An entertaining column Mr. Douthat. Your are right, both Trump and Pope Francis are dangerous...or at least their followers are. Francis leads one of the mystical religions threatened by and resentful of knowledge and science. Trump leads a paranoid schizophrenic Republican Party that desperately needs targets for its pent-up hatred. The questions are, can Pope Francis and Trump ride their tigers? Can the rest of us remain safe as we watch in awe?
4
Ross, if it was 'only a matter of time' before Pope Francis sparred with Donald Trump, then how come you didn't predict it? I'd be a lot more impressed with your prognostications if you made them ahead of the event instead of a lot of predictable blather after the event.
13
Mr. Douthat, I can't wait for your comments praising Donald Trump as a true conservative who can make America great again after he wins the Republican nomination.
16
The idea of this column is copied from the Matthew Schmitz's op-ed in the Washington Post. It is interesting to focus on what Ross Douthat added to Mr. Schmitz's idea. Ross's one original thought is that the Pope and Donald Trump are attacking Neoliberalism. Wrong again, Ross Douthat--Neoliberalism is what you hate. The people are angry at Wall Street and government impotence and hypocrisy.
As others have commented, Mr Trump and the Pope are not similar in the danger they pose to all of us. If Donald Trump were President, he would have terrible power to do harm. Remember what happened in the 20th century when people turned to strong leaders to make things right.
"Never again."
As others have commented, Mr Trump and the Pope are not similar in the danger they pose to all of us. If Donald Trump were President, he would have terrible power to do harm. Remember what happened in the 20th century when people turned to strong leaders to make things right.
"Never again."
15
I bet this Pope appreciate the 'Christian values'in Bernie Sanders stances. Hope Ross, a supposed strong Catholic, is paying attention.
12
look, let's face it: Douthat is a young naif, born of great affluence, who changes religions like most people change summer underwear. this is clickbait, pure and simple.
14
Ross, it was not "only a matter of time before Pope Francis tangled with Donald Trump." You helped make it happen. In asserting otherwise, you sound more nervous than demure.
The rift between these men exposes a contradiction in your loyalties to faith and party. Perhaps it's time to take a stand for one or the other. Let's just hope you can get Donald Pandora Trump back in his gilded box.
The rift between these men exposes a contradiction in your loyalties to faith and party. Perhaps it's time to take a stand for one or the other. Let's just hope you can get Donald Pandora Trump back in his gilded box.
11
One of the main similarities I see between the Pope and Trump is that Douthat doesn't like them.
The Pope is dangerous? To whom? People who think the ostracism of others, based on sexual preference, nationality or religious belief should be cherished?
The Pope is dangerous? To whom? People who think the ostracism of others, based on sexual preference, nationality or religious belief should be cherished?
40
Pope Francis, Trump and Bernie Sanders are all disruptors. They have shattered the establishment of their respective institutions and status quo. Success in doing so. If nothing else. Bravo!
9
Francis is remarkably inclusive, even of non-Catholics. Trump is a bigot.
44
For the last few weeks, Trump and Bernie Sanders have been indistinguishable. Now it is Trump and Pope Francis. How about Trump and Beyonce? Trump and Tom Brady?
What we all clearly need is yet more journalistic analysis.
What we all clearly need is yet more journalistic analysis.
40
I gotta admit, it takes some moxie to come up with an argument that Donald Trump and Pope Francis are two sides of the same coin. You might also add that both Bernie Sanders and Justin Bieber have found a way to appeal to young women.
12
Mmmm, they're both on TV a lot?
Right... The 0.1% crowd are neoliberals.
6
Re your final sentence: there's nothing "dangerous" about Pope Francis -- except in the ossified minds of arch-conservatives. Trump, on the other hand...
12
This outburst made them both look stupid. But, stupid is as stupid does. Just what we need, "world leaders" with poor judgement.
2
Oh Lord........literally. Can we move beyond our need for comparison. The Sanders-Trump comparisons are ridiculous enough, a Trump-Francis comparison is, well, 'reaching'. To first and foremost look at a Pope who, as one of my Catholic friends states actually "walks the path of Jesus", as dangerous is unfortunate and misses the broader potential impact of his papacy. Would a 'split' church damage the foundations of Christian belief? I would rather have a Pope who risks unleashing some degree of chaos in an institution of man and walks a true path of Jesus with social justice in his heart, than one who simply acts as a safe keeper of dogma that means little to those stricken by poverty and injustice. Those stricken need an advocate, not dogma, and he has demonstrated to us what a poor advocate the Church has historically been for those people.
14
There is an uglier reason Trump attacked the Pope. The nasty class "evangelicals" don't care for Catholics either. The KKK attacked them along with blacks and Jews. Douthat don't be naive; Trump has some truly evil media consultants. Pope? not so much.
5
Yes, clash of the Populists. Saint and sinner!
5
Everything that Douthat says about Francis sound like what an irritated Pontius Pilate must have thought about Jesus. Let's make Rome great again!
11
Comparing Trump to the Pope: now I've seen everything!
10
Ross, it seems you are a Catholic only when it means attacking people and things you don't like, and actively ignoring the things you do.
Constant harping on two Republican 'issues' while ignoring the damage being done to a large swath of the population? Right on!! Says Ross. Punish for life people who made a bad choice early in life and married the wrong person? The you are standing atop the towering pyramid of disdane, and threatening schism.
You seem to have a real problem whenever the Church decides to return to its roots of charity for all, husbanding the earth, extolling the 'widows mite', and discussing camels and needles in relation to the mega-rich and heaven.
A man walked the earth over two thousand years ago, preaching to the common people, and lambasting the 'whited sepulchers' of gaudy religiosity, and those who propagate barely veiled ethnic hatred against their neighbors.
I would suggest you review the 'Sermon on the Mount' and compare it to the platform your party proposes, and maybe think about your parties stance on negating the will of the people who elected, by a clear margin, a President you didn't like twice. I kinda missed that as a Constitutional position.
sorry Ross but as is true of a majority of
Constant harping on two Republican 'issues' while ignoring the damage being done to a large swath of the population? Right on!! Says Ross. Punish for life people who made a bad choice early in life and married the wrong person? The you are standing atop the towering pyramid of disdane, and threatening schism.
You seem to have a real problem whenever the Church decides to return to its roots of charity for all, husbanding the earth, extolling the 'widows mite', and discussing camels and needles in relation to the mega-rich and heaven.
A man walked the earth over two thousand years ago, preaching to the common people, and lambasting the 'whited sepulchers' of gaudy religiosity, and those who propagate barely veiled ethnic hatred against their neighbors.
I would suggest you review the 'Sermon on the Mount' and compare it to the platform your party proposes, and maybe think about your parties stance on negating the will of the people who elected, by a clear margin, a President you didn't like twice. I kinda missed that as a Constitutional position.
sorry Ross but as is true of a majority of
17
Being a devout Catholic justifying dogma time and again, you are in essence calling your Pope, Pope Francis a rabble rouser. As your pundritry has been proved completely wrong about Trump never getting the nomination, are you trying to wiggle into being right? Even by suggesting there is a common thread between Trump and Pope Francis seriously puts your own Catholic beliefs in jeopardy.
11
Clarification: Who is the Aesthetic and who is the Billionaire?
5
By Ross's logic in this column, Trump is similar to Jesus. Both have "status as 'outsiders bent on shaking up their establishments.'" Both messages "appeal to the same exhaustion with institutions, the same desire to...start anew." Both engage in "name-calling." Both use "pungent language." Both seem to believe "that a little troublemaking is the best way to make the disaffected pay attention." Both are enemies of "the ruling class." Both promise "deliverance from 'inconvenient and unresponsive institutions with all their strictures and corruptions.'" And "everything that makes them interesting makes them dangerous as well." Both attract crowds, and cause disruption. And really, both behave as though they are the Son of God.
So, Ross, have I just equally discredited Trump and Jesus? Or are their fundamental differences way more significant than their similarities?
So, Ross, have I just equally discredited Trump and Jesus? Or are their fundamental differences way more significant than their similarities?
3
Trump and the Pontiff comparison here is a false equivalency. Other than gender they share nothing in common. Mr. Douthat you don't get to choose your Pope, but you do get to choose your Republican nominee.
4
This populist label is silly and condescending. The Pope and Bernie Sanders are out there trying to make a better world and right some wrongs and that means bucking the system because it needs to be bucked. Whether you see Sander and the Pope as rays of hope or dangerous populist agitators probably depending on how well the "system and establishment" is working for you. As far as Trump goes, I think he gives everyone license to be silly and condescending, so say what you want about him.
2
You did it. You actually did it. Equated Trump and the Pope. A masterpiece of sophistry.
7
Come on, Douthat. I realize you were hired to be the NYT's "conservative" columnist and you want to keep your job, but you're making yourself ridiculous. Trump and Francis are not equals; they are not peers; their opinions should not be given equal weight. I actually don't agree with Francis on many things -- and I'm certainly not a Catholic -- but I recognize that he is a serious person and am willing to give some consideration to arguments he makes. Trump, however, is not a serious person. He is a buffoon -- which is exactly where the Republican party has been heading for years. People like you and Reihan Salam like to pretend otherwise, but this has long been a clown car headed to the circus.
9
Everything that makes them interesting makes them dangerous?
Mr. Douthat, just a tad hyperbolic; even for you.
Mr. Douthat, just a tad hyperbolic; even for you.
2
Ross, go beyond stylistics. What sets them clearly apart is addressing: "makes them dangerous" to whom? A truly ascetic populist-Pope is a present danger to all establishment norms. If Trump is a populist, his brand xenophobic-populism, makes him dangerous to everyone else.
2
The opening of this column was brilliant. The conclusion, not so much.
2
Jesus and the devil are also "strangely alike." Both are mentioned in the Bible.
Evidently it was a slow day Chez Douthat.
Evidently it was a slow day Chez Douthat.
9
Francis and Trump are alike in the way God and Satan are alike. The way light and dark are alike. Sweet and sour. Yin and Yang.
6
I find it quite odd that Mr. Douthat, a rather fervent convert to Catholicism, is denigrating Pope Francis and falsely portraying him as somehow mud-wrestling with Donald Trump. It's deeply peculiar that Mr. Douthat makes equivalent the garish piggish businessman with the Vicar of Christ on Earth, according to his own church. The reaching for similarities in this article is bogglingly foolish and disrespectful.
Pope Francis was merely asked a question. He replied without naming Trump, although his meaning was clear. Mr Douthat- who does not hesitate to invoke Catholicism when it comes to rights of women and gay people, advising strict obedience to strict rules- suddenly feels free to degrade the Pontiff of his Church, by making him somehow just the same as Trump. Am I the only one who finds this hypocritical and disrespectful? No, Pope Francis is not the same as Trump. What a puerile, juvenile idea.
And your Republican Party has reaped what it's sown, Ross. You're correct that it has rotted from within, through fear, war-mongering, and hate. You're just noticing this now? Comparing the venal, meanspirited, greedy and corrupt GOP to the Vatican might have seemed a clever idea as you tried to drum up an editorial. Sorry to tell you it was a benighted and sorry idea.
Pope Francis was merely asked a question. He replied without naming Trump, although his meaning was clear. Mr Douthat- who does not hesitate to invoke Catholicism when it comes to rights of women and gay people, advising strict obedience to strict rules- suddenly feels free to degrade the Pontiff of his Church, by making him somehow just the same as Trump. Am I the only one who finds this hypocritical and disrespectful? No, Pope Francis is not the same as Trump. What a puerile, juvenile idea.
And your Republican Party has reaped what it's sown, Ross. You're correct that it has rotted from within, through fear, war-mongering, and hate. You're just noticing this now? Comparing the venal, meanspirited, greedy and corrupt GOP to the Vatican might have seemed a clever idea as you tried to drum up an editorial. Sorry to tell you it was a benighted and sorry idea.
10
I am no Christian theologian, but any careful reading of the New Testament leads one to conclude that Pope Francis is only attempting to put Christ back into Christianity. That this conflicts with Douthat's brand of Catholicism/Republicanism is all too much for him to bear and has reduced him to drawing ridiculous comparisons between the Pope and Trump.
7
You lost me at "the book of Daniel predicted it."
2
"Trump is a nationalist..." No, he's a "Trumpist." He'll say virtually anything to advance his personal interests. Why not? He's learned there are no significant negative consequences. If he could, he'd rename our nation the United States of Trump.
6
Most people agree that the Republican Party needs reform -- see how I can agree with Ross?
5
Ross, Pope Francis will always be your friend even if you are in his presence jumping up and down until you're blue in the face. Trump would shoot you in the face and walk away with a smirk on his face. Pope Francis is the friend of all even if we don't agree with everything he stands for. Trump is your enemy even if you agree with everything he says. One wants to build up people, one wants to tear down people. You know the difference. Don't panic.
2
Francis "downplays the value of rules, customs, and traditions in protecting people from the rule of novelty and whim."
--------------------------------
Today rules, customs, and traditions only protect the people who can't pass thru the eye of the needle.
Ross Douthat is a Generalissimo Francisco Franco Catholic. His ideology is closer to Caiaphas and Pilate than to Jesus.
Ensconced in the rich hamlet Garrison, Douthat needs rules, customs and traditions to stay comfortable, cozy, and ensconced. Douthat's worldview has more in common with Franconism and The Grand Inquisitor than to Christianity.
--------------------------------
Today rules, customs, and traditions only protect the people who can't pass thru the eye of the needle.
Ross Douthat is a Generalissimo Francisco Franco Catholic. His ideology is closer to Caiaphas and Pilate than to Jesus.
Ensconced in the rich hamlet Garrison, Douthat needs rules, customs and traditions to stay comfortable, cozy, and ensconced. Douthat's worldview has more in common with Franconism and The Grand Inquisitor than to Christianity.
6
The Pope should have taken heed of the following:
I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it.
George Bernard Shaw
I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it.
George Bernard Shaw
7
What a dumb thing to call the Pope dangerous! And to compare him to Trump! Douthat needs to be smacked by his pastor. But the Catholic Church does deserve to be compared to the Republican Establishment.
2
I certainly haven't heard Francis giving the neo-Pelagian finger to corporations. He isn't Bernie Sanders. His harshest words currently are reserved for greedy shepards. And I doubt Francis wanted his bridges-not-walls metaphor to be quite as clearly readable as an indictment on Mr. Trump. Clearly, Mr. Douthat craves communication with doctrinal leaders and professors of Theology again - a little fight seems to stimulate him. Not so un-Trumpian of Mr. Douthat, after all?
1
It is hard to understand this comparison of Donald Trump with Pope Francis. But trying to make sense of it, I suppose it could mean that Trump is a reactionary populist in the tradition Father Charles Coughlin and Senator Joe McCarthy, while Pope Francis is a left populist in the tradition of Dorothy Day, Michael Harrington, and Pope John the 23rd.
There is no overlap between those two groups.
There is no overlap between those two groups.
6
The pope is dangerous in precisely the way Jesus was dangerous. Trump is dangerous in precisely the way Caligula was.
8
Trump against the Pope: King Kong vs. God-zilla?
Neither one is a populist, representing the common people. What they actually are is ironic: unvarnished social Drawnist.
Donald Trump and Pope Francis are only similar to each other if common descent from early hominids counts.
4
Mr. Douthat,
you just presented the 'Mother of all false equivalences'.
Thank you so much.
you just presented the 'Mother of all false equivalences'.
Thank you so much.
5
Wow! Uber Catholic Ross Douthat thinks that Pope Francis and The Donald are equivalent and equally dangerous. If he can't see the fundamental difference between a gentle reformer trying to bring the Church back to Jesus and and egomaniac huckster reveling in the echo chamber of media magnification of his antics Ross Douthat has truly lost his bearings and his Catholicism.
9
It's morbidly hilarious to see a professed (or more precisely, one who won't shut up about it) Catholic lecturing the Pope on the topic of whether in his City, dead Cthluhu lies dreaming.
Less funny is a Christian's on why hatred, on why disgust, on why rejection, on why laughing at the poor, is a good idea.
Less funny is a Christian's on why hatred, on why disgust, on why rejection, on why laughing at the poor, is a good idea.
4
Any day when the Necronomicon is mentioned on the Times op-ed page is a good day.
1
As I see it: While Pope Francis "shoots from the heart," Donald Trump "shoots from the hip." While Pope Francis unifies, Donald Trump (except for his base) divides. While Pope Francis demonstrates substance and depth, Donald Trump demonstrates materialism and superficiality. Thus, by any stretch of the imagination two peas in a pod, they aren't. But good try.
34
So, the pope is dangerous and neoliberalism needs critics, you say?
Let's start with the pope. If shaking up moribund dogma and institutions is dangerous (which you apparently think it is) then I say bring on the danger. What's life without living a little dangerously? Three cheers for Pope Francis!
As for neoliberalism, even though the word "liberal" is right in there, Wikipedia defines neoliberalism as an economic movement associated with laissez-faire economic liberalism whose advocates support such policies as privatization, fiscal austerity, deregulation, and reductions in government spending.
Now let's see, whom does that sound like? Certainly not Democrats - no, that sounds exactly like every last Republican politician who's run for office since St. Ronaldus Magnus enshrined such ideas in YOUR party's platform three and a half decades ago, i.e. all the ones you've supported ever since you were old enough to vote.
You want some criticism, Ross? Look in the mirror and start with yourself.
Let's start with the pope. If shaking up moribund dogma and institutions is dangerous (which you apparently think it is) then I say bring on the danger. What's life without living a little dangerously? Three cheers for Pope Francis!
As for neoliberalism, even though the word "liberal" is right in there, Wikipedia defines neoliberalism as an economic movement associated with laissez-faire economic liberalism whose advocates support such policies as privatization, fiscal austerity, deregulation, and reductions in government spending.
Now let's see, whom does that sound like? Certainly not Democrats - no, that sounds exactly like every last Republican politician who's run for office since St. Ronaldus Magnus enshrined such ideas in YOUR party's platform three and a half decades ago, i.e. all the ones you've supported ever since you were old enough to vote.
You want some criticism, Ross? Look in the mirror and start with yourself.
3
Great!
You had me from: "the Man in White must do battle with the Combed-Over Titan".
I add only that it's always a dangerous game.
You had me from: "the Man in White must do battle with the Combed-Over Titan".
I add only that it's always a dangerous game.
1
Keep hanging on to the clown bus steering wheel Donald. The frutration you must be causing Bush, Cruz, Rubio, McConnell, Douthat and all those other serious Republican thinkers is priceless.
2
We are we are fortunate to share the planet with Pope Francis.
2
Ross: I'll give you credit for trying, but as you know from your college days, professors don't really care if you try, they only want results. And that's to prepare you for the even less-caring real world, where trying, without results, equals failure. So, your grade on this piece I'm afraid is still an "F". Even the Donald would fire you.
And that's because you're contorting facts so much to make your case, this ought to be entered in a circus sideshow. Saying that Pope Francis and Trump are alike is like saying plums and lemons are alike. Yes, they're both fruit, but anyone can see the similarity ends there.
