Analysis

An Unhealthy Obsession with National Strength

Conservatives used to understand that a strong state would put personal freedoms at risk.

Jens Stoltenberg Donald Trump Theresa May
NATO secretary general Jens Stoltenberg, American president Donald Trump and British prime minister Theresa May attend a ceremony at NATO headquarters in Brussels, May 25, 2017 (NATO)

Writing about the immigration debate in the United States, Jonah Goldberg worries about the two sides’ obsession with “strength”.

Progressives believe diversity makes America stronger. Reactionaries believe it’s homogeneity.

But stronger to do what, exactly? Goldberg asks.

Obsession

Nobody is more obsessed with strength than Donald Trump.

He constantly extolls strength, at home and abroad. He praised the Chinese government for showing strength at Tiananmen Square. He admires Vladimir Putin’s strong leadership. On the campaign trail, he upended the traditional conservative critique of big government by decrying the “weakness” of America’s political leaders and institutions.

Goldberg is correct that “strength” is the priority of nationalism — and fits uncomfortably with the American idea. The men who founded the republic understood that a “strong” national government would conflict with the liberty of its people. That is why they designed a system of checks of balances.

National will

Trump and his supporters believe in something else.

To them, the state is the embodiment of the nation; the expression of a “national will”.

Conservatives used to understand there is no such thing.

The Atlantic Sentinel is supported by readers. Become a paying subscriber on Substack for €5 (= $5) per month and you will receive my stories by email. You can also follow the Atlantic Sentinel on Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter and Tumblr.