If you're Jewish and the use of "cosmopolitan" doesn't scare you, read some history https://t.co/yc5xTCN2ck
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) July 18, 2019
It’s all over political twitter, but the only mainstream-media pushback against Hawley I could find so far was from his hometown paper, the Kansas City Star:
The Anti-Defamation League in Missouri is calling on U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley to apologize for a speech he delivered this week slamming the “cosmopolitan elite” who “look down on the common affections that once bound this nation together—things like place and national feeling and religious faith.”
Hawley, during a keynote address at the National Conservatism Conference on Tuesday, said the “cosmopolitan agenda” drives politics on both the left and right.
“The left champions multiculturalism and degrades our common identity,” he said. “The right celebrates hyper-globalization and promises that the market will make everything right in the end, eventually … perhaps.”
He decried the “cosmopolitan consensus,” “cosmopolitan elite,” “cosmopolitan class,” and “cosmopolitan economy,” and argued that the “cosmopolitan agenda” has broken America’s national solidarity.
Karen Aroesty, regional director of the Anti-Defamation League in St. Louis, said Hawley may not have intended to offend anyone with his speech. But terms like “cosmopolitan” and “globalist” have a sinister history as anti-Semitic dog whistles, and she said Hawley should apologize.
Hawley’s speech, “raised real concern for members of the Jewish community who are and should be acutely sensitive with increased incidents of antisemitism in the US and beyond,” Aroesty said. “We have asked the Senator for an apology for even unintended harm caused by the speech. For the Senator and all who have a public platform that comes with power, context matters. Words matter.”…
— Christian Caryl (@ccaryl) July 18, 2019
From the NY Review of Books, “Retrofitting Trump’s GOP with a Veneer of Ideas”:
… Perhaps the most evocative and conclusive sign of Trump’s sway over the conservative movement came this week, however, when the recently established Edmund Burke Foundation in Washington held a meeting titled “National Conservatism” at the Ritz-Carlton. The conference aroused a good deal of controversy before it took place, but attracted a formidable array of conservative figureheads, including Peter Thiel, Tucker Carlson, John Bolton, and Senator Josh Hawley. The panelists included Rich Lowry, the editor of National Review, Chris Buskirk, the publisher and editor of American Greatness, J.D. Vance, the author of Hillbilly Elegy, Michael Anton, a former Trump administration National Security Council official who has inveighed against “birthright citizenship,” and Chris DeMuth, a former president of the American Enterprise Institute and now a distinguished fellow at the Trump-friendly Hudson Institute. The latter has recently extolled Trumpian nationalism in a lengthy essay in the Claremont Review of Books. “Harnessing today’s nationalist impulses,” DeMuth wrote, “is a task for conservatives and libertarians, who stand in the shoes of the liberal reformers of the middle and late nineteenth century.”
The event tried to do that. A July 14 invitation letter signed by David Brog, the president of the Burke Foundation and the former executive director of Christians United for Israel, noted that the conference was intended to help bring about the “revival of the unique national traditions that alone have the power to bind a people together and bring about their flourishing.” It was supposed to provide, Brog went on, “an intellectually serious alternative to the excesses of purist libertarianism, and in stark opposition to political theories grounded in race.” If nothing else, a consanguinity of thought quickly emerged.
This was a Trump-inspired counter-revolution, a conservative colloquy that aimed at creating a catechism purged of the verities of the Reagan era: a crusading foreign policy and an idolatry of free-market economics. Usually, intellectual movements precede the rise of political ones, but in this case, Trump’s camp followers are reverse-engineering an intellectual doctrine to match Trump’s basic instincts. The new national-conservatives want to form what Burke called “little platoons” to ground conservatism in what they referred to as Anglo-American traditions…
The Burke speakers sedulously avoided discussing the maelstrom of nationalist and racial bigotry stirred up by Trump, but it was hard to avoid the sense that something of a shell game was taking place. In a remarkably complacent column in The New York Times, Ross Douthat claimed that “the nationalist turn in conservative politics seems to me eminently justifiable, a response to a series of elite blunders that should inspire anger and revolt.” Although Douthat ritually drubbed Trump himself, the “nationalist in the Oval Office,” as an “exceptional disgrace,” can nationalism be so neatly detached from its most prominent promoter? Is it “eminently justifiable,” or simply a new shibboleth that is supposed to camouflage a yearning for hierarchy and retrograde social views?
… [A] variety of speakers made use of the elasticity of the term “nationalism” to smuggle in any number of traditional conservative hobbyhorses about the perfidious sway of cultural Marxism, political correctness, and identity politics. Facebook board member Peter Thiel made waves with his accusations of treasonous collaboration by Google with Red China; Trump subsequently tweeted about his accusation and stated that he was asking Attorney General William Barr to investigate the matter. Thiel also took potshots at what he claimed was the moribund nature of American universities, saying that Harvard and Stanford did not deserve their tax-exempt status…
This is the context, and I gotta say, it isn’t great. pic.twitter.com/rYnpAn2iCw
— b-boy bouiebaisse (@jbouie) July 19, 2019
Us v. Them: "'We' live in the rural heartland, where the pure values and traditions of the nation still miraculously exist despite the threat of cosmopolitanism from the nation's cities, alongside the hordes of minorities who live there…." — How Fascism Works by @jasonintrator https://t.co/tSu05LaTEZ
— Asha Rangappa (@AshaRangappa_) July 19, 2019
There is an entire American tradition of right-wing nationalist language that frames a herrenvolk middle against an underclass of racial and ethnic others and an overclass of the wealthy, defined primarily as cultural elites and often identified as Jews.
— b-boy bouiebaisse (@jbouie) July 19, 2019
Hawley (and Cotton) is why I'm reasonably sure we'll get a "Trump but actually competent" at some point in the near to medium-term.
— b-boy bouiebaisse (@jbouie) July 18, 2019