Certainly the Pope is a populist, but the only thing the Donald shares in that regard is the root of the word: he's POPular, but being popular does not make one a populist. If you really wanted to be accurate, you would have listed the similarities between the Pope and the ONLY real populist in this race: Bernie Sanders. The only reason I can see for this blinding omission is one of purpose, driven by your partisan world view.
As your professor would've said, "Try again".
And that's because you're contorting facts so much to make your case, this ought to be entered in a circus sideshow. Saying that Pope Francis and Trump are alike is like saying plums and lemons are alike. Yes, they're both fruit, but anyone can see the similarity ends there.
Certainly the Pope is a populist, but the only thing the Donald shares in that regard is the root of the word: he's POPular, but being popular does not make one a populist. If you really wanted to be accurate, you would have listed the similarities between the Pope and the ONLY real populist in this race: Bernie Sanders. The only reason I can see for this blinding omission is one of purpose, driven by your partisan world view.
As your professor would've said, "Try again".
Whatever his imperfections, the Pope really is a wonderful guy. And Donald Trump is most likely a self-absorbed Promethean neo-Pelagian, I would guess.
2
There seems to be a flaw in your presentation: what are the institutions that they represent or aspire to represent? Is it more a matter of objective reality (science, climate change) verses narcissistic fantasy? Is it a matter of morality (ethical awareness of the legacy of colonialism, biodiversity in peril) verses narcissistic fantasy? What is the institution that Trump aspires to with a "great America?' Is it a white supremacist colonial empire untrammeled by moral restrained and/or cosmopolitan norms? Shameful for a good Catholic pundit to frame things so inanely. Is religious morality for you just a matter of order and hierarchy? Do you have a soul?
2
Yes, Mr. Douthat and Mr. Brooks.
Donald Trump/the Pope, and Donald Trump/Bernie Sanders, share many things in common.
Both sets live on planet Earth.
Both sets are members of the species homo erectus.
Both sets are males of the species.
Both sets are mammals.
Both sets are bipedal.
(I know, some of these are redundant, questionable as to some members of each set etc., but I'm reaching here...)
Both sets are famous.
Both sets have many followers.
Both sets require food, air, water and media coverage to exist...
Set Trump/Sanders have been repeatedly conflated by set Douthat/Brooks for no apparent reasons other than those listed above.
Set Trump/Pope is a new and entertaining Douthat conflation that I have not yet heard the Brooks subset chime in on - I wait with baited breath to read his inevitable list of "How is a Pope like a Trump?"
In the meantime we could amuse ourselves with a rousing game of "How is a Banana Like a Rock?"
Both exist on planet Earth.
Both are composed of atoms.
Both have height, depth and width....
C'mon, David. Give it a try! Surely you and Ross can find many more commonalities.
Except, of course, the meaningful ones..
Donald Trump/the Pope, and Donald Trump/Bernie Sanders, share many things in common.
Both sets live on planet Earth.
Both sets are members of the species homo erectus.
Both sets are males of the species.
Both sets are mammals.
Both sets are bipedal.
(I know, some of these are redundant, questionable as to some members of each set etc., but I'm reaching here...)
Both sets are famous.
Both sets have many followers.
Both sets require food, air, water and media coverage to exist...
Set Trump/Sanders have been repeatedly conflated by set Douthat/Brooks for no apparent reasons other than those listed above.
Set Trump/Pope is a new and entertaining Douthat conflation that I have not yet heard the Brooks subset chime in on - I wait with baited breath to read his inevitable list of "How is a Pope like a Trump?"
In the meantime we could amuse ourselves with a rousing game of "How is a Banana Like a Rock?"
Both exist on planet Earth.
Both are composed of atoms.
Both have height, depth and width....
C'mon, David. Give it a try! Surely you and Ross can find many more commonalities.
Except, of course, the meaningful ones..
7
There must be a page missing from Mr. Douthat's dictionary. Referring to any Pope, Francis or otherwise, as a "mystic" is laughable. Have you noticed the vestments, the entourage, the gilding of the Vatican chambers?
Catholicism is seeped in material excess, not unlike Mr. Trump's flashy lifestyle. They both use a private airliner, for pity's sake. But there is not a shred of mysticism in either of these men. It is all about flash.
Catholicism is seeped in material excess, not unlike Mr. Trump's flashy lifestyle. They both use a private airliner, for pity's sake. But there is not a shred of mysticism in either of these men. It is all about flash.
1
A true Catholic would not write about the heir of Saint Peter, the rock upon which Jesus built His Curch, so demeaningly.
Of course, as an Americam Douthat is free to write about whatever he wants, but his self-anointed position of the self-righteous Catholic right is arrogant and annoying.
Of course, as an Americam Douthat is free to write about whatever he wants, but his self-anointed position of the self-righteous Catholic right is arrogant and annoying.
2
Admittedly, it's a little fun, though often also perplexing and a sad sign of our times, to read the vitriolic commentary from my fellow liberals who seem to relish in reading Douthat so that they can spit their hateful feedback. Beats kicking the dog, I suppose.
Douthat, on the other hand, is always fun to read because, though I might disagree with him, his articles are typically erudite and well reasoned. Ad hominem attacks and disrespectful insults aside, it’s rare to find enlightened and well reasoned criticism in these commentaries.
There's insightfulness in the connection Douthat draws between Trump and the Pope. Not to be taken too far, there is nonetheless a striking similarity in how the "Wait, what?!" moments captivate the press, and yet they don’t seem to tarnish the sources. The populist drive toward change, and a tearing down of establishments, is such that there's a general willingness to overlook much. There's clearly a very significant and generalized unease and discomfort with status quo.
A friend commented that if neither Trump nor Sanders gets elected, perhaps a revolution lies ahead. If not for the Pope's incessant chipping away at bureaucratic and dogmatic structures perhaps a schism would lie ahead. Socio-politically, we’re in a period of time one might refer to as “pre-volcanic.” Whether the tops blow or not may be influenced by current electoral and/or pastoral events.
Douthat, on the other hand, is always fun to read because, though I might disagree with him, his articles are typically erudite and well reasoned. Ad hominem attacks and disrespectful insults aside, it’s rare to find enlightened and well reasoned criticism in these commentaries.
There's insightfulness in the connection Douthat draws between Trump and the Pope. Not to be taken too far, there is nonetheless a striking similarity in how the "Wait, what?!" moments captivate the press, and yet they don’t seem to tarnish the sources. The populist drive toward change, and a tearing down of establishments, is such that there's a general willingness to overlook much. There's clearly a very significant and generalized unease and discomfort with status quo.
A friend commented that if neither Trump nor Sanders gets elected, perhaps a revolution lies ahead. If not for the Pope's incessant chipping away at bureaucratic and dogmatic structures perhaps a schism would lie ahead. Socio-politically, we’re in a period of time one might refer to as “pre-volcanic.” Whether the tops blow or not may be influenced by current electoral and/or pastoral events.
1
'Neoliberalism needs critics?'
Tell me where I can find some of that. I'll move there.
Tell me where I can find some of that. I'll move there.
Mr. Douthat garners the best comment threads in the NYT, hands down.
"The obvious drama of the collision lay in the contrasts between the two men: The celibate and the lecher."
How does Douthat know that Francis is a celibate and Trump a lecher? Does he have informants in the Vatican and in Manhattan?
The only obvious thing to his many readers are Douthat's persistent prurient and voyeuristic inclinations.
All in the name of God, it goes without saying!
How does Douthat know that Francis is a celibate and Trump a lecher? Does he have informants in the Vatican and in Manhattan?
The only obvious thing to his many readers are Douthat's persistent prurient and voyeuristic inclinations.
All in the name of God, it goes without saying!
1
After so many op-eds about Trump becoming a major force and why he should not be the Republican nominee, you seem to have given up seeing the end of the Republican Party as you know it. You cannot believe your own eyes and ears, looking at this drama that has exploded defying all reason, sense of decency, an unlimited display of narcissism, lies, viciousness. For once, I do not envy you, your job.
1
The danger lies in the Royalists and the Papal Conclave not in the individuals who seek reform. You can argue with their solutions, but you cannot delegitimize the need for it. Those who have run the Catholic Church and the US government have done such a poor job that there is obvious need for reform.
Trump and Pope Francis are similar? That's something I'd expect to hear from Ted Cruz. But Ross Douthat sounding like Ted Cruz isn't surprising.
2
Mr. Douthat, you must be joking. Do you really think that Mr. Trump, the man with the biggest silver spoon, is for everyday people? I will not disagree that he is, and has always been, a great used car salesman. Let the buyer beware!
5
The battle with the man in white. I immediately thought you meant Bernie.
The Pope and DT are grifters of the highest order.
DT says anything and backtracks in the next sentence.
The Pope says many a great thing and then his handlers backtrack for him at the next stop.
Both are million/billionaires. Both have an agenda. Both are making more money. Both are about power.
I do like some of what this Pope says, but.... he doesn't go far enough. He can't break free of his dogma, his billions and his handlers.
Grifters of the highest order.
The Pope and DT are grifters of the highest order.
DT says anything and backtracks in the next sentence.
The Pope says many a great thing and then his handlers backtrack for him at the next stop.
Both are million/billionaires. Both have an agenda. Both are making more money. Both are about power.
I do like some of what this Pope says, but.... he doesn't go far enough. He can't break free of his dogma, his billions and his handlers.
Grifters of the highest order.
2
Well I was flabbergasted by Frank Bruni's column and gobsmacked by this one! Frank Bruni compared Rubio and Cruz to Kennedy and Nixon respectively and now you're comparing Trump to the Pope? They are "interesting and dangerous"? Well, if Trump is elected President he will be dangerous that is true. I guess because you, being a very conservative Catholic, think the Pope dangerous because he dared to utter the words "birth control" as perhaps, maybe something that should be given consideration as okay for Catholics to use, due to the Zika virus threat to the unborn.
Are you finally becoming unhinged because the Republican establishment is being thwarted? Are you having dark thoughts about voting for a Democrat for the Presidency? Give in, vote for a Democrat.
Are you finally becoming unhinged because the Republican establishment is being thwarted? Are you having dark thoughts about voting for a Democrat for the Presidency? Give in, vote for a Democrat.
9
If someone told me i would be reading the NYT's "Politics, religion, moral values and higher education" writer, a Catholic, belittling the Pope i would have told you to seek help from a doctor. What an amazing time we live in.
7
So, "Everything that makes [him] interesting makes [Pope Francis] dangerous as well"? Douthat again stretches incredulity beyond the point of breaking.
5
So the Pope and the Trump are the same, huh?
Ask yourself this:
Whose finger would you rather have on the nuclear button?
'nuff said.
Ask yourself this:
Whose finger would you rather have on the nuclear button?
'nuff said.
4
Dear Mr. Douthat,
There's at least ONE slight difference between the two; Pope Francis is the leader of the world's Catholics duly elected by the Cardinals.
Donald Trump is a monstrous creation of the people YOU back, the GOP/TP/KOCH AFFILIATE but, so far, is the leader of nothing but media polls and two actual elective events.
The pope is followed by millions and his words are heeded by even more.
The "Trumpster/Dumpster" has a following of bigoted, hate filled, gun toting angry white folks and his appeal, beyond that particular group, seems, at the minimum, hovering around zero.
The pope is "populist"? If that means "saying one thing but doing nothing", then I guess he is; he talks of many things but has done little to cure the ills of his Church.
Mr. Trump is "populist"? The meaning shifts "populist" now meaning "lie like crazy, say what the nut cases want to hear then hope only THEY show up for the election".
In either case, it seems the meaning of "populist" is somewhat convoluted as both these guys appeal to a limited fraction of the general "population".
I will give you this, you managed to compare the Bible to the Necronomicon.
One was invented by people talking to the "Great Jehovah".
The other was created by Lovecraft, the pulp fiction horror author.
But both are pretty "popular" now, aren't they?
There's at least ONE slight difference between the two; Pope Francis is the leader of the world's Catholics duly elected by the Cardinals.
Donald Trump is a monstrous creation of the people YOU back, the GOP/TP/KOCH AFFILIATE but, so far, is the leader of nothing but media polls and two actual elective events.
The pope is followed by millions and his words are heeded by even more.
The "Trumpster/Dumpster" has a following of bigoted, hate filled, gun toting angry white folks and his appeal, beyond that particular group, seems, at the minimum, hovering around zero.
The pope is "populist"? If that means "saying one thing but doing nothing", then I guess he is; he talks of many things but has done little to cure the ills of his Church.
Mr. Trump is "populist"? The meaning shifts "populist" now meaning "lie like crazy, say what the nut cases want to hear then hope only THEY show up for the election".
In either case, it seems the meaning of "populist" is somewhat convoluted as both these guys appeal to a limited fraction of the general "population".
I will give you this, you managed to compare the Bible to the Necronomicon.
One was invented by people talking to the "Great Jehovah".
The other was created by Lovecraft, the pulp fiction horror author.
But both are pretty "popular" now, aren't they?
3
But I trust the Pope to desist from a wrestling match in Trump's Dump....the Sewer. The eternal Mouth may continue with salvo after salvo....but the Pope's silence, I hope, will be its own requiem.
3
Mr. Douthat, you are clearly in a full out crisis as a person. You are losing your faith in both your church and political party. SO, it is not surprising that you might come up with a grotesque and bizarre comparison of Pope Francis and Donald Trump as you approach a momentous choice.
The only thing that these two men have in common is that they have both succeeded in alienating you from cherished institutions that are changing...maybe in ways you could not see coming. I believe one is changing under the influence of the Holy Spirit, and the other under the influence of Fox News. BUT you have equated the two as being changed by populism.
Maybe, the comparison that you should have chosen was a comparison of Pope Francis with Pope Pius XII? I know you are a bright guy with a passing familiarity with history. Do you remember the Reichskonkordat? Do you think that Pope Francis would have pursued a policy of neutrality?
Let's face it Mr. Douthat, you are coming to a moment in time when you will have to choose between your sworn fealty to your beloved institutions of the Roman Catholic Church and the Republican Party.
As a fellow Roman Catholic, I invite you to meditate on Matthew 21:12 for discerning your choice. This would have been another more apt opportunity for comparison. Think about who, Pope Francis or Donald Trump, would have their followers crawling on the floor to grab the coins that had been toppled. This might give your heart an answer.
The only thing that these two men have in common is that they have both succeeded in alienating you from cherished institutions that are changing...maybe in ways you could not see coming. I believe one is changing under the influence of the Holy Spirit, and the other under the influence of Fox News. BUT you have equated the two as being changed by populism.
Maybe, the comparison that you should have chosen was a comparison of Pope Francis with Pope Pius XII? I know you are a bright guy with a passing familiarity with history. Do you remember the Reichskonkordat? Do you think that Pope Francis would have pursued a policy of neutrality?
Let's face it Mr. Douthat, you are coming to a moment in time when you will have to choose between your sworn fealty to your beloved institutions of the Roman Catholic Church and the Republican Party.
As a fellow Roman Catholic, I invite you to meditate on Matthew 21:12 for discerning your choice. This would have been another more apt opportunity for comparison. Think about who, Pope Francis or Donald Trump, would have their followers crawling on the floor to grab the coins that had been toppled. This might give your heart an answer.
21
Read the Sermon on the Mount if you want radical. So you would want the world spared of righteousness and would put Christ in the danger to society category. You make the Pope's case Mr. Douthat.
9
Except that the Donald is about fear and hate, and the Pope is about love....
14
The Pope is dangerous to the establishment of our time the way Jesus Christ was dangerous to the establishment of his time.
Donald Trump is dangerous to the establishment of our time the way Benito Mussolini was dangerous to the establishment of his time.
Donald Trump is dangerous to the establishment of our time the way Benito Mussolini was dangerous to the establishment of his time.
81
OK, so both of these people are shaking up the establishment. But only one of them is truly "dangerous." The Donald lives in a world of fantasy, in which immigrants are flooding into our country and stealing jobs and committing crimes, and we must build "a really great wall.". This fantasy cleverly designed to mirror and amplify the prejudices of the most ill-informed of the electorate, The reality is that the net immigration from Mexico is ZERO, and has been for several years, and immigrants (legal or illegal) commit crimes at a LOWER rate than citizens, and the unemployment rate in Arizona has INCREASED since they cracked down on undocumented workers. Trump is dangerous to the very ability of our country to deal with reality.
Whereas the Pope is calling attention to the cardinal problems the human race faces — the changes in climate wrought by unrestricted burning of hydrocarbons, and the worldwide maldistribution of wealth, in which the richest 80 people in the world now have as much wealth as the poorest 3.5 BILLION people. He is only dangerous if you ignore ordinary people and are squarely on the side of oligarchs and big business. Is that where you stand, Ross?
Whereas the Pope is calling attention to the cardinal problems the human race faces — the changes in climate wrought by unrestricted burning of hydrocarbons, and the worldwide maldistribution of wealth, in which the richest 80 people in the world now have as much wealth as the poorest 3.5 BILLION people. He is only dangerous if you ignore ordinary people and are squarely on the side of oligarchs and big business. Is that where you stand, Ross?
60
Let me see if I understand. The Pope and The Donald both are charismatic, shake up their respective establishments and they both downplay "the value of rules, customs, and traditions in protecting people from the rule of novelty and whim."
Let's use that categorization: Hitler had charisma, shook up the German establishment and downplayed the tradition of democracy.. not a good idea.
Mandela had charisma, shook up the establishment in South Africa and downplayed the tradition of apartheid... not a good idea [?]
See they are both alike.
One could think up a million of these "name the similarities" couples.
Let's use that categorization: Hitler had charisma, shook up the German establishment and downplayed the tradition of democracy.. not a good idea.
Mandela had charisma, shook up the establishment in South Africa and downplayed the tradition of apartheid... not a good idea [?]
See they are both alike.
One could think up a million of these "name the similarities" couples.
8
Seeing the headline I groaned, sure that this was another Bernie and Donald column full of the usual false equivalencies Ross employs to tar his targets....then it got worse. The equivalency suggested here is truly sickening, and to think that this comes from the pen of a noted Catholic with a sharp mind is troubling, especially given that Obedience is a deep virtue in that Church. I guess Obedience is conditional for Ross. How convenient. Any other of your sacred cows you ready to slaughter? I can only wish...
5
Oh Sweet Jesus! Have you lost your mind? "Style of public salesmanship?"
The Pope (and I'm an atheist) is soft-spoken, dignified, honest and gets attention because he has lived a long, dedicated life, rising to a position of significance because of the admiration of his peers. He doesn't seek to "sell," he responds to attention his honored position draws.
The Donald is loud, crude, dishonest and gets attention because he is aggressive, arrogant and has lived a long life in the spotlight because he inherited wealth. All he does is sell, and it's snake oil.
This false equivalence is breathtaking.
The Pope (and I'm an atheist) is soft-spoken, dignified, honest and gets attention because he has lived a long, dedicated life, rising to a position of significance because of the admiration of his peers. He doesn't seek to "sell," he responds to attention his honored position draws.
The Donald is loud, crude, dishonest and gets attention because he is aggressive, arrogant and has lived a long life in the spotlight because he inherited wealth. All he does is sell, and it's snake oil.
This false equivalence is breathtaking.
10
Honest clarity at last!
