March 19, 2016 --

LPR is convinced it is providential that three weeks after Danielle Allen called for stopping the Trump candidacy by reference to Adolf Hitler, LPR saw this quote in a March 12 New York Times story on the French philosopher Alain Finkielhaut: “There is a refusal to think about this era on its own terms.”

Clearly, at least to LPR, Ms. Allen, director of the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard University, and a Harvard professor of government , views Candidate Trump, along with Hitler, as “a demagogic opportunist …exploit[ing] a divided country.” Was it necessary to place Trump in a Hitlerian context, even with this disclaimer from Professor Allen: “Leave aside whether a direct comparison of Trump to Hitler is accurate.”? If it is to be left aside, why make the comparison?

If Professor Allen sees Trump as a demagogue who will, in office, be a tyrant, she could have turned to the warning, in that regard, found in Federalist Paper No. 1. If she is fearful of the impact of Trump on “a divided country,” is Professor Allen unaware of Madison’s observation in Federalist No. 10 that divisions in society – “factions” -- are a sign of liberty. Certainly, Professor Allen cannot be unaware how Hitler solved the problem of “a divided country” – creating a dictatorship based on the idea of One Nation, One People, One Leader. Is Professor Allen not concerned that current description of political dissent as “anti-government” might have an authoritarian ring about them, a ring tending to exalt an imperial president? Or, for Professor Allen, is it unethical to criticize Democrats in the White House?

LPR has some difficulty with Professor Allen’s frantic columns against Trump (see her Washington Post columns of February 21, February 25 and March 14). These columns are filled with lurid accusations against Trump – and scant factual support for the accusations. The following is taken from the conclusion to her February 21 column: “Donald Trump has no respect for the basic rights that are the foundation of constitutional democracy, nor for the requirements of decency necessary to sustain democratic citizenship. Nor can any democracy survive without an expectation that the people require reasonable arguments that bring the truth to light, and Trump has nothing but contempt for our intelligence.” For LPR, accusations intended to demonize a candidate do not become rational merely by their assertion. To suggest otherwise is, it would seem to LPR, a way of expressing “contempt for our intelligence.”

Is Professor Allen unaware that Madison indicated, in Federalist Paper No. 57, that democracy will not survive when officials are distant from the people? What is Politics 2016 about, if not a demand that our Founding Legacy of Liberty be renewed and that the distance between Officials and People end now?