Back in the Saddle

Howdy, Stranger

“Ridin' the range once more

Totin' my old .44

Where you sleep out every night

And the only law is right

Back in the saddle again”

—Gene Autry

Back in the Saddle

Howdy, Stranger. I have been away for more than a month, and I think you have been neglected long enough.

I have a backlog of posts to share in coming days and weeks, but for now, I would like to wet your whistle with some pieces I recently published elsewhere…

Man in the Arena

In August, I wrote an essay in IM—1776 for the 50th anniversary of Watergate:

Like the Red Scare, an episode in which Richard Nixon features prominently, the Watergate scandal is remembered as a narrow escape from despotism after the unraveling of a conspiracy. Just as reactionaries like Joseph McCarthy are remembered as conspirators to subvert constitutional norms and amass power under the guise of anti-communism, Nixon is framed as a sinister despot who radicalized America’s middle order against Washington and the press in the hope of establishing an “imperial presidency” to undermine the Constitution and destroy decades of liberal progress.

These fears were not completely unfounded. As the leader of a new majority, Nixon had finally broken the New Deal coalition with his 1972 landslide victory, carrying 49 states and winning more than 60% of the popular vote. In an interview just before the election, Nixon prophesied that he would become known as a great reformer. But unlike his predecessors, whose reforms only expanded government power, Nixon pledged to diffuse federal power throughout the country. “There are no sacred cows,” he said the day after the election, “We will tear up the pea patch.”

I have always been a Nixon respecter, and to me, his rise and fall is a perfect metaphor for the death of politics in the postmodern age. As we continue to struggle against a muscular bureaucracy at home and entangling alliances abroad—as we undergo yet another political realignment—I think Richard Nixon will be rehabilitated and remembered as a hero.

There is a lot to learn from the Watergate saga, but probably the most important lesson is that the press was and still is a political entity. Nixon knew it, and his battles with the press became the stuff of legend. What is often portrayed as a childish grudge was, in fact, a masterful understanding of politics in modern times. The myth of the neutral institution, which nurtured the idea of an independent press, was overpowering in the 1950s and 60s. To see through it is one thing… to operate around it and build a lasting political coalition in spite of its power, is quite another. Nixon did that, but the victory was short-lived.

The press has always tried to influence public opinion, but it got a taste of real power after breaking Johnson and driving Nixon from office. Watergate enshrined that power, and for decades after, the press played a key role in making and breaking politicians and shaping their priorities. To those of us who grew up in this world, the press seemed untouchable and its power limitless.

But with the rise of social media, all of that changed. Trump’s election in 2016 posed a real threat to this uncontested power, and just eight years later, the Watergate press is now fighting for its very survival.

The recent Harris/Walz PR catastrophe demonstrates the power of social media to not only flip the narrative and make or break politicians, but to interrogate the media and challenge its authority.

Watergate elevated the press the very moment its integrity was in question, and 50 years later, after years of uncontested control over what we think, know, and believe, the press is finally starting to crumble—the knockout blow delivered decades earlier when Nixon boldly declared it “the enemy.”

---

The American Nation: Resurrections

Last month I also sat down with Michael Anton of the Claremont Institute to talk about the federal bureaucracy, American principles, and restoration for IM—1776. Anton and I come from different corners of the right, with me being more of a traditionalist.

In the past, our differences over the Founding and Lincoln would take center stage, making productive conversation impossible. But as I say towards the end of the dialogue, I am less and less interested in such debates.

We, the Americans, are all on the same menu, and the forces arrayed against us are united in their desire to upend the very foundations of our civilization. We desperately need a similar kind of unity to fight this existential threat, and until that threat is subdued, I see little upside in wasting time on irreconcilable differences.

Anton seemed to agree, and we ended up talking more about the future than the past.

From the dialogue:

Anton: You say you “want America to be America again.” So do I. There is no way to do that without restoring the founders’ regime and the people’s reverence for it. That means understanding what made America great in the first place. My contention is that it was a combination of the people, their traditions, their faith, their character, and their principles. Take any one of those away, and you don’t have America anymore. You might have something that “works,” though I doubt it. But it won’t be the America that you and I want back.

Lee: So we agree that the American tradition is superior to all others and tailor-made for this time, place, and people. We also recognize the centrality of the founders and the republic they established in that tradition, and we acknowledge that our current regime is hostile, corrupt, and possibly illegitimate. We share a desire to see a rebirth of virtue and the republican spirit and a restoration of the old regime, even if the way forward is treacherous and uncertain.

---

Elite Aspirants, Your Future is at Stake

Finally, a few weeks ago, I wrote a lengthy thread about my experience as an “elite aspirant” and encouraged others like me to embrace the coming realignment and vote for Donald Trump.

An editor for The Blaze reached out, and so I was able to publish a revised version of the thread on the site.

An excerpt:

Maybe you’re like me and now see this as a contest of liberty against tyranny, freedom against slavery, and government by, with, and for the people against oligarchy. Maybe you see that it’s not really about Trump, JD Vance, or Robert F. Kennedy Jr., but about the future of America as a republic, rather than a permanent bureaucracy where a special caste controls our most fundamental rights and privileges.

If you’re an elite aspirant, like me, you might be hesitant to wage war against the same culture, institutions, and governing philosophy that you’ve pledged fealty to. Maybe you’re afraid of ostracizing yourself, sacrificing your career, and sliding down that greasy pole. Maybe you feel there aren’t adequate incentives.

I’m not here to tell you what’s best for your career and personal life, but we’re at an inflection point. Whoever wins this contest will decide whether America can endure as a republic with a right to self-government or whether a permanent bureaucratic tyranny will replace it.

You might think it won’t affect you, but I promise it will — and if not you, then your children and the good folks back home. Hard work, creativity, and merit are how outsiders like us succeed; without them, you don’t climb the greasy pole. But the coming tyranny is deeply hostile to these values. It demands obedience above all, and even then, obedience will only take you as far as the regime permits. If you’re a spiritual bureaucrat, this may appeal to you, but if you’re like me — young, hungry, innovative, and willing to live and die for something greater — you will suffer tremendously under this new system.

A realignment is coming, and it will be every bit as devastating to the established order as the elections of 1828, 1896, and 1932 were to theirs.

What makes this reaction so profound is that it has been fermenting for years far outside Washington’s line of sight. It’s more than ideology, economics, or even politics—this thing is a powerful social movement with all the right ingredients to dominate.

And it will.