The real estate developer with an endless appetite for political calculation who will say anything to rouse his lemmings forward toward the cliffs is now represented,by you, in an absolute state of moral equivalency with The holiest man in Catholicism.
The perfect metaphor for our entire state of cultural regression.
Congratulations.
The real estate developer with an endless appetite for political calculation who will say anything to rouse his lemmings forward toward the cliffs is now represented,by you, in an absolute state of moral equivalency with The holiest man in Catholicism.
The perfect metaphor for our entire state of cultural regression.
Congratulations.
5
how is it that people on the right thought the Pope was barging in to American politics and attacking Donald Trump, but people on the left and around the world hears only that building bridges is better than building walls?
we have become separate populations. If we don't interbreed, in a million years, we will be different species.
we have become separate populations. If we don't interbreed, in a million years, we will be different species.
9
Yah, Trump is a genuine populist, I guess, because you say so. I always thought that a populist seeks to represent the interests of ordinary people. No?
So, how in the world could a single-digit billionaire, self-proclaimed business tycoon, narcissistic TV celebrity possibly advocate for ordinary people? Trump knows nothing about ordinary people or any other kind. He knows enough to entertain the very lowest of mob cravings, a regular P. T. Barnum on speed, promoting his one-man freak show.
Why is Trump running? Because he can. Why is he succeeding, to the extent that he has? Because somehow through the dust storm of bluster and self-aggrandizement, he has been taken seriously by the same crowd that gave us old Bush and W and told us they were adequate to the job of president. The republican reaps what it has sown. The rest of us do not deserve Trump.
Well, it wasn't so and it ain't so now. The Great Combover grotesque would be a huge disaster of absolutely epic proportion for the US and the world. Trust me.
So, how in the world could a single-digit billionaire, self-proclaimed business tycoon, narcissistic TV celebrity possibly advocate for ordinary people? Trump knows nothing about ordinary people or any other kind. He knows enough to entertain the very lowest of mob cravings, a regular P. T. Barnum on speed, promoting his one-man freak show.
Why is Trump running? Because he can. Why is he succeeding, to the extent that he has? Because somehow through the dust storm of bluster and self-aggrandizement, he has been taken seriously by the same crowd that gave us old Bush and W and told us they were adequate to the job of president. The republican reaps what it has sown. The rest of us do not deserve Trump.
Well, it wasn't so and it ain't so now. The Great Combover grotesque would be a huge disaster of absolutely epic proportion for the US and the world. Trust me.
4
An interesting equivalency Ross. This always occurs when a society is under stress. It has been proven historically. A new viewpoint is expressed, defined in the desire to move away from the existing system and toward a new form centered on confronting the issues that are threatening it. In France with Napoleon and then in Germany and Italy during the 30’s and 40’s we saw this in the form of a hallucinatory archetypal savior image coming to the rescue. But as you said, populism’s peril is that it relies too much on charisma, so it makes it dangerous. With a church in tatters we now see this in the new pope. There is a difference though between Trump and the Pope. America in a state of confusion finds itself captivated by Trump’s utopian rhetorical militaristic bombast. Will our future be the same as was that of France? Could it even revert to that of Germany and Italy? Listen to the Trump rhetoric. Scary!
3
When did Donald Trump oppose neoliberalism? Isn't neoliberalism all about free market economic policies of the Milton Friedman sort?
I do agree with another reader, who would like to see a conservative like Ross Douthat take on neoliberalism.
As for the column, well, all popular/populist figures have much in common. I wouldn't really call Pope Francis an outsider, though. Nor, on the other hand, would I say that Trump is guided by deep beliefs. If Francis achieves reform it will be through sustained and deliberate effort; if Trump triggers "reform" in the Republican party, it will be accidental.
I do agree with another reader, who would like to see a conservative like Ross Douthat take on neoliberalism.
As for the column, well, all popular/populist figures have much in common. I wouldn't really call Pope Francis an outsider, though. Nor, on the other hand, would I say that Trump is guided by deep beliefs. If Francis achieves reform it will be through sustained and deliberate effort; if Trump triggers "reform" in the Republican party, it will be accidental.
7
I would hardly call the pope "ascetic", living as he is in a multi-billion dollars Vatican palace.
4
Another laughable comparison. I expect Russ is much more upset by Francis than by Donald. The limits of faith.
8
I have a feeling some readers are confusing neoliberalism with liberalism. Just in case from Wikipedia:
Neoliberalism is a term which has been used by scholars in a wide variety of social sciences and critics primarily in reference to the resurgence of 19th century ideas associated with laissez-faire economic liberalism beginning in the 1970s and 1980s.
Its advocates support extensive economic liberalization policies such as privatization, fiscal austerity, deregulation, free trade, and reductions in government spending in order to enhance the role of the private sector in the economy.
Neoliberalism is famously associated with the economic policies introduced by Margaret Thatcher in the United Kingdom and Ronald Reagan in the United States. The transition of consensus towards neoliberal policies and the acceptance of neoliberal economic theories in the 1970s are seen by some academics as the root of financialization, with the financial crisis of 2007–08 one of the ultimate results.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism
Neoliberalism is a term which has been used by scholars in a wide variety of social sciences and critics primarily in reference to the resurgence of 19th century ideas associated with laissez-faire economic liberalism beginning in the 1970s and 1980s.
Its advocates support extensive economic liberalization policies such as privatization, fiscal austerity, deregulation, free trade, and reductions in government spending in order to enhance the role of the private sector in the economy.
Neoliberalism is famously associated with the economic policies introduced by Margaret Thatcher in the United Kingdom and Ronald Reagan in the United States. The transition of consensus towards neoliberal policies and the acceptance of neoliberal economic theories in the 1970s are seen by some academics as the root of financialization, with the financial crisis of 2007–08 one of the ultimate results.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism
5
Crazy talk! To cast the pope and an egomaniac billionaire in the same "populist" light just reassures Ross and his limited audience that the pope got it wrong and is a danger to Ross' comfy cultural catholicism with men in surplices chanting Tantum Ergo while swinging a censer. Ross, instead of spending Sunday watching replays of Scalia's funeral, check out "Spotlight" at your local theater.
4
It's beyond disheartening to see Douthat try to draw some false equivalency between the lunatic rants of Trump and the man who has spent his life working without limousines to elevate the poor and downtrodden. Does Ross really believe there's an ounce of sincerity in the words of a (detached from) reality television show host who rails against everything his own life is?
Douthat is a Catholic convert caught hopelessly in the middle, rooting for an agnostic billionaire who is a prosperity preacher, while hoping to curry favor with the pope, a man who's made it clear he doesn't stand with Trump--or his editorial page apologists.
Douthat is a Catholic convert caught hopelessly in the middle, rooting for an agnostic billionaire who is a prosperity preacher, while hoping to curry favor with the pope, a man who's made it clear he doesn't stand with Trump--or his editorial page apologists.
14
Trump's on his way. He has 5 months to start sounding a little more reasonable. He could win in November as a kind of pragmatic patriot, rejecting right-wing business ideology, socialism, and Hillary's identity and grievance politics. I just wonder if he has the discipline to do it.
5
I don't think the comparison works well. Francis' comments reflect a consistent theme of compassion, humility and healing. Trump is a master at tossing out irresponsible statements, and then following whatever theme gets the best crowd response. He has no governing philosophy. He is driving through the rear view mirror, and bringing out the basest emotions in the voting public.
39
Much more troubling is the universal claim by the Republican frontrunners to be Christian. I have a lot of trouble reconciling their behavior and beliefs with their claims to be driven by god. They have made god in their own image. If I believed in such things, I'd say Satan has a whole lot more to do with the belief systems of people like Rubio and Cruz than Jesus.
As an tolerant Atheist who has spent decades "seeking" I've spent a lot of time with the world's religions, particularly my cultural norm, Christianity, and I find at the core of all the best teachings is support for community, compassion, empathy, and caring for each other. There's some historical violence in there as well, but the Gospels in particular are quite repetitive on the subject. Unless you dismiss the central story of Jesus's life, you cannot honestly call yourself his follower unless you rise above all this hate and violence and pride of possession.
I find most televangelists disgusting, and wonder where people park their ability to see through lies, pretension, oily phoniness, and the whole circus of exploitation when they believe the profiteers exploiting them.
Time to wake up. Our earth needs stewardship, not destructive exploitation and the "next big thing". The universe is not cosmetic, and your small (or big) screen is no substitute for reality in a storm.
As an tolerant Atheist who has spent decades "seeking" I've spent a lot of time with the world's religions, particularly my cultural norm, Christianity, and I find at the core of all the best teachings is support for community, compassion, empathy, and caring for each other. There's some historical violence in there as well, but the Gospels in particular are quite repetitive on the subject. Unless you dismiss the central story of Jesus's life, you cannot honestly call yourself his follower unless you rise above all this hate and violence and pride of possession.
I find most televangelists disgusting, and wonder where people park their ability to see through lies, pretension, oily phoniness, and the whole circus of exploitation when they believe the profiteers exploiting them.
Time to wake up. Our earth needs stewardship, not destructive exploitation and the "next big thing". The universe is not cosmetic, and your small (or big) screen is no substitute for reality in a storm.
66
apologies; I submitted this as a reply to my earlier comment ... sigh
2
Agreed, largely. But community is at the heart of most religions surely because most religions are organized and therefore need a community base?
2
"Neoliberalism"? Really?
The Neocons invaded Iraq and think that there is nothing in the world that a little military intervention by the US won't fix. The Koch Brothers aided by the Murdoch media empire coopted the Tea Party into becoming a wrecking ball in Congress. And, thus, guaranteed no progress on immigration, health care reform, banking reform, infrastructure repairs.
Any you want to blame neoliberalism? Really?
The Neocons invaded Iraq and think that there is nothing in the world that a little military intervention by the US won't fix. The Koch Brothers aided by the Murdoch media empire coopted the Tea Party into becoming a wrecking ball in Congress. And, thus, guaranteed no progress on immigration, health care reform, banking reform, infrastructure repairs.
Any you want to blame neoliberalism? Really?
43
It's a goofy way to put it--and of course, Douthat's trying to duck responsibility for what the conservatives in and out if the Church have done--but he's got a point.
Nixon, Ronald Reagan, even George Bush (well, the first one, anyway) do in fact speak for an intellectual and cultural tradition that can be fairly called neo
Iiberal.
What I find odd is that Douthat's trying to call opposition to a frozen Church that's aided and abetted violence against kids, stuck itself in the most ibvious sorts of financial corruption, screamed hatred of gay people, and tried to keep women in their, ah, place,the same thing as what Trump's doing.
Trump isn't opposed to violence. He brags about it. He isn't opposed to plutocracy: he embodies it. He doesn't have zip to say about gay people: he wants to close a deal.
And that's the real difference: Francis, right or wrong, is at least principled and isn't pumping up the violent and the stupid.
Nixon, Ronald Reagan, even George Bush (well, the first one, anyway) do in fact speak for an intellectual and cultural tradition that can be fairly called neo
Iiberal.
What I find odd is that Douthat's trying to call opposition to a frozen Church that's aided and abetted violence against kids, stuck itself in the most ibvious sorts of financial corruption, screamed hatred of gay people, and tried to keep women in their, ah, place,the same thing as what Trump's doing.
Trump isn't opposed to violence. He brags about it. He isn't opposed to plutocracy: he embodies it. He doesn't have zip to say about gay people: he wants to close a deal.
And that's the real difference: Francis, right or wrong, is at least principled and isn't pumping up the violent and the stupid.
2
Dark Money by Jane Mayer, everything you need to know about the Koch Brothers and the Dark Money empire that is now strangling our democracy.
2
I was a little shocked, though not altogether surprised, to find that in Mr. Douthat's opinion, it is radical for a Christian to practice Christianity in the person of a Pope.
I guess that's true, but it does not speak well of the institution.
The comparison falls down there. Mr. Trump is a publicist and con man, selling illusion for profit. Pope Francis is a good man who follows the teachings of Jesus in the Gospels, and does his best to navigate past the trappings of wealth and power. Mr. Trump is solely interesting in acquiring those trappings and doesn't care if anything he says is either true or doable, as long as it makes him king of the dunghill. We have lost our bearings if we thing mounting that midden is a good thing, or if he will lead his dupes to similar success. The art of the con is that people want to be deceived.
The humorous bits are amusing though.
I guess that's true, but it does not speak well of the institution.
The comparison falls down there. Mr. Trump is a publicist and con man, selling illusion for profit. Pope Francis is a good man who follows the teachings of Jesus in the Gospels, and does his best to navigate past the trappings of wealth and power. Mr. Trump is solely interesting in acquiring those trappings and doesn't care if anything he says is either true or doable, as long as it makes him king of the dunghill. We have lost our bearings if we thing mounting that midden is a good thing, or if he will lead his dupes to similar success. The art of the con is that people want to be deceived.
The humorous bits are amusing though.
41
It is a clash of love thy neighbor vs. hate the stranger, the latter replacing the Republican decades of sit in judgement upon and condemn thy neighbor.
20
Ross Douthat has something in common with Donald Trump. They've both insulted the Pope. Trump has done it only once. Douthat does it every time the Pope says something he doesn't like, which is often. This time it was most likely the Pontiff's common-sense statement on the same airplane flight that use of contraception to prevent the spread of the Zika virus might be okay. Poor Catholic women in South America who have sex must be punished with children who have very small heads, low IQs and other serious medical problems. How dare the Pope show compassion for them!
20
Mister Trump would only be dangerous if he was elected President. It will not happen. This is not whistling past the graveyard. His supporters are maybe 30% of Republican primary voters, who represent maybe 20% of the electorate. His negatives among likely voters as a whole are astronomical. He remains a bad joke, although a godsend to the Chattering Classes.
Senor Bergoglio represents a danger to no one except possibly (hopefully) some of the entrenched Vatican hierarchy.
If neoliberalism needs critics, why doesn't Mister Douthat take a shot?
Dan Kravitz
Senor Bergoglio represents a danger to no one except possibly (hopefully) some of the entrenched Vatican hierarchy.
If neoliberalism needs critics, why doesn't Mister Douthat take a shot?
Dan Kravitz
6
There is one big difference. Trump champions exclusion and Francis champions inclusion. I am with Francis.
12
Francis accepts inclusion on his terms. Been there, done that.
Republicans enjoy merging church and state. This is just another example of a Republican having nothing else to say trying to do so.
8
Cease and desist. Donald Trump is not remotely like either the Pope or Bernie Sanders. And Sanskrit, "the language of the gods", couldn't possibly be the language of The Art of the Deal. These attempts to humanize Trump by associating him with people and things that are actually human just doesn't work.
12
Let's count the ways the Pope and Trump are alike-both are men. One is a good man and the other is not. Anything beyond that point is ridiculous. The Pope is working for reform of an institution that over centuries squandered its message and riches. The Pope is acting as close to a Christ-like figure as a man can reach. Reform and a return to the true message is not "neoliberalism".
I'm sure The Pope has his own set of obstructionists like our Congress and Senate. Ross, you should go pray that your Pope prevails.
I'm sure The Pope has his own set of obstructionists like our Congress and Senate. Ross, you should go pray that your Pope prevails.
14
Ross: Your literary allusions and the uses therfeof are a wondrous and pleasurable attraction for the allusion starved. The article was good tool.
1
Interesting that the Pope called out the non-Catholic Trump for not being a Christian but did not call out Catholics Cruz and Rubio for not being a Christian even though they spout the same hate Trump does.
Wake me when the faux liberal/progrssive Pope actually changes doctrine.
Wake me when the faux liberal/progrssive Pope actually changes doctrine.
2
The Pope's appeal is similar to that of Ghandi, while Trump's popularity is akin to Mussolini's sway. Both are popular, one benevolent, the other decidedly sinister. Their similarity is superficial, while the difference between the two is stark and deep. Poor analysis Ross.
34
True, they are both populists. But like the Italian rock star and judge of the Italian version of American Idol, concluded,who could'nt believe the source of that unbelievable voice - The Singing Nun, Trump and the Pope are the Devil and Holy water, respectively.
"Everything that makes them interesting makes them dangerous as well."
Both Donald Trump and Pose Francis are fascinating. Dangerous?
Trump is possibly dangerous only to the Republican establishment which made its Faustian deal in 1964 and abdicated its national responsibilities in 1980.
The Pope is dangerous only to religious reactionaries such as Ross Douthat.
What's not to like?
Both Donald Trump and Pose Francis are fascinating. Dangerous?
Trump is possibly dangerous only to the Republican establishment which made its Faustian deal in 1964 and abdicated its national responsibilities in 1980.
The Pope is dangerous only to religious reactionaries such as Ross Douthat.
What's not to like?
30
Donald Trump showed his lack of sound judgement by publicly finding fault with a response that Pope Francis I made to a journalist's absurd question. Francis, in fact, didn't even name Trump, per se. Trump could have just ignored the question, just like he constantly does when asked about his lack of military service, his changing ideas on various topics, or any real policy issues.
http://thetruthoncommonsense.com
http://thetruthoncommonsense.com
9
Even if all this is true, the real difference between them is that one of them is doing it for the sake of the institution; the other for himself. I'll leave you to decide which is which.
5
While we can all recognize that Ross was using the Pope as a vehicle to generate an op-ed piece, there is something essentially wrong about characterizing the Pope's answer to a question at a news conference and an attack on Trump. He did not name Trump, nor is "a wall" a unique invention of the Donald. The idea of a wall is at the center of right wing immigration policy.
So while the point of the column is fine enough, just like Carly Simon in her song, the Donald also thinks the song was about him. It was not. It is a larger criticism of policies from a nation run be people who use both the Bible and the flag to mask their mean spiritedness.
So while the point of the column is fine enough, just like Carly Simon in her song, the Donald also thinks the song was about him. It was not. It is a larger criticism of policies from a nation run be people who use both the Bible and the flag to mask their mean spiritedness.
24
I'm pretty sure that Ross's intention here isn't to make a serious comparison, but simply to besmirch the Pope. It just an political attack ad.
26
RADICAL IDEAS Are the basis for this oddly compelling piece by Ross Douthat. I must admit that it made me sit up and take notice, as I am fond of such comparisons, but disquieted by their being applied to the Pope. While Douthat does identify Trump's flaws and the Pope's idealism in ways that could be called fair, comparing their motivation and morality goes beyond the pale, in my opinion. Trump has little care about whom he injures with his endless spraying around of foul-smelling garbage on the media for the simple reason that he can. While the Pope speaks for the oppressed and suffering whose live are sometimes worse for their contact with the catholic church. While their rhetorical forms of argument may bear some similarity to each other, I find little if anything to compare in their ideology. Anybody who believes for an instant that Trump intends to improve the lives of the 99% by balancing things between them and the 1% are deluded. Trump is the 1% personified with the same magical thinking and lures to follow his siren calls to end up on the rocks yet again. The Pope speaks to fairness, integrity and kindness. Could someone provide examples of where Trump has done the same? In my opinion, the only person he is ever interested in is himself. The Pope spends his nights ministering to the poor by visiting them to offer comfort and solace, while Trump is where and doing what? Not volunteering in a soup kitchen for the homeless that I know of. The Pope is great.
