Opinion | Donald Trump, Man of Destiny - The New York Times
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Every act of political violence yields instant reactions that can’t be supported by the available facts.
A single assassination attempt by a loner with a rifle doesn’t necessarily tell us anything about whether America is poised to plunge into a political abyss. Nor do the motives of would-be assassins necessarily map onto a given era’s partisan divisions. Nor can we say definitively that this assassination attempt has sealed up the 2024 election for Donald Trump and his running mate, J.D. Vance — surely the wild twists and turns of the Trump era should disabuse us of that kind of confidence.
Having lived through eight years of that era, though, I feel comfortable making one sweeping statement about the moments when Trump shifted his head fractionally and literally dodged a bullet, fell bleeding and then rose with his fist raised in an iconic image of defiance. The scene on Saturday night in Pennsylvania was the ultimate confirmation of his status as a man of destiny, a character out of Hegel or Thomas Carlyle or some other verbose 19th-century philosopher of history, a figure touched by the gods of fortune in a way that transcends the normal rules of politics.
In Hegel’s work , the great man of history is understood as a figure “whose own particular aims involve those large issues which are the will of the World Spirit.” Hegel’s paradigm was Napoleon, the Corsican adventurer whose quest for personal power and military glory spread the ideas of the French Revolution, shattered the old regimes of Europe and ushered in the modern age.
For Hegel the great man’s role is a fundamentally progressive one. He is developing or revealing some heretofore hidden truth, pushing civilization toward its next stage of development, sometimes committing crimes or trampling sacred things but always in service to a higher aim, the unfolding intentions of a divine process.
In different ways in my own lifetime, American conservatism and liberalism placed Hegelian hopes in Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama, both figures who seemed to embody a grand optimistic vision of how the global future would unfold.
But what if progress isn’t linear, and the World Spirit’s purposes are a bit more complicated than an optimistic form of liberal Protestantism expects? What if an era is decadent rather than vital? What if there is no obvious next political stage for a civilization’s development? What if stagnation and repetition rule the day? What does a man of destiny look like then?
I think we have to say it looks like Donald Trump: a man of notable charisma, limited ideological conviction and naked appetite, motivated as much by wounded vanity as by Napoleonic ambition, who has become the avatar of the rebellious populism that has remade his era’s politics and overthrown or undermined its establishments.
And not just an avatar but a perfect one, more perfect than all the other leading populists — because from Viktor Orban to Javier Milei to his own newly chosen running mate, they tend to have specific ideologies and relatively worked-out worldviews, whereas actual populist sentiment is more protean, more flexible and opportunistic, more certain of its enemies than its policy commitments. More Trumpian, in other words: He’s the archetype of a global phenomenon precisely because he offers something less coherent and predictable, more inchoate and vibes-based, than other figures in the right-wing International.
But that archetypal status extends beyond the substance of the populist age. Trump is a “chaos candidate,” as the extremely non-Hegelian Jeb Bush once said, for whom chaos is a ladder and conventional political opposition a relatively easy obstacle to overcome. He is a man of negligible intellectual curiosity who dominates all of his epoch’s popular media forms: gossip columns, cable news, reality television, social media. He’s a man who represents the shadow side of the American character — not the Lincolnian statesman but the hustler, the mountebank, the self-promoter, the tabloid celebrity — at a time when American power and American corruption are intermingled. And he’s a man graced, this past weekend especially but always, with incredible, preternatural good luck.
That last quality is understood by some of Trump’s religious supporters as proof of divine favor and a reason to support him absolutely. But this is a presumptuous interpretation. (Some notably sinister historical figures have enjoyed miraculous-seeming escapes from assassination.) The man of destiny might represent a test for his society, a form of chastisement, an exposure of weakness and decay — in which case your obligation is not to support him without question, but to try to recognize the historical role he’s playing and match your response to what’s being unsettled or unveiled.
But that recognition is essential. Why talk about Trump in these sweeping terms, the anti-Trump reader might say, bringing in God and history and building him up to be something more than just a charlatan and demagogue? Because otherwise you’re just not dealing in reality. The man has survived self-disgrace and countless political near-death experiences, he’s poised for the greatest comeback in American political history, he just turned an attempted assassination into a Renaissance painting of bloodied defiance … you either see him as the defining figure of the age or you don’t see him at all.
I’m as guilty of this as anyone, not for underestimating Trump at the start (almost everyone did that) but for constantly trying to look beyond him, imagining a world where his political appeal somehow diminished organically and politics regained a more normal-seeming shape — in a Joe Biden versus Ron DeSantis presidential tilt, let’s say. Even my essay on his potential second term , appearing the morning of the assassination attempt, ended with a wistful vision of Trump the lame duck, fading from the spotlight through his second term.
I don’t think that’s how this goes. Trump can be defeated; Hegel’s man Napoleon was defeated, after all, and Hegel assumed that world-historical figures were destined to “fall off like empty hulls from the kernel” when their purpose had been served.
