizing themselves to advance their interests. A wiser party establishment would listen to these groups and work to find common ground, but that isn’t the Republican establishment that we have. For all his flaws, Trump is providing an avenue for many disparate kinds of right-of-center Americans to vent their frustration. I don’t like it. I wish dissident conservatives could form responsible alternative institutions to shift the public agenda, but I don’t know how to start. Does anybody know of a community organizer who will soon have a great deal of time on his hands?