Reflections on President Trump: words and action
Quite some time ago I noticed that people tend to describe themselves in different modes. If you ask people to give a brief summary of who they are, the first might use words of emotion and relationship: I am a kind person who likes to talk to people and hear what they say. I have a good sense of humor. That sort of thing.
The second might be a “just the facts” type: I was born in Kansas. I have a degree in mechanical engeering. I have a wife and three children. In other words: I am my resume.
And a third might self-define in terms of activities: I love to golf and ski, and in summer I go sailing in my sailboat. I’ve traveled all around the world.
Those modes of description may seem arbitrary, but they are not.
Donald Trump is that last type of person, a man who defines himself though action. In my opinion, that is one of many reasons why one cannot possibly think of him as an intellectual, although he’s sharp and canny. Nor does he seem articulate—although his words certainly get the job done, don’t they? He hardly spoke on the campaign trail about conservatism (as a movement or a theory or set of principles), and does not really define himself in terms of conservatism or any particular political ism at all (he talks populist and populism but never uses the words, as far as I know).
In sum: a man of action who conceptualizes himself as a man of action and looks at the world that way. He defines himself by what he will do.
That’s one of the reasons I’ve stopped so very much emphasis on parsing Trump’s words. That’s hard for me; parsing words is something I’m used to doing and something I do quite naturally. But with Trump it’s somewhat of a waste of time, although of course I’ll still do it. And now that he’s president, his words carry even more weight and might have even more repercussions than before.
But it’s Trump’s actions that will tell the tale. And since I’ve been thinking of Trump as an action-defined person for a while now—and even had a long talk about the concept last night with a friend—I was especially struck by the following words in Trump’s speech today, words that might not have seemed all that memorable to most people:
We will no longer accept politicians who are all talk and no action, constantly complaining but never doing anything about it.
The time for empty talk is over. Now arrives the hour of action.
The hour of action is at hand for Trump, as well.
Funny. I was thinking exactly the same thing.
“Distinguish the man of words from the man of deeds.” Baltasar Gracian, S.J.
“The Atlantic” published a useful description of the Trump phenomenon some time ago: “The press takes him literally, but not seriously; his supporters take him seriously, but not literally.”
“Take him seriously, but not literally”, appears to be a valid way to view him.
I said to someone the other day (an Obama supporter and lifelong Dem) that in both cases, Obama and Trump, what they say, the words they emit, amount to epiphenomena. What counts is what they actually do.
“Today’s ceremony, however, has very special meaning. Because today, we are not merely transferring power from one administration to another or from one party to another.
But we are transferring power from Washington D.C. and giving it back to you, the people.
For too long, a small group in our nation’s capital has reaped the rewards of government while the people have borne the cost. Washington flourished, but the people did not share in its wealth. Politicians prospered, but the jobs left. And the factories closed.
The establishment protected itself but not the citizens of our country. Their victories have not been your victories. Their triumphs have not been your triumphs. And while they celebrated in our nation’s capital, there was little to celebrate for struggling families all across our land. That all changes starting right here and right now. Because this moment is your moment. It belongs to you.” – President Trump
This was not a speech attempting heal the wounds between the Washington insiders- either Republican or Democrat. This was more a declaration of war.
I’m reminded of Peter Drucker’s story about the merchants Uncle Henry and Charlie Kellstadt, and Uncle Henry’s son Irving.
“Fifty years or more ago the Uncle Henry’s and the Charlie Kellstadts dominated; then it was necessary for Son Irving to emphasize systems, principles, and abstractions. There was need to balance the overly perceptual with a little conceptual discipline…But now we again need the Uncle Henrys and Charlie Kellstadts. We have gone much too far toward dependence on untested quantification, toward symmetrical and purely formal models, toward argument from postulates rather than from experience, and toward moving from abstraction to abstraction without once touching the solid ground of concreteness.”
http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/6459.html
A quiet declaration of war is exactly what’s needed because the Left has been at war with America for generations. The last 8 years demonstrated that the closer they get to having their way, the more determinded they are to sweep all before them. Fanatical ideologues cannot be assuaged. Satiation for such as they consists of total domination without restraints.
Drain the swamp. Damn calls for ‘moderation’ and bipartisanship. Burn it out, root and branch. Timidity in the face of and civility to the disloyal are a formula for far worse consequences down the road. Bite the bullet now and do what must be done.
Trump Inaugural Address Focuses On ‘We,’ Leaves Himself Out Of Speech Almost Entirely
Almost says it all…
but he was gracious to the prior residents of his new home!!