29
"Everything that makes them interesting makes them dangerous as well."
That statement certainly applies to, as Ross describes him, the billionaire frank materialist lecher. Not so the Pope, in my non-Catholic opinion. Mr Douthat does nothing in this column to make the case that Pope Francis is dangerous.
The individual that is the current leader of the GOP Parade of Fools is what Republicans deserve. As Pope Francis would agree, "for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
That statement certainly applies to, as Ross describes him, the billionaire frank materialist lecher. Not so the Pope, in my non-Catholic opinion. Mr Douthat does nothing in this column to make the case that Pope Francis is dangerous.
The individual that is the current leader of the GOP Parade of Fools is what Republicans deserve. As Pope Francis would agree, "for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
20
Agreed
I suppose Ross would like the Catholic Church to return to the style of previous Popes. You know ones who ignored sexual abuse, presided over various inquisitions and crusades, etc., as opposed to the current Pope who actually appears to be a real Christian.
I suppose Ross would like the Catholic Church to return to the style of previous Popes. You know ones who ignored sexual abuse, presided over various inquisitions and crusades, etc., as opposed to the current Pope who actually appears to be a real Christian.
Pope Francis is an educated Jesuit who was a Cardinal and then elected Pope by his fellow Cardinals. His adult life has been of the church. To compare him to a man who has probably never set foot in the Capitol building let alone legislated anything, is a stretch greater than my Spanx.
42
I'm just so pleased that in his last four or five ruminations Ross has moved from denial through bargaining and now, with this column, has arrived at acceptance. Perhaps now his grieving over the loss of a loved one, in this case the Repubican Party, can now be assuaged. Dona nobis pacem.
29
Intelligent, great insight, as usual. Misunderstood by most commentators, as usual.
5
At least you didn't throw Bernie Sanders into this populist mix between Trump and Pope Francis as he certainly doesn't deserve to be there even if he is a populist.
Sanders aspires to be a secular populist with a view that church and state ought to be separate.
While I think that Trump plays the game in evangelical states, his is lip service to the role of religion in public affairs. The Pope is often called " the first atheist pope" but with his positions on birth control, abortion, women's rights in the Catholic Church etc. he is populist-lite.
Sanders aspires to be a secular populist with a view that church and state ought to be separate.
While I think that Trump plays the game in evangelical states, his is lip service to the role of religion in public affairs. The Pope is often called " the first atheist pope" but with his positions on birth control, abortion, women's rights in the Catholic Church etc. he is populist-lite.
I was waiting to see what Ross would say about the clash of the leaders of Catholicism and capitalism. Both of these religions have high ideals that are rarely practiced and are often misinterpreted by its followers. I think Ross's main beef is that people are paying attention to Trump and the Pope but not him.
4
All of the attention devoted to the Pope-Trump issue has distracted us from noting important statements the Pope made concerning the relation of his religious authority to politics and political processes. As reported in "America" magazine, the Pontiff declared:
"The pope doesn’t get mixed up in Italian [or American] politics. At my first meeting with the [Italian] bishops in May 2013, one of the three things I said was: with the Italian government you’re on your own. Because the pope is for everybody and he can’t insert himself in the specific internal politics of a country."
When further asked concerning how he would counsel Italian legislators who are about to address such issues as gay-marriage and gay-adoption, he stated: "A Catholic [legislator] must vote according to his well-formed conscience."
The Pope will doubtlessly continue to speak out on areas where moral and political concerns overlap--on climate change, immigration, income inequality and other social justice issues.
He would also remind Catholic legislators that a well-formed conscience is a conscience proper to one who has seriously reflected on the Church's authoritative pronouncements and which is prudentially reflective in the face of complex moral situations.
His response is, overall, quite refreshing when compared to the more authoritarian pronouncements issued by some ultra-conservative American bishops, some of whom Mr. Douthat may admire.
"The pope doesn’t get mixed up in Italian [or American] politics. At my first meeting with the [Italian] bishops in May 2013, one of the three things I said was: with the Italian government you’re on your own. Because the pope is for everybody and he can’t insert himself in the specific internal politics of a country."
When further asked concerning how he would counsel Italian legislators who are about to address such issues as gay-marriage and gay-adoption, he stated: "A Catholic [legislator] must vote according to his well-formed conscience."
The Pope will doubtlessly continue to speak out on areas where moral and political concerns overlap--on climate change, immigration, income inequality and other social justice issues.
He would also remind Catholic legislators that a well-formed conscience is a conscience proper to one who has seriously reflected on the Church's authoritative pronouncements and which is prudentially reflective in the face of complex moral situations.
His response is, overall, quite refreshing when compared to the more authoritarian pronouncements issued by some ultra-conservative American bishops, some of whom Mr. Douthat may admire.
7
And the juxtapositions never cease. Douthat constantly attempts to downgrade good by drawing specious connections to an evil. And how has orthodoxy bettered the world in the past 1000 years? Wars, genocides, slavery, expropriation and all sorts of unholy fraud, waste and abuse leveled on man in the name of orthodoxy, institutional purity and stability. Look around, show me custom and I will show you a con, a hustle, a world where cognitive dissonance rules. Sorry Ross, your parties revival is far from near.
8
A Douthatian exercise in false equivalence, which is all I ever expect from him.
8
Since the Vatican is a sovereign state, there is nothing to prevent the Pope from setting up a tent city in the Vatican gardens to house several hundred refugees from Africa and the Middle East. Instead the Vatican just runs a token homeless shelter and soup kitchen that handles around 30 people a night. So the Pope is somewhat of a hypocrite in calling Trump and other world leaders un christian. The bottom line is the Vatican doesn't want to be swamped with poor refugees and economic migrants any more than any other nation does.
Some day Republicans, including Trump, will wake up to the reality of climate change as storms off the risen sea level floods their McMansions and some day the Catholics will wake up to the reality that their god is just a scapegoat for their lazy refusal to take responsibility for their own actions that have bad outcomes. Making America great again and belief in god are both fairy tails popular with suffering people and in those ways Trump and the Catholic leader are alike, but at least the pope seems genuine and consistent. Trump is neither.
5
Think how crazy this is. Dragging the Pope into American politics?
How low has our country stooped to make points for elections in this country of "separation of church and state"?
Although some of us remember when some people were horrified at voting for that young Catholic, John F. Kennedy. Still, even throwing in Catholicism as a factor, back in those 60's days, there would have been no candidate taking issue publicly with a pope or the other way around. Would there have been?
Has this country really gotten that extreme? If so, seems churches need to stop the politics from the pulpit, and politicians need to stop publicly praising God for their election wins. But that would not get some Republican votes, would it?
How low has our country stooped to make points for elections in this country of "separation of church and state"?
Although some of us remember when some people were horrified at voting for that young Catholic, John F. Kennedy. Still, even throwing in Catholicism as a factor, back in those 60's days, there would have been no candidate taking issue publicly with a pope or the other way around. Would there have been?
Has this country really gotten that extreme? If so, seems churches need to stop the politics from the pulpit, and politicians need to stop publicly praising God for their election wins. But that would not get some Republican votes, would it?
3
Where he says, "But they nonetheless share a common enemy: Not just specific guardians of business as usual, whether Catholic or Republican, but the wider Western ruling class.", Douthat has it wrong. Trump is the enemy.
6
What is it with conservatives and false comparisons? Trump is an opportunist taking advantage of the monster that the Republican party created by pretending to care about working peoples "values". These people realize they have been had and are rejecting the "establishment" by backing Trump. They know he is nuts but they don't care.
Pope Francis is trying the get the Catholic Church back to caring about the poor, the sick, the oppressed. Sort of a Jesus thing.
Douthat's comparison is in his mind. He dislikes both Trump and the Pope and through his contortions finds them equal.
Pope Francis is trying the get the Catholic Church back to caring about the poor, the sick, the oppressed. Sort of a Jesus thing.
Douthat's comparison is in his mind. He dislikes both Trump and the Pope and through his contortions finds them equal.
8
Populist vs. popular?
The difference is one is making promises for personal gain while the other expresses concern. The Pope only attempts to gain justice.
The difference is one is making promises for personal gain while the other expresses concern. The Pope only attempts to gain justice.
5
Mr. Douthat has made no secret of how much he laments the destruction of the GOP in the hands of Mr. Trump, but this column illustrates his own contribution to the impending doom. It is the religious and ideological fanaticism of the Republican intellectuals who have driven the thinking people away, orphaning the party and abandoning it to the crazed. Much more than an insult to the current Pope, this sophomoric analysisis is an insult to Mr. Douthat's intelligence--and level-headedness.
5
What a shuck. This is a prose exercise that could be easily done with any two populists, such as Sanders and Trump, or Sanders and Huey Long. The point is Trump's populism is one of anger and resentment--giving the middle finger to government--and Francis's is the populism of ordinary, faithful Catholics who go gaga over him because he's "el Papa."
4
One thoughtful, decent, caring, humble and prepared for the leadership he has earned.
The other bombastic, indecent, heartless, egomaniacal and woefully unprepared for the position he seeks.
The other bombastic, indecent, heartless, egomaniacal and woefully unprepared for the position he seeks.
8
Dream on, Ross. DT will use anything to bolster himself or make a deal. He's not about tearing down or reforming the establishment - he is a poster boy for it. He wouldn't be bashing it if doing so didn't pay off. He's not about bringing democracy back to its true roots, he's about using whatever's available for his own benefit. There's a huge and extremely fundamental difference between the two men that makes this column a bunch of nonsense: Francis is completely connected to his heart and Trump divorced from his.
5
For whatever reform the Republican Party needs and may, inadvertently, receive from Donald Trump, it pales in comparison to what is needed by of the institution headed by Pope Francis.
Ross, you should be applauding the Pope's capacity to move the church from anachronism to modernity - it's long overdue!
Ross, you should be applauding the Pope's capacity to move the church from anachronism to modernity - it's long overdue!
4
I do not see the popularity of either Pope Francis, Donald Trump, Ted Cruz Bernie Sanders, etc. as reflective of each of them but as reflections of the people they represent. These men are not catalysts or change agents, but chosen by large numbers of people to represent them. In 2008, Obama ran as a "change agent", but he quickly reminded his followers "you are the change you have been waiting for", meaning even Obama understood rather that he was not a catalyst, but merely reflecting back to the people their own views and wants. Hillary Clinton is not running as a "change agent" and neither was Jeb. Instead, change under them will only happen when there is overwhelming support from the people for that change to occur. Remember, Hillary Clinton did not change her position on gay until May of 2013 (she previously strongly supported DOMA). Hillary's explanation for now supporting gay as explained painfully to Terry Gross at NPR is because the people support gay marriage. Meaning, Hillary supports gay marriage now because there is a plurality of support, not because her personal views on gay marriage have changed. Marco Rubio has a similar issue with immigration. Leaders do not change the population - The population changes the leaders. Meaning this, all elected leaders ultimately all lead from behind.
2
This column must be one of the shallowest and most misguided editorial pieces I have ever read.
The feeble attempt to place Trump and Francis on the same plane is, to put it generously, unbelievable. Your use of the term "populism" to describe the Pope's position on the Church's doings can only be attributed to blind ideology, deep ignorance or a combination of both.
This column already occupies a permanent place in my "totally forgettable readings" category.
The feeble attempt to place Trump and Francis on the same plane is, to put it generously, unbelievable. Your use of the term "populism" to describe the Pope's position on the Church's doings can only be attributed to blind ideology, deep ignorance or a combination of both.
This column already occupies a permanent place in my "totally forgettable readings" category.
18
The Pope is a dangerous man? I guess he is since he does seem to take Jesus Christ as described in the Gospels seriously. Jesus Christ was a dangerous man, he praised the poor and had nothing good to say about the rich. Now, Trump is a dangerous man for exactly the opposite reason. Why should anyone be surprised the Pope thinks Trump has an un-Christian attitude?
12
Imagine if the conservative Pope Benedict, Francis's predecessor, had stuck his nose into our political process by criticizing a liberal politician for his/her ideas. What a ruckus there would have been from the left! I do not like Trump, and I do like Francis. It's worth pointing out, however, that Article VII of the Constitution prohibits any religious test for office in the United States, so it really does not matter whether Trump is a Christian or not. Our political process is supposed to be a secular one. Keep religion out of it, and that goes for both sides. Pope Francis, a religious leader and the ruler of a sovereign state, should not have stepped into the American political fray.
27
I suspect that Benedict, then Cardinal Ratzinger, had his hand in the attempt by some of the American bishops to sway the 2004 US election away from John Kerry, arguing that he should be excommunicated for his pro-choice policies. If this was not "stepping into the American political fray," then I don't know what would be. But in partial defense of those same bishops--who are hardly favorites of mine--I would add that religious leaders do have a duty to speak to the moral issues of the day. Don't we wish that more of the Christian clergy had condemned the genocidal policies of the Third Reich? But the focus should always be the issue itself, not the politicians per se, and they should be very weighty before the clergy weigh in.
1
John Mead: Previous Popes stuck their nose into US politics constantly, especially on abortion, birth control, gay rights, etc. It was too common to excite that much notice.
From the Pope "As far as what you said about whether I would advise to vote or not to vote, I am not going to get involved in that. I say only that this man is not Christian if he has said things like that. We must see if he said things in that way and in this I give the benefit of the doubt."
Hard to agree that the Pope did anything wrong here. He stayed away from talking about candidate support and even gave Mr. Trump the "benefit of the doubt." By your standard, The Pope could never comment about any world leader as every leader on earth would use the old "stay out of our internal affairs" canard. That used to be only the province of the Communist countries.
Hard to agree that the Pope did anything wrong here. He stayed away from talking about candidate support and even gave Mr. Trump the "benefit of the doubt." By your standard, The Pope could never comment about any world leader as every leader on earth would use the old "stay out of our internal affairs" canard. That used to be only the province of the Communist countries.
It is sad to see young people like Ross Douthat discouraging the honest changes that we need to make our world and our nation more fair and equitable to all. He claims to be Catholic, but has consistently criticized the Pope for trying to make Catholicism more humane. He claims to be a Conservative, but he regularly admits he has no clue about how to make his party more honestly conservative. It seems that with every passing week, Ross Douthat uses more big words while actually saying less than any other columnist in the world today.
3
Douthat, what we need to break is the conviction of those running, that to win, they need to bow to billionaires, and then legislate to benefit them at the cost of serving the needs of American public.
Americans are voting to overthrow the donor class. Hillary copycat Clinton might have won by a narrow margin tonight, but it's not over. Her speech tonight makes me think she took some acting classes.
Americans are voting to overthrow the donor class. Hillary copycat Clinton might have won by a narrow margin tonight, but it's not over. Her speech tonight makes me think she took some acting classes.
What Douthat misses is that Republican/Catholic "rules and traditions" are no longer protecting people like the poor or children, respectively. In fact, both have used that trust to empower injustice. And I won't even get into his ridiculous, utterly inaccurate parallel between Trump and Pope Francis.
I think Douthat is misreading the Pope's swipe at Trump. The Catholic Church has a huge problem aligning itself with the new catechism of western elites, who deplore bossy, hierarchical canon and traditional values. A few years ago the (previous?) Pope was in Kenya, and took the opportunity to tell hundreds of thousands of people that the best way to beat AIDS was not using condoms, but by traditional monogamy. He was immediately villified in the western press, which called him irresponsible and reckless for being off message on safe sex. In lashing out at Trump over "walls", the Pope was hoping to derail Trump in South Carolina and score some points with the west's multicultural elites. It didn't work out too well.
Also, if neoliberalism (private sectcor good, state sector bad) has governed the west "for a generation or more", how come the US has $19 dollars in debt?
Also, if neoliberalism (private sectcor good, state sector bad) has governed the west "for a generation or more", how come the US has $19 dollars in debt?
Trump defiles the term populist. Bryan and Lafollette were populists. A crass ignorant demagogue cannot be a true populist. The only thing Trump needs to add to become a complete charlatan is an Elmer Gantry shtick. (btw Ross: Elmer was a fraud just like Sister Sharon).
When the Republicans became a hard-right party (2008-present) and abandoned middle America, politically and economically, they sought the nuts on the fringes: the birthers, the Second Amendment and militia types, the conspiracy theorists and the racist white supremacists. These extremists are the Trump voters and now constitute 30%+ of Republican primary voters. Once, Archie Bunker was a right-wing Republican. Now, he'd be the last of its moderates lamenting a party he no longer recognizes.
What concerns is what comes next. What happens to the disaffected Americans when Trump loses or simply quits them? To whom do they turn? To what ideology? It's not hard to picture some of these people in "Brown Shirts" following a delusional "Leader" (insert the German words, if you dare). Time to update another Sinclair Lewis classic, "It Can't Happen Here". Yet, it is too easy to picture.
When the Republicans became a hard-right party (2008-present) and abandoned middle America, politically and economically, they sought the nuts on the fringes: the birthers, the Second Amendment and militia types, the conspiracy theorists and the racist white supremacists. These extremists are the Trump voters and now constitute 30%+ of Republican primary voters. Once, Archie Bunker was a right-wing Republican. Now, he'd be the last of its moderates lamenting a party he no longer recognizes.
What concerns is what comes next. What happens to the disaffected Americans when Trump loses or simply quits them? To whom do they turn? To what ideology? It's not hard to picture some of these people in "Brown Shirts" following a delusional "Leader" (insert the German words, if you dare). Time to update another Sinclair Lewis classic, "It Can't Happen Here". Yet, it is too easy to picture.
2
Although sneered at by the pseudo-intellectual elite, populism, is usually the collective wisdom of a democratic majority.
On immigration, a wise parable warns no one can enter a strong mans home unless he first binds the strong man.
Donald trump may loosen the binding and it should be asked how welcoming Muslim countries of Christians.
The notion of multiple cultures and religions living harmoniously together under one set of laws and values is somewhat fanciful and further to that: "Rescue me and deliver me from the hands of foreigners,
Whose mouths speak lying words,
And whose right hand is the right hand of falsehood" (Psalms 144:11)
"They will put you out of the synagogues; yes, the time is coming that whoever kills you will think that he offers God service" (John 16:12)
On immigration, a wise parable warns no one can enter a strong mans home unless he first binds the strong man.
Donald trump may loosen the binding and it should be asked how welcoming Muslim countries of Christians.
The notion of multiple cultures and religions living harmoniously together under one set of laws and values is somewhat fanciful and further to that: "Rescue me and deliver me from the hands of foreigners,
Whose mouths speak lying words,
And whose right hand is the right hand of falsehood" (Psalms 144:11)
"They will put you out of the synagogues; yes, the time is coming that whoever kills you will think that he offers God service" (John 16:12)
Shaking up the establishments? It may be true that this is the goal of Francis. But Trump? His goal is self-promotion. To think he's on a mission to change the GOP is nonsense. The GOP is a convenient tool for his self-advancement. Trump criticizes everyone and everything: Obama is a disaster; our military is degraded; our administration is peopled with failed bureaucrats. Everything is rotten and everything is wonderful.
Douthat needs a wee break. Now. Or he'll have a complete breakdown before the summer is out.
