Is Steve Bannon Trying to Divide MAGA?

My favourite superhero growing up was the Hulk. He’s clean; I’m dark: It’s near much. Guy’s my warrior. Did you ever notice his TV show? Similar issue every workweek:” Don’t make me angry! You may n’t like me if I was furious! ” You remember what happened after that? They did beat his a** like an dog. Therefore he’d get mad and turn into a demon and beat them up — and keep on walking like nothing happened. What kind of function type is gonna struggle that much? After five episodes, I was like,” Hey man. Sometimes it ’s you. “

—Dave Chapelle’s 1990s-era schedule on “The Incredible Hulk”

I was an Incredible Hulk lover, to. One of my earliest childhood thoughts was being punished in school for biting a student. ( Look, the professor told us to believe we were species. She made me an eel. What was I supposed to do? ) She threw me in the corner and made me sit in the “bad son chair” for the rest of the time. Yet over 40 years later, I still vividly recall sitting in that chair, wishing I could change into the Incredible Hulk, so I had hit up that terrible, horrible, no-good teacher. ( And therefore bite that person again: I was a GREAT gator! )

And this brings us to Steve Bannon.

He’s a talent. One of the major thought-leaders in MAGA. Back in 2016, he perhaps received very little credit for Trump’s defeat, but since then, his position in popularizing MAGA, rallying the bottom, and keeping the troops engaged has been underappreciated. As a commander and a proper scholar, he’s one of the sharpest minds in the modern conservative movement.

But he also fights with people.

He’s declared war on Elon Musk, telling an Italian journalist, “[ Musk ] is a truly evil person. His sole purpose is to become a multimillionaire. He will do anything relevant to make sure that his businesses are protected. …Quite simply, the persons around Trump are tired of it. We’ve seen maximum Elon, his aggressive character, his lack of understanding of the true problems. Before, because of all the wealth he put in, I was prepared to bear it: not any more. ” [emphasis added ] 

Bannon described “Muskism” as “techno-feudalism on a worldwide level. ” In Bannon’s estimation, “It’s going to be the populist-nationalist movement that’ll take [ Muskism ] on and break them. ”

But that ’s no all he’s trying to break: He’s even launched proactive shots at retired U. S. public Keith Kellogg, Trump’s option as special envoy to Ukraine and Russia, alert, “If we aren’t mindful, it will change into Trump’s Vietnam. That’s what happened to Richard Nixon. ”

As Politico noted:

The number of the important “War Room” audio is girding for a major political fight over United States action in Ukraine. He advocates ending America’s all-important military assistance to Kyiv, but fears his ancient boss is going to fall into a pit being set by an unlikely ally of the U. S. defence industry, the Europeans and even some of Bannon’s personal friends, whom he argues are then misguided. These include Keith Kellogg, a retired U. S. standard who is Trump’s choose to get special envoy to Ukraine and Russia.

The Politico discussion was released at 4 a. m. on January 20 — before Trump had even been sworn in. Bannon had now made up his mind: Trump’s plan will be a loss.

And he might be best.

But if your end goal is growing a social activity, round fire teams are a horrible car for long-term development. Within any business, a destroyer may eliminate faster than a contractor can develop.

For whatever reason, Bannon seems much more interested in policing and enforcing intellectual purity than welcoming new MAGA people into the fold. In his thoughts:

“We like turns. But the changes sit in the back and study for years and years and years to make sure you understand the beliefs and you understand the nuances of the trust and know how you can embrace the faith, ” Bannon said. “[ Don’t ] come and go to the pulpit in your first week here and start lecturing people about the way things are going to be. If you’re going to do that, we’re going to rip your face off. ” [emphasis added ]

A skeptic would argue that it ’s simply not realistic for “converts ” to “sit in the back ” for years and years and years. They joined MAGA for a reason; no self-respecting American would stay silent in a movement — forfeiting their right to offer ideas — lest their face is ripped off.  

It’s a lousy growth strategy.

Within every political movement, there’s room for multiple roles. Trump World is no exception: MAGA needs someone to police its ranks, but it also needs someone to rally the troops, mobilize the voters, and popularize its core tenants. These roles are distinct and different.

And Bannon was so good at the latter.

Seven years ago, in Trump’s first term, Bannon was booted from the White House for blasting Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner (“The railhead of all bad decisions is the same railhead: Javanka. ” ). He also dubbed Ivanka “the queen of leaks, ” and freely cooperated with anti-Trump journalists. Eventually, the president had enough:

The Mercer Family recently dumped the leaker known as Sloppy Steve Bannon. Smart!

— Donald J. Trump ( @realDonaldTrump ) January 5, 2018

Here we are, seven years later, and history is repeating itself. Bannon is attacking MAGA insiders, using vitriolic invectives to score political points. It’s the same as before; only the names have changed.

Steve Bannon seems to have much in common with another outside-the-box political thinker: Ayn Rand.

Like Bannon, Rand was a genius. It’s impossible to read “Atlas Shrugged” or “The Fountainhead ” and not be dazzled by the magnitude of her intellect. Along with Barry Goldwater, William F. Buckley, Jr. , and Ronald Reagan, she did as much to popularize conservative tenets — limited government, personal freedom, the virtues of capitalism — as anyone else.

But she was also utterly impossible to get along with. Nobody was sufficiently ideologically pure. She even led the charge against Reagan:

The Presidential election of 1976. I urge you, as emphatically as I can, not to support the candidacy of Ronald Reagan. I urge you not to work for or advocate his nomination, and not to vote for him. My reasons are as follows: Mr. Reagan is not a champion of capitalism, but a conservative in the worst sense of that word — i. e. , an advocate of a mixed economy with government controls slanted in favor of business rather than labor ( which, philosophically, is as untenable a position as one could choose — see Fred Kinnan in Atlas Shrugged, pp. 541-2 ). This description applies in various degrees to most Republican politicians, but most of them preserve some respect for the rights of the individual. Mr. Reagan does not: he opposes the right to abortion.

And there’s nothing wrong with being ideologically rigid. There’s value to intellectual purity. But in the world of politics, inflexible people get very little done. Because in politics, nothing’s ever going to be pure enough. So instead of advancing the ball, purists attack their allies; instead of negotiating the best deal possible, purists flip the table, call the other person names, and threaten to “rip their faces off. ”

Due to her inflexibility, Rand’s political impact — as great as it was — was nowhere near what it could’ve been. And if Bannon is n’t careful, he’ll share a similar fate. Such is the danger of trying to fight with everybody.

Just ask the Incredible Hulk.

Source credit