AND the other part is how with inclusiveness, he ends up saying this:
“Todays ceremony however has very special meaning, because today we are not merely transferring power from one administration to another, or from one party to another, but we are transferring power from washington DC, and giving it back to you, the people”
there is a quick story about a capitalist and their actions, and how some of them, despite all teh bs and media and such, and in fact a lot of them (i have been helped more than once by the crowd), do really good things and do not care if you know.
there was a woman, she worked for a company that did demolition work. she mostly handled the books and the company was run by someone and owned by another. over the course of her work, the books dodnt work out and she discovered through due diligence, that it was the CEO that was taking money.
she had only a few options
1) Leave the company (make it someone elses problem)
2) Approach the CEO for a cut (both rob the owner)
3) Just shut up (keep job until you cant keep it)
4) Call the owner, have a sit down and let the cards fall (this has the most risk)
she chose 4
the owner came in, saw the stuff, agreed with her, and fired the CEO… he then asked her to help run the company.. she said yes..
so what was the good thing?
well, he offered her the company
how much? for nothing or rather she already paid
she got the company, she got the equipment, the debt and a bank account whose money was a lot larger than the debt.
from their, she ran her company as he did, and made sure to give away cars and things to her employees.
-=-=-=
my story of help? well here is one of several. made a friend on the net, she was very wealthy and married. she helped me out when i was made homeless from my ex. wrote a check for 7000… that allowed me to get an apartment, get cleaned up, and get back to work after i was in the dirt from a feminist dominated system that didnt care and told me i had no rights.
i got on my feet, paid it all back and have lived there ever since. i asked her what do i do to pay her back more than she loaned me? what interest? she said, find someone when your successful and do the same for them
i can tell you more than 20 of those stories..
-=-=-=-
some people, when they arent on the left, and they arent into using money for perversions and naughty things which dont interest them. what do they do? many of them take in foster kids, many of them build churches and start businesses and give them away, many of them give to charities and such
but the part the public misses in this secret area, is that once you ahve so much, and you dont want to quit cause work is made likeable like that, and you have more than you can use, and dont trust the state or charities, what do you do to pay it back
why is it so hard to believe that a person with money is good rhetorical given the lefts constant wailing in your ear?
what makes people think that the poor are nice and the rich are bad, greedy and evil?
i see the poor more wiling to paint others property and cause damage out of spite, not the wealthy… i see the poor willing to rob and take what htey want, and not work hard for it.. but not the wealthy… the poor are the ones that kill their rich nicve family, to get the money…
by far, the wealthy are good not bad…
i have met very few negative wealthy people in my life who do anything negative.. they are commonly more positive, nice, helpful, polite, concerned and so on.
after all its not the money that makes a rich area nice, its the behavior of the rich… which you would see easily if you go to indonesia, where the poor are nice too… but they are not “owed”
we have forgotten waht real people are like
we have forgotten to the point that only the ones that hurt us are acceptable to us and the good ones who will not do that, are not.
its not greed that drives trump, thats what poor people say to explain what they cant explain in behavior that they dont share if they had the same
if you make enough to live super well above everyone each year of your life, more is not what motivates you, despite the jokes and other things… the poor alway have it backwards and arse up!!
lets say your a olympic quality ball player… except now the game is business. your an olympic quality organizer and leader that can get people to follow you and make things happen.
you see, when you start out, your that way, but poor. and you get more and more and more, but your still that way. once you start making 10 million a year (arbitrary number), you are still that way… the poor that look at you think your cheating to get there, but they dont think a football player making more than 10 million a year is cheating, he or she is the best.
and THAT is what they dont want to admit, from walter williams to freidman to the road to serfdom. they would have to admit that a person with great olympic qulaity life skills (even if their criticisms dont see it or agree), does better than them, and they always do and it never stops.
the point, hopefully neo wont delete me, is that they are being the best they can be, and just cause they get a lto of money early on, or in the start and you come in in the third act of their lives and judge them, they are still being the best and that attracts the money…
the money is not why the best are the best
the best are the best and that brins the money
when they get to be old, they want to be the same
so they keep being the best, and the world keeps giving them money
are there people who cheat that? yes, but they are the exceptions that prove the rule, not the norm, of which the nice is the exception, otherwise society would be veyr despotic and dangerous
Trump is indeed conservative. Not “A Conservative” but indeed (in deed) conservative.
“Perhaps it would be well, most of the time, to use this word “conservative” as an adjective chiefly. For there exists no Model Conservative, and conservatism is the negation of ideology: it is a state of mind, a type of character, a way of looking at the civil social order.” ~~ Russell Kirk
When the terms “Neo-“, “Paleo-“, etc. entered the lexicon the body of classical conservatism was interred. If you are at all interested in the intellectual foundation of conservatism as philosophy you will find no better starting point than this short essay:
http://www.kirkcenter.org/index.php/detail/ten-conservative-principles/
Well, I wish him well regardless.