Douthat needs a wee break. Now. Or he'll have a complete breakdown before the summer is out.
7
You left one essential difference out; the pope is a champion for the downtrodden, the oppressed and those who suffer trials and tribulations and are without hope. He pleads and yes exhorts and lectures to those who can and should make a difference to improve the lives of the less fortunate and tries to impose Christian values ( in this sense Charity, Compassion and love for all ) as opposed to the Donald who is all about Donald . When he is momentarily off his favorite topic ( Donald ) he is attacking, denigrating , humiliating and eviscerating the poor, oppressed and different. It is simply outrageous that a man who often writes and points out his belief in Christianity and all it should stand for could compare the two. The Pope wants to make this a better, safer and freer world , feed the poor, house the homeless, champion peace understanding and faith. Donald Trump speaks glowingly of a world that would destroy all that the Pope believes in and fights for.
4
Ross, you mystical first paragraph said it all. In the order of humankind, the battle between these two alpha males is interesting but realistically the outcome will not affect our daily lives. The reality is Money is in the first position in the order of our behavior, government or the sovereign has been bypassed and the ancient call of the mysticism of religion is in last place as government melds with money. The ascent of money, may or may not be in humanity's interest but the realities of the requirement to shift our economic dependency away from fossil fuel technologies may do our species in before we recognize the importance of acting to make the shift. I am still amazed that the Republicans, including all the candidates, are in denial of global warming, when it is directly related to our survival as a species. It is telling me that the contest between the Big Money supporters of the GOP and the Pope's miraculous recognition of the science of the global warming threat may be the 7th envelope of our civilization.
1
Pope Francis is only dangerous to those who want to cling to a church that instead of spreading Jesus' gospel of love and care for the poor and downtrodden instead wants to control the sexual lives of its faithful.
As to Donakd Trump, well he is indeed dangerous to the Republican Party which planted the seeds of hate and rancor in this country in its attempt to win elections instead of governing, and now realizes the ravenous weed that sprouted from those seeds may devour and destroy the Party that planted it.
As to Donakd Trump, well he is indeed dangerous to the Republican Party which planted the seeds of hate and rancor in this country in its attempt to win elections instead of governing, and now realizes the ravenous weed that sprouted from those seeds may devour and destroy the Party that planted it.
5
The real problem that no Republican wants to admit is that 35 years of Reaganomics has been great for the very rich, not so much for the middle and working classes.
They try to say it is globalization but look at Germany or Denmark or all the rest. They have faced the same globalization all these years and yet you won’t find people in those countries working two part-time minimum wage jobs, below the poverty line and with no health care.
You will not find the inequality we have.
And they have better economic mobility than the US, that ability to pull one’s self up by our bootstraps.
Forbes ranks Denmark number 1 country to do business and ranks the US number 22.
We rank 20 in education, 27 in infant mortality and Mississippi ranks the same as Botswana for infant mortality.
We have the highest incarceration rate in the world and it costs about the same as a year at a state university to keep a person in prison that the rest of us are paying, plus the additional police and judicial costs.
No wonder working class Republicans are unhappy.
They try to say it is globalization but look at Germany or Denmark or all the rest. They have faced the same globalization all these years and yet you won’t find people in those countries working two part-time minimum wage jobs, below the poverty line and with no health care.
You will not find the inequality we have.
And they have better economic mobility than the US, that ability to pull one’s self up by our bootstraps.
Forbes ranks Denmark number 1 country to do business and ranks the US number 22.
We rank 20 in education, 27 in infant mortality and Mississippi ranks the same as Botswana for infant mortality.
We have the highest incarceration rate in the world and it costs about the same as a year at a state university to keep a person in prison that the rest of us are paying, plus the additional police and judicial costs.
No wonder working class Republicans are unhappy.
6
Lately, conservative journalists have been publishing articles that compare the far-right candidates to the far-left, and conclude they're pals under the skin. That's bologna. Donald Trump is a boastful, vacillating, poorly educated narcissist. Pope Francis is an experienced, thoughtful, and kind man. They do not equate. For further proof that the Right does not equal the Left, please review clips of recent US presidential debates. Which party features mean and nasty attack dogs? Which party features civil individuals? Check it out.
6
End times are here, but most are blind and busy getting married as was said would happen in God's word. If Trump is elected it's really on! Once we see a one world currency there will be no denying it. We have see Europe go to a single currency and I think it's coming... Pray to be saved everyone. Watch Chasing Tyson on Netflix if you have it. That was quite the good fighting evil story also.
Dangerous? Trump is dangerous to the political process, to the nation and to the world. He's shallow and thoughtless. Trump cares about Trump and nobody else.
Francis is dangerous to the Catholic establishment that's more concerned with privilege, influence and protection of wealth and secrets. He's also dangerous to the power brokers of the world who don't care how many people starve as long as they preserve their power and position. Francis cares about everyone who cannot fight for themselves.
I'm not a Catholic, or a Christian, but I see Pope Francis as a powerful force for good in this world. No wonder the late Justice Scalia sneered at him.
Francis is dangerous to the Catholic establishment that's more concerned with privilege, influence and protection of wealth and secrets. He's also dangerous to the power brokers of the world who don't care how many people starve as long as they preserve their power and position. Francis cares about everyone who cannot fight for themselves.
I'm not a Catholic, or a Christian, but I see Pope Francis as a powerful force for good in this world. No wonder the late Justice Scalia sneered at him.
9
In principle there is no difference between Pope Francis and Donald Trump.
One could say that two of them almost like the identical twins.
Both of them preside over the enormous institutions and organizations that became extremely rich while claiming to work on behalf of the poor and fellow countrymen.
Both promise the things that they cannot deliver – the former to get you in touch with God, the latter to make America great.
See, both those objectives are in our hands, not theirs. In both cases we have to implement the right principles. Our salvation does not come from any individual but from within us.
Both had no problem with witnessing their countrymen being harmed, either by the brute military dictatorship and indiscriminating killings or by forcing us to compete with the people that are paid ten times less than us. Should not we produce for our needs and the Chinese produce for their needs and exchange the surpluses?
God did not command us to produce something as cheap as possible but to produce the things that we need - not some other country, not some other people. Should not those people enjoy in the fruits of their hard work? Do you understand how morally wrong is to have the others work on your behalf and us working on behalf of the others instead for ourselves? Somebody gets morally spoiled and ruined.
Both of them are the false idols.
One could say that two of them almost like the identical twins.
Both of them preside over the enormous institutions and organizations that became extremely rich while claiming to work on behalf of the poor and fellow countrymen.
Both promise the things that they cannot deliver – the former to get you in touch with God, the latter to make America great.
See, both those objectives are in our hands, not theirs. In both cases we have to implement the right principles. Our salvation does not come from any individual but from within us.
Both had no problem with witnessing their countrymen being harmed, either by the brute military dictatorship and indiscriminating killings or by forcing us to compete with the people that are paid ten times less than us. Should not we produce for our needs and the Chinese produce for their needs and exchange the surpluses?
God did not command us to produce something as cheap as possible but to produce the things that we need - not some other country, not some other people. Should not those people enjoy in the fruits of their hard work? Do you understand how morally wrong is to have the others work on your behalf and us working on behalf of the others instead for ourselves? Somebody gets morally spoiled and ruined.
Both of them are the false idols.
1
To the editors of the Times and every other publication out there please stop confusing populist and popular. The Pope and Donald Trump are popular they are not populists. Populism was a political movement in the late 19th century of rural farmers fighting back against the banking and railroad interests that were squeezing them. There was plenty of corruption back then but the farmers were mostly concerned with banks foreclosing on the farms they had mortgaged to the hilt and the rates the railroads charged them to get their crops to market.
The Pope is not a populist he is a popular religious leader. Donald Trump is not a populist as far as I can tell he is a clown. This is not a populist moment it is a moment of popular discontent with the status quo. It is easy to fall in to the trap of labeling it populist, I have myself, but it is imprecise. It leaves the impression that the writer knows what is going but he really doesn’t. It is increasingly clear that we don’t know what is going on today. I don’t know what to call our political situation today; just that it is scary. We will have to wait for future historians to come up with something if there are any future historians.
Maybe we are in the mess we are in today because no one seems to remember our history very well and everyone thinks they can change it or cherry pick it or ignore it to suit whatever facile argument they are making.
The Pope is not a populist he is a popular religious leader. Donald Trump is not a populist as far as I can tell he is a clown. This is not a populist moment it is a moment of popular discontent with the status quo. It is easy to fall in to the trap of labeling it populist, I have myself, but it is imprecise. It leaves the impression that the writer knows what is going but he really doesn’t. It is increasingly clear that we don’t know what is going on today. I don’t know what to call our political situation today; just that it is scary. We will have to wait for future historians to come up with something if there are any future historians.
Maybe we are in the mess we are in today because no one seems to remember our history very well and everyone thinks they can change it or cherry pick it or ignore it to suit whatever facile argument they are making.
13
O.K., I live in Florida so I'm used to weird electoral things. Like the time voters put a crook in the statehouse but that's for another time. But even I'm mystified: A billionaire real estate mogul -- as the NYT calls him -- has been leader of the big GOP pack ever since the race began. He's insulted women, other Republicans, Mexicans and now he tangles with a beloved pope. Then he handily wins another primary. Holy Cow. Everyone seems to call Trump a populist. Thus, he must be. but I think Trump is a demagogue in the old fashioned sense of the word and the scariest part is the other candidates try to out-Trump Trump. So why is anyone surprised at Trumps remarks about Pope Francis?
10
People have been using the word 'populist' like it is a bad thing. A populist is a member of a political party who is attempting to represent the interest of ordinary people rather than the party elite. Trump's attraction is that he at least pretends to represent the interest of ordinary people. The ordinary people who are ignored by the GOP elite. The ordinary people that the GOP elite is totally dependent upon for general election wins. By welcoming the Tea Party into the Republican party, the GOP has changed the definition of 'ordinary party member' in the Republican party.
The Republican party needs to decide who it wants to represent. Even in a political party, democracy represented by a majority vote will eventually win the day. Instead of trying to limit voting in the general election, the GOP should focus on its primaries.
The Republican party needs to decide who it wants to represent. Even in a political party, democracy represented by a majority vote will eventually win the day. Instead of trying to limit voting in the general election, the GOP should focus on its primaries.
4
One huge difference, Ross. The Pope won't have his fingers all over the nuclear buttons, ready to nuke a "loser" nation that just might insult him. The worst thing the Pope can do to Catholicism (and the world) is to continue to display humility and respect for all of humanity.
4
The false equivalency borders on the absurd. Trump, in prime racist form, insults all Hispanics (the Pope is Hispanic), while indirectly employing thousands of them. In emulating St. Francis, the Pope is a radical representative of the poor and challenges the dusty imperial Vatican; Trump is the man who would be king, offering gold to illiterate peasants and mercenaries. If this were the 14th century, there would be war. The Pope is moral strength incarnate, who can stand alone, but connected to all. Trump is the schoolyard bully who, without his money and gang of ruffians, crumbles in the dust.
10
Douthat's columns became a lot more intelligible to me once I realized his intent. He is not necessarily attempting to build a strong logical argument of persuasion. Instead, he attempts to craft words to defend a worldview already held. And if non sequiturs and pretzel logic are required, so be it.
In many ways, it's like being on a debate team and constantly getting horrible positions to defend. You do what you have to do, but unless you have incredible rhetorical gifts, you're not going to look so good at the end of the debate.
David Brooks is similar, but occasionally can't resist the effort to build a logical case, which is why he sometimes writes columns that are a little surprising or unexpected.
In many ways, it's like being on a debate team and constantly getting horrible positions to defend. You do what you have to do, but unless you have incredible rhetorical gifts, you're not going to look so good at the end of the debate.
David Brooks is similar, but occasionally can't resist the effort to build a logical case, which is why he sometimes writes columns that are a little surprising or unexpected.
3
Ross, do you write these things because you believe them, or because your job here is to get a lot of people to post their opinions about how wrong you are?
82
Pope Francis tells everyone - citizens, leaders, clergy - that they each have a responsibility to improve our shared world. Donald Trump tells his supporters they rightfully have glory due to them, if only fill-in-the-blank would stop keeping them down.
Comparing them as "populists" is a false analogy.
Comparing them as "populists" is a false analogy.
12
"But for now, the last thing they have in common in this: Everything that makes them interesting makes them dangerous as well."
After noting the possibility of Donald Trump's finger on the nuclear trigger, should he survive voter's scrutiny to become President, one struggles to find even a roughly equivalent danger presented by the Pope, unless it is your worry that his critique of capitalism might find majority support from the people of the world.
After noting the possibility of Donald Trump's finger on the nuclear trigger, should he survive voter's scrutiny to become President, one struggles to find even a roughly equivalent danger presented by the Pope, unless it is your worry that his critique of capitalism might find majority support from the people of the world.
11
It is somewhat astounding to read two columns in two days in the New York Times comparing Pope Francis to Donald Trump on the false premise that they are both populists.
Pope Francis who is rightfully and faithfully adored by 1.2 billion Roman Catholics because he is the head of their church is not a populist.
Also not a populist is Trump who is an elitist by definition. He was born with a silver spoon in his mouth - a spoon he pawned multiple times to banks and investors - nearly losing his inherited wealth in the process. He cares not a whit about the man on the street - to him they are losers he has contempt for, just as he has contempt for the disabled and desperate immigrants. We are witnessing a Reality TV star with a filthy mouth acting out a role as a vulgar Presidential candidate in a series with far too many episodes. Trump is not a populist.
Please spare us these contorted and meritless comparisons which give far more credibility to the Wizard of Oz than his own smoke and mirrors.
Pope Francis who is rightfully and faithfully adored by 1.2 billion Roman Catholics because he is the head of their church is not a populist.
Also not a populist is Trump who is an elitist by definition. He was born with a silver spoon in his mouth - a spoon he pawned multiple times to banks and investors - nearly losing his inherited wealth in the process. He cares not a whit about the man on the street - to him they are losers he has contempt for, just as he has contempt for the disabled and desperate immigrants. We are witnessing a Reality TV star with a filthy mouth acting out a role as a vulgar Presidential candidate in a series with far too many episodes. Trump is not a populist.
Please spare us these contorted and meritless comparisons which give far more credibility to the Wizard of Oz than his own smoke and mirrors.
25
I've been amazed at how many commenters say the Pope needs to change, or to do this or that. He's not running for office people, he's the Pope! He's also head of what is basically an independent country, definitely not subject to the whims of the American voter. He's not going to be supporting raw insults and self interest over the teachings of Jesus. Those with the most extreme positions on immigration are not following Christian philosophy, that is all he is really saying. It's undeniable that Mr Trump's insulting remarks about entire races and religions are extreme. They are also directly contrary to Christian teachings.
22
Discouraging that you would choose such subject material. One always gets the feeling that the Pope's ostensibly off the cuff comments have forethought behind them. The current Pope is an intellectual with an historical understanding of the world as it exists today. If a comparison is to be made of the Pope and a current American politician, President Obama comes to mind. Both the Pope and Mr. Obama walked into as heads of their respective governments having to put out multiple fires and disasters that their predecessors left them.
20
As a supporter of Hillary since she first ran for the Senate I am thrilled to see she has turned the corner in Nevada and next week in South Carolina. Bernie means well, and has been a well needed spark to get Hillary in gear and primed for the Fall.
What pleases me more is the idea that The Donald may actually con these rubes in the Republican Party to nominate this clown for president.
I can't help but recall that old Democratic chestnut from FDR's era:
"Happy Days Are Here Again". Indeed.
DD
Manhattan
What pleases me more is the idea that The Donald may actually con these rubes in the Republican Party to nominate this clown for president.
I can't help but recall that old Democratic chestnut from FDR's era:
"Happy Days Are Here Again". Indeed.
DD
Manhattan
4
People want that wall because they feel they are in competition with folks outside the country. Sharing is the Christian thing, but there are reasons why that might be a hard sell.
Consider the effect of immigration on the labor economy of working class Americans. Nobody has cared about them for too long, yet now we are alarmed about attitudes that remind us of fascism. Why are people so surprised?
Blame the problems of the working class on: globalization, trade agreements, technology, self-serving out-of-touch elites? Pick any, or all of the above.
But once it was easy to get a job as a steelworker or autoworker or textile worker. Not any more.
The elites said: free trade agreements will pump up GDP by enabling America to offshore semi-skilled work and specialize instead at tasks where it has a comparative advantage. We TRIED it. The elites captured all of the income gains. It does NOT 'trickle down', as was promised.
So MAKE it trickle down, millions of open mouths are waiting with less and less patience.
But quit being so surprised when nativist rhetoric starts to dominate the conversation. People are suffering and they are going to blame somebody. Maybe start building infrastructure to give them a decent way to participate in GDP gains.
But whatever you decide to do, be sensitive to the painful hole they are in, or you will see 'rational' interest groups changing into angry mobs, and the leader they pick will not look much like a good Christian.
Consider the effect of immigration on the labor economy of working class Americans. Nobody has cared about them for too long, yet now we are alarmed about attitudes that remind us of fascism. Why are people so surprised?
Blame the problems of the working class on: globalization, trade agreements, technology, self-serving out-of-touch elites? Pick any, or all of the above.
But once it was easy to get a job as a steelworker or autoworker or textile worker. Not any more.
The elites said: free trade agreements will pump up GDP by enabling America to offshore semi-skilled work and specialize instead at tasks where it has a comparative advantage. We TRIED it. The elites captured all of the income gains. It does NOT 'trickle down', as was promised.
So MAKE it trickle down, millions of open mouths are waiting with less and less patience.
But quit being so surprised when nativist rhetoric starts to dominate the conversation. People are suffering and they are going to blame somebody. Maybe start building infrastructure to give them a decent way to participate in GDP gains.
But whatever you decide to do, be sensitive to the painful hole they are in, or you will see 'rational' interest groups changing into angry mobs, and the leader they pick will not look much like a good Christian.
10
What struck me about the Francis - Trump kerfuffle was how the media took the Pope's rather complicated, non-partisan & non-moralistic thoughts and crammed them into the black & white partisan shouting match into which it crams every observable phenomenon in the universe.
And reading an essay like Mr. Douthat's, which finds some weird equivalence between someone who manipulates people by telling them any nonsense they want to hear, and someone else who tries to show a higher standard by speaking difficult truths, I can only be struck by the fact that the writer is stuck so deep in his media universe that when others speak he can only hear pandering, strategy & ideology. This is perhaps how Republicans are able to look at moderates or conservatives like Obama or Clinton and project divisiveness. Tthere are no ideas, no sincerity in their world, only strategies & poses.
And reading an essay like Mr. Douthat's, which finds some weird equivalence between someone who manipulates people by telling them any nonsense they want to hear, and someone else who tries to show a higher standard by speaking difficult truths, I can only be struck by the fact that the writer is stuck so deep in his media universe that when others speak he can only hear pandering, strategy & ideology. This is perhaps how Republicans are able to look at moderates or conservatives like Obama or Clinton and project divisiveness. Tthere are no ideas, no sincerity in their world, only strategies & poses.