But to beat him — memo to the Biden Democrats — you have to do more, go further, risk much, become something you yourself did not expect. Because in a struggle with a man of destiny, there is no normalcy to be restored.
Ross Douthat has been an Opinion columnist for The Times since 2009. He is the author, most recently, of “The Deep Places: A Memoir of Illness and Discovery.” @DouthatNYT • Facebook
Tags
Who is online
417 visitors
Impressive pile of bullshit psychobabble from a right winger at the New York Times.
The author, while not seeming to support Trump, had some good insights.
The author, while not seeming to support Trump, had some good insigh
People who can’t read would disagree with you.
I know how hard it to is to not be able to look at things as they really are instead of as we wish they were.
Why would you post it then? I think it's a good op-ed.
I am sure there is gay porn with less dick sucking than this.
Are you?..
Pretty damn sure, this article was 100% blowjob. Gotta be some gay porn with ass fucking or something else.
It’s as if you find gay sex a slur.
They are funny insults. Be gay all you want , I don’t care, I just know conservatives care and it really bothers them to be called those slurs.
Embracing homophobia when it works for you.
No. Embracing the concept of Donald Trump's dick up someone's ass does. Because that is where he is trying to put it in America: Right up the asshole.
Is that possible, given how small most here think it is?
Like this?
Nah, that is pointing out flaws, not endlessly licking his balls.
kind of the whole point of my post in response to your post 4:
Which a normal interpretation of would be that you think the author is 'sucking Trump's cock' and now you admit he was pointing out flaws, which is pretty different.
I’ll trust your knowledge on gay porn.
Bad bet, not much knowledge here but given two guys there are really only 2 things you can do.
That aside, I assume you are supporting the relentless dick sucking of this article and the elevating an observable complete piece of shit to godlike status?
Are you letting your limited imagination constrain you?
That’s just your bias running away with you.
I could be wrong but I think he's speaking from his law enforcement experiences
if it means what you are going for then yes, I wil let it constrain me.
[removed][✘]
Huh?
Imagine what you like but leave me out of it.
Sure thrawn, all your posts have been deeply intellectual....
Don’t support inclusivity?
They weren’t, but I can see why you would think they were.
Don’t you?
No, shit?...
I know it blew your mind…
NSFW and deeply disturbing
Bullshit. We see him for exactly what he is -- a lying, cheating, traitorous, wannabe dictator felon.
If you say so, but...
Yes, I do.
Then you had better start writing the headline.
Teamsters speaking at the RNC, that is a giant FU to Biden and democrats.
I love it!
The man is a charlatan, a fraud, and several other worse things that I will not bother to mention.
First class twat waffle with maple syrup on top
I read it and thought “wow, that’s some actual interesting analysis in a New York Times article” and, was impressed. That it is immediately attacked by the leftists in the comments because it’s not some third grade level tripe mindlessly calling trump hitler reinforced my initial reaction.
a sane article from an anti trumper published in left wing media. The rarest of rare occurrences.
LOL.
Trumpsters are fucking nuts.
Ross Douhat is not a never Trumper by the way.
Teamsters endorsed Biden in 2020, and Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012, but know they are fucking nuts.
Good point there.
There is no way to read this article except that it is a love letter to Donald Trump.
Start with the title "Trump : Man Of Destiny" . It has a little superhero feel to it.
This passage is the author figuratively blowing Trump.
Thats the mainstream media for you.
Frustration breeds unusual metaphors.
I thought our democrat friends were more inclusive, it seems homophobia is a serious issue with some.
Yeah, pointing out that a man had disgraced himself is praise of the Highest magnitude, and that comes from the sliver of article you selected.
If you understood the author’s point, you’d see the terms that got you so bothered are not those of unqualified praise, But rather the opposite. Calling him a man of destiny and offering napoleon as the example is not a compliment. And pointing out that trump is the defining figure of the age is simply a fact, and not a compliment from someone who sees the US as stagnating/in decline.
It’s not “trump is hitler, trump is a Nazi, trump is the worst human history” repeated ad nauseam that one finds in the usual NYT article so I can see why leftists are confused by more advanced concepts.
What the article actually says is that Trump has overcome his "self-disgrace" and is now an unstoppable force.
Ross Douhat recently interviewed JD Vance. It was basically a softball interview. There isnt a real never Trumper in the world that would do that.
The kindest thing you could say about Douhat is that he is a wishy washy bothsideser who is "Trump curious".
Again, that explicitly states Trump disgraced himself. Do you think that's praise?
and is now an unstoppable force.
From the highlighted section of the article:
That's the opposite of "unstoppable force"
t Douhat is that he is a wishy washy bothsideser who is "Trump curious".
Douthat is trying to place Trump in historical context making a nuanced argument. It's not the sort simplistic, extremely partisan recitation of Democratic talking points you find in the usual NYT screed.