I’ve gotten looser about Trump’s words.
I don’t know what happens next but I will make my decisions on the basis of his actions.
That’s what will make or break him.
He hardly spoke on the campaign trail about conservatism (as a movement or a theory or set of principles), and does not really define himself in terms of conservatism or any particular political ism at all (he talks populist and populism but never uses the words, as far as I know).
no ism works, all are totalitarian, whether conservative, or not..
he is not an ideologue…
which is why the people like him
you guys been watcign wrestling between two or more isms and forgot that there was a time in which isms were not the norm, and the fight was not defined in academic terms by elites with high degrees and knowing little of the real world having to make a life from donations or the state, and not their own living in the world
sorry.
but that is what i tried to keep saying
normal people dont live isms
they live their live and chose as they go
they dont follow an idealogy, they barely follow their religion
since wilson the progressives have programmed the people to think in certain ways so that they are favoed, and the people who made the USA with their bare hands and such were put on the side, chess masters and suits collectively beating up on the real movers and shakers that didnt ever need their theories to live
Trump, Carnegie, Ford, Edison, Houston, Vancerbuilts, and on..
NONE of them were ideological
even our founders werent
nor were most of our presidents
it was the bottle washers and button sorters who wanted nice categories and 10 columns on the page and so on… and wrap up the world in a bow as they worship astagnant order that makes them not fear, than they do the chaotic real world in which everything is breaking their categories, and classes, and sets, and so on. [i mean really, all marx is, is set theory using different terms. the class of blacks, the set of blacks. except in marx math there is no inetersection of sets… so they talk as if blacks dont marry whites and so on.. ]
we constantly have commented how the left is not real world and forget that the left is following an ism and so cant be real world. how could it be
these people whose strength comes from order, rules and setting up rules and commanding force, are completely outclasses by someone like trump or others.
they are jealous too
with all their tools and theories, and so on, they can never make it work right, can never really win, never get people on their side, and on and on.
[edited for length by n-n]
Artfldgr:
Saying he wasn’t about any “ism” was not a criticism.
As a NeverTrumper I will say I have almost no kick with the man so far. Not that he needs my approval.
My personal reading is that someone or something came to Trump after the last time he nuked his polls by tweeting with intent to abuse against the ex-beauty queen, and he got the message that it really was time to turn presidential.
He still gets into the occasional tweet-fight, but it sure looks to me like he has mostly put away “childish things” as St. Paul would say.
The John Lewis thing is debatable but as far as I’m concerned, after Lewis lied about N-word and the Tea Party, his karma has caught up with him.
And I gotta say:
Knock on wood.
huxley:
You may be right that the tweeting about the beauty pageant queen was Triump’s very-offensive-tweet swan song, a last fling before donning the trappings of the office.
If someone did indeed influence him in that regard, my guess is that it was a combination of Kellyanne Conway, Ivanka, and Melania.
A man of action. Yes.
If you have ever built a house, you know that it takes someone planning, executing, and pushing to get it done or it just doesn’t happen. Multiply that by what it takes to build big buildings in cities dominated by Democrat government bureaucracies. Then you have some idea of what a person has to do to build many such buildings and actually make money in the process. That he enjoys work and enjoys the action of getting things done is a huge plus. No more leading from behind, no more tying the hands of the wealth creators, no more wringing of hands over problems. This is a man who is going to do things. He may fail (the inner cities are an enormous problem that may defeat even him) or make mistakes, but he will never quit working and pushing for solutions.
He’s recruited some very able people to help him. I’m beginning to think we may all be pleasantly surprised. I certainly hope so.
I’m not under any naé¯ve illusions that the progressives won’t do everything possible to stop him. It is not going to be smooth sailing. We have to be ready for a lot of chaos and possible setbacks. We live in interesting times.
Obama is and always was full of BS (to me). I just never saw anything there beneath the surface. He was full of words – but short on deeds. Or his deeds fell so far short of his lofty words. Yet, so many people believed and continued to believe him ( why?). He plays a round of golf with Tiger Woods – and he thinks he could be Tiger Woods if he tried. Ditto for shooting hoops with Michael Jordan. I credit him with getting elected POTUS twice, but not much else. At least he blocked Hillary, but I don’t know if 8 years of her would have been worse than what we have experienced.