27
They both live in ultra secure enclaves, they both are surrounded by gaudy treasures, they both are ignorant of science, but only one presides over an organization whose history is riddled with pedophiles.
2
The Pope is not ignorant of science. He holds a degree in science.
1
A "populist" from the Roman "populares" was one who defended and advocated for the common man, the plebeian class, against the rich aristocracy or patricians. Pope Francis clearly is a populist while Donald Trump is just as clearly not. He's a self-serving demagogue who seeks political power at the very expense of those modern-day plebeians whose fears he manipulates for his own self-aggrandizement. There's absolutely no equivalence here. The "clash," as it was in Rome and is now, is between the "haves and have-nots, the "billionaire class" as the real populist, Bernie Sanders calls them, and the masses. To place The Donald who reads from the holy book of the deal in the Temple of Mammon on an epic or Biblical plane with Pope Francis moves from sacrilege to self-satire and from folly to farce.
10
"But for now, the last thing they have in common in this: Everything that makes them interesting makes them dangerous as well."
I think the Pope and Trump may be a little dangerous but the Pope is an improvement on old Catholic doctrine (even approving a little of birth control this week) and Trump may be an improvement on old Republican doctrine so they both seem less dangerous than what came before.
I think the Pope and Trump may be a little dangerous but the Pope is an improvement on old Catholic doctrine (even approving a little of birth control this week) and Trump may be an improvement on old Republican doctrine so they both seem less dangerous than what came before.
2
And consider too the similarities between the Pope and Assad, with their bilateral vision, their leading position among large numbers of bipeds, their characteristic speech patterns (subject, verb, often object), and their visceral theistic proclivities. They could be twin sons of different mothers.
11
"Everything that makes them interesting makes them dangerous as well." This is so way out there.
Stalin in 1935: "The Pope! How many divisions has he got?" An American president has enough divisions (and planes, ships and nuclear buttons--it only takes one of the latter) to wreak even more havoc than Bush 43 and Dick Cheney did.
Yes, the Pope may be the Curia's worst nightmare, but Trump would be the world's.
Stalin in 1935: "The Pope! How many divisions has he got?" An American president has enough divisions (and planes, ships and nuclear buttons--it only takes one of the latter) to wreak even more havoc than Bush 43 and Dick Cheney did.
Yes, the Pope may be the Curia's worst nightmare, but Trump would be the world's.
10
Great comparison Ross. Only problem is Francis is now the Pope and actually demonstrating how dangerous he is by being a combination of Bernie Sanders and like Martin Luther. What could be a more lethal combination for the Catholic faith and our economic system than that?
Donald Trump on the other hand is helping us sort out the kind of person we wish to vote for and we can consider what is happening now as great theater. Not so with Pope Francis who day after day confuses and dismays faithful Catholics. Ah, if we could only vote for the Pope? Maybe we would get what we deserve or, come to think about it, maybe we already have.
Donald Trump on the other hand is helping us sort out the kind of person we wish to vote for and we can consider what is happening now as great theater. Not so with Pope Francis who day after day confuses and dismays faithful Catholics. Ah, if we could only vote for the Pope? Maybe we would get what we deserve or, come to think about it, maybe we already have.
2
Michael,
Too many mistake the symptoms for the disease. The US economic system is collapsing. It would be collapsing whether Francis and Bernie said it was collapsing or not. Francis and Bernie are only offering a soft landing for you, your children and parents.
Did Francis cause Walmart's growth to hit the wall this week? Will rounding up 12 million people and expelling them grow the economy? Will further concentrating wealth spur more consumer spending?
"Conservative" economics reminds me of the 18th century surgeon barbers who when the patient didn't recover after the first bleeding bled the patient some more. I am afraid the next GOP President will bleed the patient to death.
Too many mistake the symptoms for the disease. The US economic system is collapsing. It would be collapsing whether Francis and Bernie said it was collapsing or not. Francis and Bernie are only offering a soft landing for you, your children and parents.
Did Francis cause Walmart's growth to hit the wall this week? Will rounding up 12 million people and expelling them grow the economy? Will further concentrating wealth spur more consumer spending?
"Conservative" economics reminds me of the 18th century surgeon barbers who when the patient didn't recover after the first bleeding bled the patient some more. I am afraid the next GOP President will bleed the patient to death.
4
For a change I couldn't agree more with Douthat, but not for the reason he may believe.
Even though I do not agree with many of the Church's dogmas, I believe that Pope Francis is a great human being unlike The Donald. The Holy See stands for and promotes humanity unlike Trump.
So what is it that I agree with Douthat? "well). Both show a "mastery of the contemporary media environment." But here too they diverge. Pope Francis uses the media to show a softer side of Catholicism whereas Trump uses the media to denigrate the person du-jour. Yesterday it was the Mexicans, today it is veterans, and tomorrow it'll be gays.
Even though I do not agree with many of the Church's dogmas, I believe that Pope Francis is a great human being unlike The Donald. The Holy See stands for and promotes humanity unlike Trump.
So what is it that I agree with Douthat? "well). Both show a "mastery of the contemporary media environment." But here too they diverge. Pope Francis uses the media to show a softer side of Catholicism whereas Trump uses the media to denigrate the person du-jour. Yesterday it was the Mexicans, today it is veterans, and tomorrow it'll be gays.
10
Ummm, I don't think so. The Trumper is an evil minded manipulative narcissist on the order of McCarthy or Father Coughlin, playing to crowds that don't care or understand the extend of their own anger, which he fans with devilish delight. The Pope appears to be exactly what he seems to be--a humble, honest man with an eye on the larger issues of humanity, morality, and decency. These are not in any way equivalent. The Pope is popular, Trump is populist--big difference.
44
To claim that Trump is a populist puts the joke on us. He may want the ordinary man's vote, but does not want to share Trump Towers with him. As for Francis, I have the sense that he is a man of great conscience who is confronting his establishment when it conflicts with the ordinary human experience as is lived by most ordinary people. He preaches love and acceptance which to some sounds radical. His comment about the Trump Wall was simply positing the idea that bridges are better than walls in the realm of humanity.
27
I wish I could speak Italian, or Spanish, and hear what the Pope actually said without translation. It is translated, in the Times for instance, as "not a Christian" on the video and "not Christian" in the text.
I heard the Pope differently - maybe it's all those years of hearing the language of the Gospel read to me. I interpreted the Pope as saying, that people who demonize others, who actively work to promote misery, are not acting in a Christian manner. "He is not Christian" (adjective) is different from "He is not a Christian" (noun.) The Pope backs it up by saying, "This is not the Gospel."
I heard the Pope criticizing the extra mile that Trump has gone to demonize illegal immigrants; to strip away dignity and humanity, rather than to deal solely with the real legal and economic issues. And I'd have to agree, that calling 11 million people rapists and criminals for the transgression of looking for a better life, is not Christian.
All and all, a tempest in a teapot. The Pope said nothing differently from what he has been saying about refugees for months. We may not like it, and we may not be able to afford it, but it is unchristian, it is "not the Gospel," to ignore the misery of refugees worldwide. Trump may have been the rudest face of the issue, but he wasn't the only face.
I heard the Pope differently - maybe it's all those years of hearing the language of the Gospel read to me. I interpreted the Pope as saying, that people who demonize others, who actively work to promote misery, are not acting in a Christian manner. "He is not Christian" (adjective) is different from "He is not a Christian" (noun.) The Pope backs it up by saying, "This is not the Gospel."
I heard the Pope criticizing the extra mile that Trump has gone to demonize illegal immigrants; to strip away dignity and humanity, rather than to deal solely with the real legal and economic issues. And I'd have to agree, that calling 11 million people rapists and criminals for the transgression of looking for a better life, is not Christian.
All and all, a tempest in a teapot. The Pope said nothing differently from what he has been saying about refugees for months. We may not like it, and we may not be able to afford it, but it is unchristian, it is "not the Gospel," to ignore the misery of refugees worldwide. Trump may have been the rudest face of the issue, but he wasn't the only face.
46
It might be better to distinguish between Revolutionaries and Leaders than to compare Revolutionaries with Demagogues! I believe that Revolutionary types like Pope Francis, MLK, Elizabeth Warren and maybe even Bernie Sanders have the important effect of moving public opinion so that leaders like President Obama can compromise to make changes that are evolutionary and benefit everyone.
Maybe having a Revolutionar y in charge is not the best approach since by definition they do not like to compromise. Pope Francis might be the exception since his thoughts about Catholic doctrine are more evolutionary.
So, that leaves the demagogues including Trump out of the comparison game. They are neither Revolutionaries or Leaders. Instead, they have a personal agenda driven by ego and narcissism. I am sure the German people could tell us what happens when demagogues are in charge!
Maybe having a Revolutionar y in charge is not the best approach since by definition they do not like to compromise. Pope Francis might be the exception since his thoughts about Catholic doctrine are more evolutionary.
So, that leaves the demagogues including Trump out of the comparison game. They are neither Revolutionaries or Leaders. Instead, they have a personal agenda driven by ego and narcissism. I am sure the German people could tell us what happens when demagogues are in charge!
28
Douthat's conversion to Catholicism has not taken effect. The Pope is the Vicar of Christ, that is the representative of Jesus Christ on earth in Catholic dogma. It is utterly ridiculous for you to compare Francis to "a lecher, .... materialist." N'cest-ce pas?
"False equivalence is a common result when an anecdotal similarity is pointed out as equal, but the claim of equivalence doesn't bear because the similarity is based on oversimplification or ignorance of additional factors. The pattern of the fallacy is often as such: "If A is the set of c and d, and B is the set of d and e, then since they both contain d, A and B are equal". d is not required to exist in both sets; only a passing similarity is required to cause this fallacy to be able to be used." False equivalence is also a logical fallacy that is an essential ingredient of Republican, Conservative, Tea Party discourse (that is not an over generalization).
The fact that the Pope did not mention Trump should be considered, but the assumption that Trump was intended speaks to the facts about Trump. The Seven Deadly Sins: pride, greed, lust, envy, gluttony, wrath and sloth. seem to describe Mr. Trump excepting gluttony and sloth.
The efforts that Pope Francis is making to improve the plight of the majority of the human race causes some great discomfort to those who prefer lecherous, prideful materialists. Trump is acting for number one, vanity. Perhaps "Prosperity Theology" resonates better for Ross?
"False equivalence is a common result when an anecdotal similarity is pointed out as equal, but the claim of equivalence doesn't bear because the similarity is based on oversimplification or ignorance of additional factors. The pattern of the fallacy is often as such: "If A is the set of c and d, and B is the set of d and e, then since they both contain d, A and B are equal". d is not required to exist in both sets; only a passing similarity is required to cause this fallacy to be able to be used." False equivalence is also a logical fallacy that is an essential ingredient of Republican, Conservative, Tea Party discourse (that is not an over generalization).
The fact that the Pope did not mention Trump should be considered, but the assumption that Trump was intended speaks to the facts about Trump. The Seven Deadly Sins: pride, greed, lust, envy, gluttony, wrath and sloth. seem to describe Mr. Trump excepting gluttony and sloth.
The efforts that Pope Francis is making to improve the plight of the majority of the human race causes some great discomfort to those who prefer lecherous, prideful materialists. Trump is acting for number one, vanity. Perhaps "Prosperity Theology" resonates better for Ross?
26
As a Catholic, I hear Francis's ad hoc comments not as doctrine to be learned but the prideful ramblings of an elderly caudillo. The Pope is no less susceptible to the sin of Pride than any other Catholic and perhaps he should take the opportunity of Lenten reflection during the Year of Mercy to discern whether he has allowed himself to be repeatedly tempted by his desire for earthly approbation to make statements that reflect his personal bias in a way that confuses the faithful. Perhaps he might give himself an appropriate penance of shutting up and sitting in the front of the plane reading The Imitation of Christ during his trips.
The Pope said that Trump's behavior, i.e. building a wall, was not Christian, not that Trump himself is not "a Christian". Big difference.
In fact most of the positions the Republicans take are not Christian: denying healthcare to the sick, denying unemployment insurance to the poor, denying birth control, pre-natal care, and post-natal care to mothers, denying in-vitro fertilization to veterans made impotent in wars Republicans foster and support. The list of lack of love and compassion taught by Jesus is endless.
In fact most of the positions the Republicans take are not Christian: denying healthcare to the sick, denying unemployment insurance to the poor, denying birth control, pre-natal care, and post-natal care to mothers, denying in-vitro fertilization to veterans made impotent in wars Republicans foster and support. The list of lack of love and compassion taught by Jesus is endless.
4
No, I don't think Ross wants "Prosperity Theology". What he is deeply desiring is the old testament God. A God of rules and wrath for those who do not follow the Church's dogma. His beloved Lord and Savior is more keen on love, understanding and compassion. The Pope is more closely aligned with Christ then with a Church that has lost its way. For reasons we will never know this terrifies Ross and others like him. Sad.
2
"But they nonetheless share a common enemy: Not just specific guardians of business as usual, whether Catholic or Republican, but the wider Western ruling class."
Donald? Really? A billionaire running for the highest office in the land. He's already a member of the "ruling class" having bought and sold politicians for decades.
The Pope is genuine. I'm goin' with the Pope!
Donald? Really? A billionaire running for the highest office in the land. He's already a member of the "ruling class" having bought and sold politicians for decades.
The Pope is genuine. I'm goin' with the Pope!
15
The Republican party's long delayed reform? In fact Trump is playing to all those deeply atavistic instincts that now constitute the political philosophy of the Republican party and which drummers like Douhat have been instrumental in creating.
15
You say that Trump "may be remembered...as the unlikely catalyst for the Republican Party's long-delayed reform."
I'd say--and hope--it's for the disappearance of the Republican Party in it's present form.
I'd say--and hope--it's for the disappearance of the Republican Party in it's present form.
11
A Sarah Palinesque word soup. Us Oliver Twist types are not going to ask for more.
22
Oh dear. I'm getting used to reading between Mr. Douthat's lines of secretive prose. The conclusion of this article is that both the pope and Trump may be "dangerous." But what is it that Douthat doesn't say (or only eludes to when he talks about the value of "rules" and "traditions")? Namely, exactly which rules and traditions that he favors. Of course we know from other columns: Douthat is afraid that the pope will weaken the Church's hold on sexual regulation.
9
The Pope may well deplore "the greed and self interest of rich nations," but the poor, 6 billion of whom live outside the rich western nations, have never had better incomes, food and survival as they now enjoy, courtesy of the self interest of developing market economies in China, India, Brazil and elsewhere.
The Pope is not a "populist reformer:" his own Argentina has declined precipitously in GDP in the last century.
He is simply a Luddite. His anvil and tongs will not advance billions of poor people in the computer age.
The Pope is not a "populist reformer:" his own Argentina has declined precipitously in GDP in the last century.
He is simply a Luddite. His anvil and tongs will not advance billions of poor people in the computer age.
1
"Everything that makes them interesting makes them dangerous as well". Actually Ross, only one of these people is dangerous and I can't believe that I, an aetheist, need to point out the obvious differences between Donald Trump and the head of the Catholic Church (your church I'm led to believe). One lifts up the common man while the other lifts up his enormous ego. One rails against evil in the world while the other winks at and dog whistles his way through rallies that encourage hate and torture. One models his life on the Holy Bible while the other relies on "The Art of the Deal" as his sacred text. One embraces Jesus' call to help his fellow man while the other only recognizes white fellow men. One man tries to enlighten the minds of his followers while the other counts on his followers' minds to be closed. One is expanding the base of support for his organization while the other is systematically tearing his organization to shreds. But, probably the biggest difference between the two is that God looks kindly on one of these men and he gave the other one God awful orange hair.
10
If the reader cuts away from Ross Douthat's charm offensive toward the Republican Party and its myoptic economic and fiscal policies, you can easily see that the Pope's standing up for the poor, those who seek economic opportunity, and those who seek to rid themselves of nationalist oppression or hunger, as most immigrants are, has been a direct hit on the culture of Republican Party politics and this Presidential campaign.
Without saying it, Douthat's recognoizes that the issues of economic inequality worldwide and the largess that the very rich have gleaned from the world's resources are finally making the whole point of this election. Rather than attack the mid-19th century world Republicans really feel most comfortable with, Douthat criticizes and ridicules the man whose is not on a campaign for election, but on a campaign to lift those who struggle above the means enforced on them.
When the Pope spoke last week, he wasn't even asked about or referring to Trump. He was answering a general question a reporter put to him where the Pope simply articulated a 2-century old message, something Douthat, a Catholic, won't acknowledge. The real theme here is that the GOP, including the impresario and bombastic billionaire (he says), will have to come to terms with is that this Presidential election is about economic and political justice. If you know the Douthat Code, the message is not subtle or unclear. Republicans have to face the facts and reality for a change.
Without saying it, Douthat's recognoizes that the issues of economic inequality worldwide and the largess that the very rich have gleaned from the world's resources are finally making the whole point of this election. Rather than attack the mid-19th century world Republicans really feel most comfortable with, Douthat criticizes and ridicules the man whose is not on a campaign for election, but on a campaign to lift those who struggle above the means enforced on them.
When the Pope spoke last week, he wasn't even asked about or referring to Trump. He was answering a general question a reporter put to him where the Pope simply articulated a 2-century old message, something Douthat, a Catholic, won't acknowledge. The real theme here is that the GOP, including the impresario and bombastic billionaire (he says), will have to come to terms with is that this Presidential election is about economic and political justice. If you know the Douthat Code, the message is not subtle or unclear. Republicans have to face the facts and reality for a change.
7
Very false equivalence, Mr. Douthat. Their actions may be somewhat similar but their intent and consequent results are different. Your compare and contrast reads like a Scalia opinion - backward rationalization into the point. This is superficial sophistry; would have been better to expand your short essay to contrast the merits of each other's intent, leading into an examination of value and virtue.
7
John Ralston Saul was President of PEN International from 2009-2015. In 1992 he published Voltaire's Bastards (The Dictatorship of Reason in the West)
Saul's book made the NYT's best seller list.
Saul had no crystal ball and is no conspiracy aficionado but his understanding of where we were headed in 1992 sure looks prophetic.
The Republican and Sanders campaigns sure seem to herald the end of the Age of Reason that began with the Wonk Cardinal Richelieu and I suspect ends with Wonk Hillary Clinton.
We are hungry for more than efficiency. We lust after meaning. For my grandchildren Bernie promises meaning in their lives. I suspect Donald promises his voters an identity. The Pope offers his flock purpose. We are starving for something more than being cogs in a machine.
We are witnessing a revolution and we are powerless to stop it. Today our new Canadian Federal Government has an approval rating of 70%. I am 68 years old and our Federal Government has never had a 70% approval rating.
As a foreigner am I allowed to hope that June 2017 the United States Federal Government has an approval rating approaching 60%? Am I allowed to hope the voices of division and fear are silenced and the US again become a nation worthy of leadership in the world?
Saul's book made the NYT's best seller list.
Saul had no crystal ball and is no conspiracy aficionado but his understanding of where we were headed in 1992 sure looks prophetic.
The Republican and Sanders campaigns sure seem to herald the end of the Age of Reason that began with the Wonk Cardinal Richelieu and I suspect ends with Wonk Hillary Clinton.