Action is indeed needed. So far the cabinet picks are mostly strong choices. The new administration, thanks to the choice of Pence, has an opportunity to get the gop controlled legislature on board the varvious promises that have been made. Trump should ignore the democrats and the msm. They will oppose him 24/7 so why pay them any attention? And please stop tweeting about them. (Ain’t going to happen, but freezing them out would drive them bonkers.)
Action without results is mere spinning the wheels. I hope the new regime hits the ground running tomorrow.
‘The time for empty talk is over. Now arrives the hour of action.’
Thought and action are two sides of an integrated human being. Thought without action is useless and action without thought will lead only to chaos.
@Neo – you may have correctly identified what we see about trump, IDK.
Correct or not, it is his action that speaks louder than words, and it is this notion that is very much behind the expression:
We’ll See.
.
For all the grand talk here in the comments of trump as a “man of action”, most seem to be imputing something positive on that.
Not that I am equating trump with him, but keep in mind (insert a famous bad man here…e.g. stalin) was very much a man of action.
.
To add to Steve D’s pointed comment…
Even assuming there is a set of principles and a plan with some depth, if a person cannot articulate their ideas and explain what they want done, it seems, at minimum, opportunity for misfires and conflict, as it leaves many others to guess and act accordingly. In the worst case, it creates chaos.
We do not get to see what he does or says behind closed doors, so all we can do is decipher his actions.
I still consider ourselves to be in a relatively risky situation until we see a clear direction and pattern.
We’ll see what the next 100 days brings.
Steve D and Big Maq,
Yes, we’ll see. I am willing to wait to see. I am not willing to be an ankle biter or armchair quarter back. We’ll see. If we don’t see I will go back to my if only we had nominated Cruz persona.
Neo-neocon,
That is a very astute observation. It explains so much. Even about Obama’s supporters.
Thanks!
Let try to ask you neo how you discripe yourself
If someone did indeed influence him in that regard, my guess is that it was a combination of Kellyanne Conway, Ivanka, and Melania.
neo: Sure. Maybe.
As a somewhat religious person, I don’t rule out God, angels or what alcoholics call a “moment of clarity” either.
I have seen people turn their lives around. Perhaps Trump wasn’t as bad as I came to think about him — many details of his life weren’t encouraging — but maybe he was and something changed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_f8snT93Bc
Excellent insight, Neo. I oftentimes have found myself laughing aloud at things Trump has said up to the present. But every fiber of my being is grateful that he is President and not Hillary. I feel hopeful.
I like this PJ post by Charlie Martin:
STOP MAKING ME DEFEND TRUMP
https://pjmedia.com/blog/stop-making-me-defend-trump
Indeed, typically politicians mince words, alluding to deeply held philosophical points while covering them with a facade of popular common-sense. “Kinetic action”, “man-caused disaster”, etc.
Trump is a not a typical politician. The federal bureaucracy will certainly need to adjust.
Haliv:
Ordinarily, in the style of that first mode. That’s the one that’s natural to me, although I can do any of the three.
There’s an American flag in my parent’s garage that is unintentionally hanging backwards. I’m going to retrieve it, clean it and properly hang it. I believe the flag is about 20 years old, so it’s about time it was treated with some respect.
#MAGA
So I did an “I-count” on Obama’s first inaugural speech, just out of curiosity.
I found 3:
“I stand here today humbled …”
“I thank President Bush for his service to our nation…”
“Today I say to you that the challenges we face are real.”
His speech looks much longer. So on a per-capita basis, Obama’s got fewer “I”‘s .
Obama’s speech:
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2009/01/21/president-barack-obamas-inaugural-address
…in case anyone wants to fact-check.
Better year on record says left
Trump days no way
Gore says sequel to his prediction coming to theatersThese bizarre scenes from the Sahara Desert show locals sledging down sand dunes after the heaviest snowfall in living memory.
Photographers have taken incredible pictures this morning of ONE METRE deep snow covering the sand in the small Saharan desert town of Ain Sefra.
The town saw a sprinkling of snow just before Christmas, when a few flakes settled on the red sand dunes of the world’s hottest desert for the first time in 37 years.
Once I got past listening to what Trump says, and watching what he does, I not only began to accept him, but “almost” to like him.
Regarding the number of times Obama an Trump said “I” in their inauguration speech:
Both have used the royal “we” abundantly, so counting the number of occasions “I” occurred does not tell the whole story.
In Trump’s speech yesterday, he used the royal “we” frequently at the outset, but later he used “we” to refer to the American people. It is not sufficient to count the number of times “I” appears in the speech each gave; one must also count “we” and differentiate how many references are to the self and how many to the nation.