We are hungry for more than efficiency. We lust after meaning. For my grandchildren Bernie promises meaning in their lives. I suspect Donald promises his voters an identity. The Pope offers his flock purpose. We are starving for something more than being cogs in a machine.
We are witnessing a revolution and we are powerless to stop it. Today our new Canadian Federal Government has an approval rating of 70%. I am 68 years old and our Federal Government has never had a 70% approval rating.
As a foreigner am I allowed to hope that June 2017 the United States Federal Government has an approval rating approaching 60%? Am I allowed to hope the voices of division and fear are silenced and the US again become a nation worthy of leadership in the world?
3
The (ridiculously) sainted John Paul II was the real papal "populist." His continual neglect of the institutional church produced disastrous results--poisonous curial vendettas, endless financial scandals, Mafia entanglement, Berlusconi hugging, and of course the church's utter failure to deal with the pedophile scandal occurred on his watch. John Paul saw his role as being a doctrinal enforcer (the kind Douthat likes) and a celebrity for God. His poor unfit successor (chosen as the continuator of JP's doctrinal cop role) was helpless to prevent it all from getting much worse.
Francis saw (long before he became pope) that traditional ecclesiastical niceties weren't going to alter this mess. He had to act boldly, and quickly, in view of his age. Among his first acts were steps toward curial and financial reform--which remain his highest priorities. But he can't accomplish them without the needs and hopes of ordinary Catholics as leverage against the church establishment. This he can do by convincing them (ordinary Catholics) that the church is really capable of change. Thus, he does what he can to de-enlist the church as the champion of political, economic and moral oppression that it has been for several hundred years.
Francis saw (long before he became pope) that traditional ecclesiastical niceties weren't going to alter this mess. He had to act boldly, and quickly, in view of his age. Among his first acts were steps toward curial and financial reform--which remain his highest priorities. But he can't accomplish them without the needs and hopes of ordinary Catholics as leverage against the church establishment. This he can do by convincing them (ordinary Catholics) that the church is really capable of change. Thus, he does what he can to de-enlist the church as the champion of political, economic and moral oppression that it has been for several hundred years.
4
There is a difference in what these two "populist" leaders are confronting. Trump is attacking Obama, not the "Western ruling class". And Pope Francis is slowly confronting archaic 19th Century Catholic dogma (obsolete marriage rights, contraception rights, abortion rights, gross misogyny in power). They share a similarity in that they are popular, but that is about all they share.
Trump seeded is popularity with his "birther" movement; it flowered with his draconian solutions to our immigration problem. Francis seeded his popularity by saying things Jesus might say, normal things that Catholics have been waiting for leadership to say.
There is a danger in what Trump advocates for. There is no danger in what Pope Francis wants. The "novelty and whim" comes from Trump: talk of building great walls, deporting 11 million people, mocking the disabled, using foul language, flaunting wealth, bragging. The Pope speaks of basic empathy, unselfishness, less greed, and human rights.
Trump taps into fear while Francis taps into a hope for a better humanity.
The danger comes if we listen to Trump, and disregard Francis.
Trump seeded is popularity with his "birther" movement; it flowered with his draconian solutions to our immigration problem. Francis seeded his popularity by saying things Jesus might say, normal things that Catholics have been waiting for leadership to say.
There is a danger in what Trump advocates for. There is no danger in what Pope Francis wants. The "novelty and whim" comes from Trump: talk of building great walls, deporting 11 million people, mocking the disabled, using foul language, flaunting wealth, bragging. The Pope speaks of basic empathy, unselfishness, less greed, and human rights.
Trump taps into fear while Francis taps into a hope for a better humanity.
The danger comes if we listen to Trump, and disregard Francis.
13
The pope and Donald Trump are disruptive in such different ways and have such different agendas that Ross has written a largely pointless essay.
Pope Francis is a refreshing change from Benedict's narcissism and barnacle-like embrace of tradition but it's not clear how much actual reform he's going to impose on the Catholic church. He's dangerous because he reminds people how ossified and hypocritical the Vatican hierarchy is but his threat to the establishment doesn't go much beyond that. Catholics for the most part are going to be more involved in their church because of Francis.
Trump is all about Trump. He's not interested in reform of the GOP or the government; if he were, he would have published policy goals and proposals a long time ago. He is all spectacle and no substance.
The candidate Trump is riding on top of the public's anger. Like Bernie, he encourages incredibly unrealistic notions of how the federal government works and how much power any president has. Inevitably, both men are going to make people even angrier because this election is not going to reward the expectations of the far left or far right.
Trump is bound to cause public alienation from national politics and possibly the downfall of the GOP. Compared to him, Francis is merely a breath of fresh air.
Pope Francis is a refreshing change from Benedict's narcissism and barnacle-like embrace of tradition but it's not clear how much actual reform he's going to impose on the Catholic church. He's dangerous because he reminds people how ossified and hypocritical the Vatican hierarchy is but his threat to the establishment doesn't go much beyond that. Catholics for the most part are going to be more involved in their church because of Francis.
Trump is all about Trump. He's not interested in reform of the GOP or the government; if he were, he would have published policy goals and proposals a long time ago. He is all spectacle and no substance.
The candidate Trump is riding on top of the public's anger. Like Bernie, he encourages incredibly unrealistic notions of how the federal government works and how much power any president has. Inevitably, both men are going to make people even angrier because this election is not going to reward the expectations of the far left or far right.
Trump is bound to cause public alienation from national politics and possibly the downfall of the GOP. Compared to him, Francis is merely a breath of fresh air.
6
The question the intersection of these two personalities brought to my mind was how long it will take their respective institutions to recover from them. I had thought earlier about the long term effects of Pope Francis and whether, after his death, the Church would be able to go back to business as usual. I hope not. I'd like to think the changes in tone, if not dogma, that Francis has begun would be permanent, but suspect the odds are against. Whether the Republican Party will ever be the same after this election cycle is also not immediately predictable. There has always been a political party in this country that represents the interests of the wealthy and the business community. Since the end of the Civil War it has been the Republican Party, Federalists and Whigs before. The establishment has been surprised by the recent goings on--as I am sure some cardinals have been--but I assume that the economic elite will either take back the Party or create a new one. At the moment, I'm betting on the take back. I have higher hopes for the Church.
1
There is hardly an equivalency here, - Francis does not shake the rules of capitalism, he merely wants to channel it. More importantly, the Vatican at most has the power of the bully pulpit, while a President Trump would have his finger on the world's largest arsenal of nukes. On the general question about the value of institutions, perhaps there is a need to not destroy them, but to hack off decades of encrustations, which has turned them from providers and enforcers of commonly agreed-to rules to the bulwarks of entrenched interests and their tilted playing field.
4
The gospel does speak more in terms of what the Pope said of the matter, whether we like it or not, whether it is universally feasible or not, or whether anyone follows it or not.
Pastors also have to remind the flock that the gospel does not promote exclusion, it does not put up fences, and it condemns judgmental behaviors. Such attitudes and deeds are unchristian. Yet all of us Christians are guilty of these feelings and tendencies to varying degrees throughout our lives. We are human and we live in the world: we rarely discern people correctly, and are often fooled.
So I read what the Pope said as basically what a good (or at least brave) pastor would say in any congregation about delicate and difficult matters such as immigration, treatment of foreigners, etc. Whether it is feasible or not, it is something that good Christians should keep in mind.
Pastors also have to remind the flock that the gospel does not promote exclusion, it does not put up fences, and it condemns judgmental behaviors. Such attitudes and deeds are unchristian. Yet all of us Christians are guilty of these feelings and tendencies to varying degrees throughout our lives. We are human and we live in the world: we rarely discern people correctly, and are often fooled.
So I read what the Pope said as basically what a good (or at least brave) pastor would say in any congregation about delicate and difficult matters such as immigration, treatment of foreigners, etc. Whether it is feasible or not, it is something that good Christians should keep in mind.
7
I Agee with Ross on only one point, they have a populist message, speaking for those who feel disenfranchised and oppressed. But, that's it.
I spent a lot of time watching the popes trip to Mexico. I don't see him as a "pawn" for the Mexican government. The pope is in the business of saving souls, whereas Trump is demonizing and scapegoating illegals. One has a positive message of hope, another seeks to say whatever will get him elected, even if it's a pack of lies.
No, Ross there is nothing dangerous about speaking the truth, it is though flat out fascist when a politician says certain classes of people and foreigners are the cause of America losing its preeminence.
I spent a lot of time watching the popes trip to Mexico. I don't see him as a "pawn" for the Mexican government. The pope is in the business of saving souls, whereas Trump is demonizing and scapegoating illegals. One has a positive message of hope, another seeks to say whatever will get him elected, even if it's a pack of lies.
No, Ross there is nothing dangerous about speaking the truth, it is though flat out fascist when a politician says certain classes of people and foreigners are the cause of America losing its preeminence.
11
Curious that two starkly different characters can talk about the same issues, but depending on the color of their glasses. Religion will leave those disaffected, and the nonbelievers, unaffected, given the dogmatic position on issues the people cannot or will not abide by, some of them nonsensical, some others that might as well belong to the dark ages. Populists, on the other hand, denounce the establishment's status quo, as they want to become relevant and, if lucky, join the establishment and likely renegue on their empty promises. Populists are narcissists that love to hear themselves talk, send themselves roses, and cheat folks for their gullibility, quite successful in countries lacking strong democratic institutions. As to why it is happening in the U.S. is an open question yet, at least on the republican side. Bombast, bullying, lies, intrigue, all weapons used often enough to mask its lack of content (i.e. 'we'll make this country great again'; or 'we'll take back our country', or 'our economy is going to be HUGE again'; etc). With so much disinformation, this political game can become dangerous indeed. If one of these charlatans gets elected, we may deserve them, for lack of critical thought, for missing our chance to educate ourselves in civics and reality, so all the lies spewed from the bully pulpit can be unmasked. And the Press, if it dares to do its duty, must call out some of these clowns for what they are.
1
Twenty years ago, my husband and I spent a lot of time in Europe as my son was going to school, and working in both France and Spain. Lately, we have been spending lots of time in Switzerland. Over all of these years, I always told those I was in conversations with, that America was the biggest Socialist country in the world. Once I explained it all, no one disagreed, ever. You see, there are tax deductions for the Clinton foundation), Donald Trumps businesses, farmers, oil companies, students, each child, every business, mortgage deductions, and the rest is in the 70,000 pages of the federal tax laws of the IRS. Then, there is a government transfer for every child, senior, disability, health care for Veterans, current military, government employees, welfare, food debit cards, housing vouchers, free education for many at a certain income level, etc. There is no one in America that isn't on the dole. Did we leave out the ever growing government bureaucracies that keep growing and need their overpaid salaries, and benefits with basically free healthcare premiums? These jobs are needed to keep all the underworked and overpaid professors to keep providing jobs for all those college graduates with their degrees that are $100,000 in debt or not in any debt, as for many, college was free? Could that be why we are going to approach $21 trillion in debt by next year? Yes!
2
Wow! This is a borderline deranged article from Mr Douthat. Francis speaks for the downtrodden and his message seeks to bring the best out of humanity. Trump is an ego maniac who exploits the fears of gullible people to bring out the worst in them. That they both seem to be in some sense fighting the existing status quo in two different spheres is a very flimsy excuse to equate the two even in very broad terms.
26
Douthat missed his calling as a cable TV game show producer. Pick two disparate personalities and then use adjectives to establish their similarities until they seem like conjoined twins. Pope/Trump -- outspoken, custom-tailored, signature head covering, moral outrage, ad lib, problematic bank issues, real estate empires, signature homes, social mediagenic, rabble-rousing, iconic brands, selfie bait, hand talkers, reverential followers, women issues, walls, globetrotters, extroverts, monotheists, art of the Vatican and art of the deal, chief honchos, popular, controversial, anti-Wall Street, dull predictable garb, trouble-makers, soundbite prima madonnas, big entourage, Latin users, detractors, many rivals. Of course Trump trumps Francis with a network TV show where he fires people. But when Francis says "You're Fired" he means it. With his blasphemy Ross may want to get a head start on his penance or he'll be keeping company in that special place Madeline Albright sends girls who don't like grandmas. Trump of course isn't Christian so when he's fired his soul goes into escrow and his deal never gets done. Like his namesake, Francis has no fear of animals or a politician who plays one on television.
Posted: 1:30 am PST
Posted: 1:30 am PST
15
It must be tough to stake out the same sodden territory when its comes to the return to greatness of Catholicism in this day and age, but to combine the Pope Francis approach with a guy who's interested in "winning" (but only at the vast expense of others), and drawing similarities through statements like "channeling the same forces" seems misguided, let alone disrespectful in large part to the Pope.
The redux seems to be that the Pope is as much a charlatan as Trump, and that the Pope's attempts to modernize the Church so it doesn't dissolve into irrelevance are the scatterbrained thoughts of someone who is not a true believer in God, at least in Douthat's eyes.
My brother went to see the Pope in Philadelphia, and was fortunate to be close enough to him that he commented to me afterwards about the goodness which seemed to radiate from him like rays from the sun. It's really too bad that millions of people could be energized and hopeful of the loving kindness that the Pope seems to represent, and Douthat not see it.
The redux seems to be that the Pope is as much a charlatan as Trump, and that the Pope's attempts to modernize the Church so it doesn't dissolve into irrelevance are the scatterbrained thoughts of someone who is not a true believer in God, at least in Douthat's eyes.
My brother went to see the Pope in Philadelphia, and was fortunate to be close enough to him that he commented to me afterwards about the goodness which seemed to radiate from him like rays from the sun. It's really too bad that millions of people could be energized and hopeful of the loving kindness that the Pope seems to represent, and Douthat not see it.
14
Art imitates life, and life imitates art. The world of Twitter and Facebook and cable and the rest make these two guys (or people like them) inevitable, just as these guys in turn give point and purpose to the nonstop chatter.
The best part of the article/essay concerns the potential for losing all the rules, the assumed glue which holds churches and states together, individually and mutually. The chatter accelerates the process and vice versa. Of course, cultures tend to behave this way: struggle breeds success breeds refinement breeds skepticism breeds a taste for and finally a demand for upheaval.
It's contemplating what comes after that that gives one a little pause.
The best part of the article/essay concerns the potential for losing all the rules, the assumed glue which holds churches and states together, individually and mutually. The chatter accelerates the process and vice versa. Of course, cultures tend to behave this way: struggle breeds success breeds refinement breeds skepticism breeds a taste for and finally a demand for upheaval.
It's contemplating what comes after that that gives one a little pause.
1
This reads like a college exercise where the writer is required to compare two entirely different people. The Pope is, well, The Pope - nothing else to compare him to. He's leader of the Catholic religion, vowing poverty and chastity. This Pope in particular won't even live in the palatial Pope palace inside the Vatican. The Trump is, well, Trump. He not only lives in palaces but builds them, and became rich doing so. Besides that they both (presumably) have ten fingers and ten toes there's not much else that's similar.
23
My eyes bleed from having to read that one of the greatest popes ever supposedly has something in common with a buffoon billionaire out to make a bug and in it to stroke his massive ego (and to get his hands on presidential cutlery and on the towels with the "President of the United States" logo printed on them). Francis is an intellectual and transformative pope that almost had me converting to catholicism, even though I am an agnostic (christian) at best. He has a deeply meaningful vision for humanity as the stewards of this earth and that we, the humanity, could derive meaning through that relationship instead of through consumption and greed. He does not deny global warming or science in general. But is the first pope to integrate science in a meaningful (and logical) way with faith.
39
Ross, you have consistently portrayed Pope Francis as an anarchist, but look closer and you will see that he seeks reforms by working with, not against, institutions. The Pope addressed both the United Nations and Congress last year, not because he had unquestioning audiences, but because that is where the leadership is. He went to Cuba and Iran, not because those societies reflect his faith, but because doing so came from his faith in diplomacy. He has sought and continues to seek reforms within his church, from addressing lavish lifestyles to acceptance of divorced parishioners and now, moving away from the absolutist anti-family planning stance. He made history meeting with his Russian Orthodox counterpart. None of his actions has moved at a revolutionary pace, but he is a realist, not a firebrand.
Trump, on the other hand, has no use for incrementalism (despite being a supposed deal master). His solutions are to make others tremble over assured warfare, build walls, create registries, disparage opponents. Legislation not to his liking will be undone on day one. Fear trumps respect.
Which man's approach has longterm potential?
Trump, on the other hand, has no use for incrementalism (despite being a supposed deal master). His solutions are to make others tremble over assured warfare, build walls, create registries, disparage opponents. Legislation not to his liking will be undone on day one. Fear trumps respect.
Which man's approach has longterm potential?
115
The Pope, in his criticism of the odious Mr. Trump, was simply asserting what is plain as day, that which Trump himself repeatedly asserts, with his publicized thinking on whomever, and whatever, that he is the furthest one could be from simple Christian values, values which billions of humans adhere to, regardless their religious persuasion, some described below, culled from various sources.
In the 21st century United States, Australia, UK and other countries, the phrases "Christian values" and "family values" are used by liberal political groups to describe some or all of the following political stances:
Support for a culture of empathy and compassion, seen as central to Christianity among a diverse range of religions and worldviews; favoring individuals, families (of all compositions) and small communities' interests over the interests of large corporations and the powerful;
Protection of the environment to benefit all mankind.
The undesirability of war other than as a last resort, and a respect for diplomacy.
A living wage for all, seen as a mark of concern for the physical welfare of "the least among us"
A high, progressive income tax to promote greater income equality, in support of the poor and against excessive riches;
Promoting "Render unto Caesar" as an endorsement of secular governance, separation of church and state, and religious tolerance.
Trump is clearly a narcissist, believing entirely the world is his, to do with as he wishes, whenever he wishes.
In the 21st century United States, Australia, UK and other countries, the phrases "Christian values" and "family values" are used by liberal political groups to describe some or all of the following political stances:
Support for a culture of empathy and compassion, seen as central to Christianity among a diverse range of religions and worldviews; favoring individuals, families (of all compositions) and small communities' interests over the interests of large corporations and the powerful;
Protection of the environment to benefit all mankind.
The undesirability of war other than as a last resort, and a respect for diplomacy.
A living wage for all, seen as a mark of concern for the physical welfare of "the least among us"
A high, progressive income tax to promote greater income equality, in support of the poor and against excessive riches;
Promoting "Render unto Caesar" as an endorsement of secular governance, separation of church and state, and religious tolerance.
Trump is clearly a narcissist, believing entirely the world is his, to do with as he wishes, whenever he wishes.
18
Jesus was a revolutionary bent on destroying the Pharisee system. The Catholic Church has long been the sort of entity Jesus attacked, and what makes the Church so fascinating is the internal battle and dialectic between these two tendencies. Francis is clearly on the anti-institutional side as he leads the oldest institution in the world. God loves us because at our best we are absurd.
Francis has much more in common with Bernie than with the Donald. Both Francis and Bernie begin with a coherent conceptual framework, a bunch of central, interconnected insights that inform and generate the positions they take. People feel their frameworks in action as they speak, and these frameworks, which bring sense to our situation and choices, are a key part of their power. The Donald is as far from this as possible. He is a deal maker, a problem solver, and disruptive in a way that Bernie and Francis would never strive to emulate.