Regarding who influenced him to become more presidential:
Yesterday’s wreath-laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown was instructive. He was clearly watching (out of the side of his eye) what Pence was doing, and taking his cue from that. I have noted other occasions where Pence is giving him subtle cues. I am not troubled by the fact that Pence influences him in this manner. In fact I am pleased Trump is willing to take these cues from Pence, and pleased that Pence has learned how to influence him without appearing to be in charge. It is a good relationship.
@parker – there is a lot of celebration here based on what folks assume trump will do, some (much?) of which is wholly without much evidence.
Yes, be happy that the shrew queen wasn’t blessed with her deepest desire.
But, trump is a man to watch very carefully, imho, as he is largely still an “unknown”.
He get’s his first 100 days to make himself much better known, but not in silence.
Well, as I said, yesterday — remember how strong Obama looked in 2008. Eight years later the Democratic Party is the weakest it’s been in my lifetime.
That can happen to Trump and Republicans.
You only need to parse the words of sneaky liars, and the problem is this- you are usually doing the parsing long after the words were spoken. Whatever else Trump is, he is not such a liar- if he is going to lie to you, he will bluff it out with great bravado.
As someone who manages a company it is always good to look at the numbers. Who are your customers? What did they buy? Where are they? Trump blusters and stomps but his real actions are few and far between. I’m waiting for an intelligent replacement for Obamacare as my small company is the target of huge price increases and lower coverage. The solution is not easy and will require some people to make big changes on faith. Rather than engage people like Rand Paul and Paul Ryan on this Trump seems to just throw out some flip comments about covering “everyone”. Not even Obamacare does that. A good manager not only give steady direction but helps resolve disputes and difficulties. The President is the guy who is going to have to sell this new health care law. Refusing to get into the process is not acceptable.
There is a whole lot of mean and envy built up in Donald Trump and it will not serve him well going forward.
Quite insightful neo. Kudos …and thanks.
I knew enough to instinctually ignore some (at least) of what he says (he reminds me of the doers I grew up around), but hadn’t quite grasped why I knew I’d need to separate the wheat from the chaff rather differently than usual. You successfully cleared that mystery up lol.
…by the by, at this point, I’m suspecting that he may be a better choice, after all, than my first choice was, for what I was hoping for in a candidate.
Indeed, I suspect here I am in my dotage, sliding into a hopeful Jacksonianism …when I thought my neo-conservative arteries had long since hardened into concrete.
I must have been hearing a different speech yesterday than the one George Will heard, for sure.
The good news for Trump is that his mandate is not to bring forth mighty FDR-like government programs, but to enforce existing laws and beat back the administrative regulations and executive orders from the Obama era.
The crucial exception is Obamacare. Apparently we cannot just wipe it off the books and go back to pre-2010 healthcare. So there will have to be some good solid, even creative thinking to do and then the even harder part of making the deals to make it happen — especially since the Democrats have blood in their eyes to trip Trump up however they can.
I’m not convinced Trump and his associates are up to the task.
Chaos is happening – courtesy of the progressives. Anti-Trump demonstrations all day in Seattle with someone shot near the U. of Washington campus. Many Seattle area high schools emptied out in protest against Trump
Anti-Trump violence in many other cities. Today, huge women’s rights demonstrations in many cities with around 250,000 showing up in Washington D.C.
This is obviously well orchestrated and funded.
The TEA Party protests did not begin until the Porkulus Bill was passed in late February, 2009. The TEA Party protests were never violent, never interfered with anyone else’s civil rights, and never destroyed property. These anti-Trump rallies are marked by rampant interference with other people’s civil rights, foolish violence, and random property destruction.
The authorities had better crack down hard with stiff penalties on the law breakers or we could see billions in property losses and far too much spent on law enforcement. The gauntlet has been thrown down by the progressives. A repeat of the late 60s and early 70s in the works? It doesn’t look good.
“I must have been hearing a different speech yesterday than the one George Will heard, for sure.” [brdavis9]
George Will wants the soaring rhetoric of a JFK or an Obama. He doesn’t understand two things:
First, such rhetoric is rare in the business world. Business people don’t often think in soaring rhetorical terms, an when they do it’s oftentimes held suspect as a cover for lack of accomplishment;
Second, the first stage in problem solving is to identify the problem. “An education system flush with cash and failing its students,” “rusting factories standing like tombstones” (my favorite) and “Islamic terrorism” are succinct identifications of those problems.
George Will is condescending conservative; John Podesta, Jonathan Gruber, et al. are condescending Progressives; same men, different ties.
This speech was almost as laconic as “veni vidi vici”, just put in future tense.