Francis has much more in common with Bernie than with the Donald. Both Francis and Bernie begin with a coherent conceptual framework, a bunch of central, interconnected insights that inform and generate the positions they take. People feel their frameworks in action as they speak, and these frameworks, which bring sense to our situation and choices, are a key part of their power. The Donald is as far from this as possible. He is a deal maker, a problem solver, and disruptive in a way that Bernie and Francis would never strive to emulate.
57
Comparisons are a bit like an exercise in equilibrium. They hold up to a certain point and when they are stretched too far, they come tumbling down. Where Francis has a clear idea on the direction the Church should take, Trump is launching destructive ideas thinking that they will somehow work out.
19
The Pope actually said that birth control could be seen as “the lesser of two evils.”
Which century are we living in and why is this considered a moral thing to say in 2016?
Which century are we living in and why is this considered a moral thing to say in 2016?
11
@V: In the eyes of Catholic conservatives like Douthat, the Pope's statement was outrageously liberal. They're foaming at the mouth because they insist that birth control is a "grave evil" punishable by an eternity in hell. You use the Pill? No Purgatory for you!
1
In a world of false equivalencies, Ross Douthat has jumped the shark.
165
False equivalence is a right-winger's best friend.
Lord Douhat will never be lonesome, knowing he can always put white next to black, call them fraternal twins and curl up with his warm conservative fantasy of inverse logic.
Pope Francis has spent his life as a Jesuit priest and taken a vow of poverty; he opposes opulent riches and violence.
A practicing Jesuit is every man's friend, except for the prosperity gospel churchgoers.
Here's the Pope:
"Time, my brothers and sisters, seems to be running out; we are tearing apart our common home. Irreversible harm is being done to the ecosystem. The earth, entire peoples and individual persons are being brutally punished. And behind all this pain, death and destruction there is the stench of what Basil of Caesarea called “the dung of the devil”. An unfettered pursuit of money rules. The service of the common good is left behind. Once capital becomes an idol and guides people’s decisions, once greed for money presides over the entire socioeconomic system, it ruins society, it condemns and enslaves men and women, it destroys human fraternity, it sets people against one another and, as we clearly see, it even puts at risk our common home."
Here's Presidential TV reality star Donald Trump:
"We're going to do a lot of beautiful work. We're going to terminate Obamacare. We're going to build our military so big, so good, so strong, so powerful that nobody is ever going to mess with us, folks."
These guys are clearly fraternal twins.
Lord Douhat will never be lonesome, knowing he can always put white next to black, call them fraternal twins and curl up with his warm conservative fantasy of inverse logic.
Pope Francis has spent his life as a Jesuit priest and taken a vow of poverty; he opposes opulent riches and violence.
A practicing Jesuit is every man's friend, except for the prosperity gospel churchgoers.
Here's the Pope:
"Time, my brothers and sisters, seems to be running out; we are tearing apart our common home. Irreversible harm is being done to the ecosystem. The earth, entire peoples and individual persons are being brutally punished. And behind all this pain, death and destruction there is the stench of what Basil of Caesarea called “the dung of the devil”. An unfettered pursuit of money rules. The service of the common good is left behind. Once capital becomes an idol and guides people’s decisions, once greed for money presides over the entire socioeconomic system, it ruins society, it condemns and enslaves men and women, it destroys human fraternity, it sets people against one another and, as we clearly see, it even puts at risk our common home."
Here's Presidential TV reality star Donald Trump:
"We're going to do a lot of beautiful work. We're going to terminate Obamacare. We're going to build our military so big, so good, so strong, so powerful that nobody is ever going to mess with us, folks."
These guys are clearly fraternal twins.
424
Hey Socrates, thanks for including that quote from the Pope. I read it and realized how in tune with it my two kids are and it made me so proud of them. As my dad always said, "It's only money".
1
I get it that you don't like the Pope or Trump, but lumping them together as revolutionaries bent on destroying the establishment is a reach. Trump isn't a radical who hates corruption at the top. He's at the top and is corrupt himself. Whether the Pope wants to subvert the Vatican establishment, well, I'll leave it to folks who care more about such matters than I do to say. I do know, however, that he isn't corrupt, and much about the Catholic hierarchy is. I wish him well, and Trump ill.
144
Douthat can be forgiven for highlighting the Pope and Trump in their populist roles - he is, after all, a Catholic. But that comparison is completely irrelevant. The more interesting comparison between populists is between Trump and Sanders.
Their objectives and world views are completely opposite, but their styles and tactics are amazingly similar. Both pronounce grand objectives without much fact and policy detail with which these objectives would be realized.
Donald pronounces that he will build the greatest wall since the Chinese Wall without any details (except that Mexico will pay for it ..). Bernie Sanders promises to break up the big banks, also without any details on how that is to be achieved, especially in an environment where he would have both Houses of Congress against him.
When pushed, Trump says that he will achieve his goals because he is a "great negotiator". Bernie Sanders claims his promises will be implemented because he will "lead a massive social revolution of millions of Americans". Between the two, I'm sorry to say, I would put more faith in Trump's negotiating skill and in the the effectiveness of Bernie's "great revolution" to actually bring about some changes.
Fortunately for the Democrats, Bernie Sanders' limitations are becoming more apparent to more Democratic primary voters. By contrast, it is beginning to seem quite plausible that Trump will become the GOP candidate for President. That should make for an interesting Presidential campaign.
Their objectives and world views are completely opposite, but their styles and tactics are amazingly similar. Both pronounce grand objectives without much fact and policy detail with which these objectives would be realized.
Donald pronounces that he will build the greatest wall since the Chinese Wall without any details (except that Mexico will pay for it ..). Bernie Sanders promises to break up the big banks, also without any details on how that is to be achieved, especially in an environment where he would have both Houses of Congress against him.
When pushed, Trump says that he will achieve his goals because he is a "great negotiator". Bernie Sanders claims his promises will be implemented because he will "lead a massive social revolution of millions of Americans". Between the two, I'm sorry to say, I would put more faith in Trump's negotiating skill and in the the effectiveness of Bernie's "great revolution" to actually bring about some changes.
Fortunately for the Democrats, Bernie Sanders' limitations are becoming more apparent to more Democratic primary voters. By contrast, it is beginning to seem quite plausible that Trump will become the GOP candidate for President. That should make for an interesting Presidential campaign.
28
Sanders has been quite pragmatic all his life and has had to be, to survive so long. He has maintained an outsider status while being an insider (which is incredibly hard, if you've ever tried it, something the Clintons didn't our wouldn't).
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/bernie-gets-it-done-sanders-record...
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/bernie-gets-it-done-sanders-record...
I guess I only half agree with Mr. Douthat's conclusion about the potential danger of these 2 populists.
The half I agree with is Trump: yes, as potential leader of the Free World, he's not only dangerous, he could push us all over a cliff.
But the Populist Pope? Trying to shake-up a corrupt church and bring it back to its core values? Surely you jest.
Only Catholics who prefer authoritarianism would feel threatened by a return to emphasizing the mercy of Jesus. Only Catholics who put rules and regulations ahead of love and compassion would find Pope Francis's priorities scary.
I don't know where that leaves you, Mr. Douthat. As for me, I say to the Pope, "bring it on, the more the better."
While Trump is promising a return to "greatness," whatever that means, the Pope is promising nothing. Because this Pope understands that everything mankind needs, it already has, ripe for the taking. If you don't know what that is, I suggest you begin with the gospels, followed b any epistle of Paul.
The half I agree with is Trump: yes, as potential leader of the Free World, he's not only dangerous, he could push us all over a cliff.
But the Populist Pope? Trying to shake-up a corrupt church and bring it back to its core values? Surely you jest.
Only Catholics who prefer authoritarianism would feel threatened by a return to emphasizing the mercy of Jesus. Only Catholics who put rules and regulations ahead of love and compassion would find Pope Francis's priorities scary.
I don't know where that leaves you, Mr. Douthat. As for me, I say to the Pope, "bring it on, the more the better."
While Trump is promising a return to "greatness," whatever that means, the Pope is promising nothing. Because this Pope understands that everything mankind needs, it already has, ripe for the taking. If you don't know what that is, I suggest you begin with the gospels, followed b any epistle of Paul.
149
Donald may become President and after winning both the Nevada and South Carolina primaries today he is certainly close to an odds on favourite but he will never be the leader of the Free World.He will join Putin and the leaders of China in leading the most powerful countries on the planet.
We residents of the Free World will never accept Trump as our leader. Here in Canada have witnessed our Prime Minister reject the calls from our stock market to peg our Canadian dollar to the American dollar and have seen our dollar find its own level every day. I am approaching my 68th birthday and today our Prime Minister's approval rating is at 70%. In my 68 years 70% approval was simply unheard of.
Canadians are frightened of the country that has been our protector and ally but we are preparing for a future with the EU and Japan.
PS I know Nevada was a Democratic primary but turnout and tactics seemed to make Trump the only winner.
We residents of the Free World will never accept Trump as our leader. Here in Canada have witnessed our Prime Minister reject the calls from our stock market to peg our Canadian dollar to the American dollar and have seen our dollar find its own level every day. I am approaching my 68th birthday and today our Prime Minister's approval rating is at 70%. In my 68 years 70% approval was simply unheard of.
Canadians are frightened of the country that has been our protector and ally but we are preparing for a future with the EU and Japan.
PS I know Nevada was a Democratic primary but turnout and tactics seemed to make Trump the only winner.
2
Montreal, wonder what the Latinos in Nevada think of Donald?
I believe that I may quote Mark Twain without feeling disrespectful to the Pope.
“Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.”
“Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.”
99
Ross, aside from having both been born of women, Trump and Francis have little in common - and certainly not an authentic populist ethos.
Francis is attempting to bring the spirit of the Gospels alive for our time, whereas Trump is looking to play the Republican base, and eventually Americans at large, for suckers.
Francis is encouraging human beings to remember the better angels of our nature, while Trump is invoking what Gandhi might have described as the devils within each of us.
Trump isn't peddling an authentic populism, but a lurch towards fascism.
Ross, does Trump even know or care that he's playing with fire? A authentic man of the people, like Francis, would care.
Francis is attempting to bring the spirit of the Gospels alive for our time, whereas Trump is looking to play the Republican base, and eventually Americans at large, for suckers.
Francis is encouraging human beings to remember the better angels of our nature, while Trump is invoking what Gandhi might have described as the devils within each of us.
Trump isn't peddling an authentic populism, but a lurch towards fascism.
Ross, does Trump even know or care that he's playing with fire? A authentic man of the people, like Francis, would care.
204
Both were born of women, but the Pope's birth was a result of original sin, per Catholic dogma. Trump took a while to begin sinning in earnest.
1
Agreed.
Comparisons like this tell us much more about the commentator than about the subjects of the comparison.
Comparisons like this tell us much more about the commentator than about the subjects of the comparison.
Douthat I say is not correct
The brain of Trump is quite suspect
While the Pope has a mind
Brilliantly defined
And Trump has a vacuum defect.
The brain of Trump is quite suspect
While the Pope has a mind
Brilliantly defined
And Trump has a vacuum defect.
227
I burst out laughing! Thank you, Larry!
39
Thank you Mr E. I'm waiting for Trump to call Jesus a loser. He let himself be crucified after all.
3
You leave me unconvinced that Trump and Francis have anything in common, Ross.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio spent his formative years in the cauldron of the era of Desaparecidos In Argentina. Trump spent his pretending to be a knowledgeable business executive.
Trump still pretends, and is encouraged to. I don't agree with Francis on a number of matters, but I have no suspicions about pretense on his part.
Trump is dangerous. He's an unbridled liar who may know the difference between reality and truth, but doesn't much care about distinguishing between the two, and ultimately doesn't seem interested in doing so.
The pope isn't dangerous at all. Oh, sure, he can make Conservatives like Ross Douthat explode for even mentioning change, but he's just the bishop of Rome after all. He can't really do very much if the other bishops refuse. His hopeless position is somewhat as if Christ's apostles got up the Saturday after Good Friday and decided that, hey, you know, that was interesting, but fishing is more lucrative.
After all, Christ didn't really think he was going to get the very Conservative Jewish congregations and establishment of his time to change, did he?
Sanders and Francis do. Trump just wants to win and have power. That's not like Francis. That's more like an emperor, Caligula for instance.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio spent his formative years in the cauldron of the era of Desaparecidos In Argentina. Trump spent his pretending to be a knowledgeable business executive.
Trump still pretends, and is encouraged to. I don't agree with Francis on a number of matters, but I have no suspicions about pretense on his part.
Trump is dangerous. He's an unbridled liar who may know the difference between reality and truth, but doesn't much care about distinguishing between the two, and ultimately doesn't seem interested in doing so.
The pope isn't dangerous at all. Oh, sure, he can make Conservatives like Ross Douthat explode for even mentioning change, but he's just the bishop of Rome after all. He can't really do very much if the other bishops refuse. His hopeless position is somewhat as if Christ's apostles got up the Saturday after Good Friday and decided that, hey, you know, that was interesting, but fishing is more lucrative.
After all, Christ didn't really think he was going to get the very Conservative Jewish congregations and establishment of his time to change, did he?
Sanders and Francis do. Trump just wants to win and have power. That's not like Francis. That's more like an emperor, Caligula for instance.
119
Caligula, or Nero?
2
The Pope and the Donald both have style, but only one of them has class.
165
Are we getting close to the end? It's not possible to endlessly pretend to be scholarly, human and simultaneously support the present GOP candidates. Is this the beginning of Mr Douthat's belated spiraling out of control? Has the strain of writing about so many fact-ignoring would-be national leaders led you to a self-painted in corner in some dark room? Really, a comparison of Donald Trump and the Pope, really? This column re-defines the term fatuous and cute, it aint!
343
Now that Trump has walked back his initial ad baculum response to Pope Francis, it may well be time for Francis to back off, as well. Unless, of course, he wishes to antagonize a lot of Catholics in this country by an implication that failing to open one’s border to in effect an osmotic process that evenly distributes a continent’s poor across its various geographies is something uniquely not “Christian”. Judging from the wealth of the Church, that may not be a message most would buy.
Yet Ross’s comparison of Trump and Francis is … curious, to say the least. Trump’s popularity owes largely to a sense of immense frustration at the inability of our establishment pols to move us forward, while Francis is the head of a world-girdling Church that regards him as infallible when speaking ex Cathedra. Trump may or may not be around in thirty days, because while his support is broad it’s also shallow as all protest candidacies are. Francis will be around and influential as long as he draws breath and doesn’t retire to go drink wine with Benedict.
What’s more, Francis may play the avuncular pope, but in truth he operates within the system and defends its most central totems, while Trump flails left and right and threatens destruction of all that he touches. These are two fundamentally different men with different goals, and a superficial appeal to populism by both doesn’t change that.
Yet Ross’s comparison of Trump and Francis is … curious, to say the least. Trump’s popularity owes largely to a sense of immense frustration at the inability of our establishment pols to move us forward, while Francis is the head of a world-girdling Church that regards him as infallible when speaking ex Cathedra. Trump may or may not be around in thirty days, because while his support is broad it’s also shallow as all protest candidacies are. Francis will be around and influential as long as he draws breath and doesn’t retire to go drink wine with Benedict.
What’s more, Francis may play the avuncular pope, but in truth he operates within the system and defends its most central totems, while Trump flails left and right and threatens destruction of all that he touches. These are two fundamentally different men with different goals, and a superficial appeal to populism by both doesn’t change that.
28
My understanding about what the Pope said was NOT specifically regarding a physical wall between the US and Mexico, rather he was speaking metaphorically. Those who divide because of what they advocate, such as Trump has done vs those who seek to build bridges to gain understanding, cooperation and benefit for both sides of the metaphorical bridge.
The Great Wall of Trump may sound to some like a good idea "lets keep out the undesirables" but something tells me that just plays to the likes of the lowest denominator in our society.
The Great Wall of Trump may sound to some like a good idea "lets keep out the undesirables" but something tells me that just plays to the likes of the lowest denominator in our society.
4
"Trump’s popularity owes largely to a sense of immense frustration at the inability of our establishment pols to move us forward..."
Not really. The fact is right in front of you: Trump's popularity comes from the enraged, betrayed people who were promised that the GOP could stop forward motion. They want to reverse history, not "move us forward", and they want to shatter the idea of "us" in the first place. Anything like forward motion is anathema to them.
Your diagnoses hold no water. You presume to know certainly that Trump's support is "broad [but] also shallow as all protest candidacies are"; but there's no evidence of that. You gamely insist on the fiction that the GOP is somehow still the party of reasoned consensus and responsible governance, and that it will come to its senses. There's no evidence of that either. Trump doesn't threaten destruction of all that he touches. He doesn't have to. It's already destroyed.
Trump's capitalizing on the opportunity left to him by decades of Republican smugness, malleability and the GOP's infinite capacity to rationalize and self-delude. Trump's not a protest candidate. He's the authentic fulfillment of all the GOP wanted to be since Reagan. And you're a natural Trump supporter: neither of you needs reality to corroborate your certainties. You say what you think, and naturally just assume that because you think so, they're true. You just know you're right.
Not really. The fact is right in front of you: Trump's popularity comes from the enraged, betrayed people who were promised that the GOP could stop forward motion. They want to reverse history, not "move us forward", and they want to shatter the idea of "us" in the first place. Anything like forward motion is anathema to them.
Your diagnoses hold no water. You presume to know certainly that Trump's support is "broad [but] also shallow as all protest candidacies are"; but there's no evidence of that. You gamely insist on the fiction that the GOP is somehow still the party of reasoned consensus and responsible governance, and that it will come to its senses. There's no evidence of that either. Trump doesn't threaten destruction of all that he touches. He doesn't have to. It's already destroyed.
Trump's capitalizing on the opportunity left to him by decades of Republican smugness, malleability and the GOP's infinite capacity to rationalize and self-delude. Trump's not a protest candidate. He's the authentic fulfillment of all the GOP wanted to be since Reagan. And you're a natural Trump supporter: neither of you needs reality to corroborate your certainties. You say what you think, and naturally just assume that because you think so, they're true. You just know you're right.
5
"Neoliberalism" in the Republican Party? Where is that? They haven't had a liberal, "neo" or otherwise, since John Wilkes Booth gunned down Lincoln at Ford's Theater. As for the Catholic Church, the current pope is a "liberal" only in comparison with his predecessors. Anyway, if Mr. Douthat really has trouble distinguishing between the two men who are the subject of his op/ed piece a reader who can answer these two admittedly difficult questions might be of some help: 1- Which one is Catholic? 2- Which one has referred to Rosie O'Donnell as a "fat pig"?
93
I can suspend disbelief and follow along with this column, but the argument seems strained to me. At the end I am left with something like, "Both Trump and Pope Francis do things that are inconsistent with what I see as the best interests of two institutions I liked as they were, institutions whose strengths and weaknesses I see quite differently from the way these interlopers see them, and institutions which I rely on to continue in ways that would be undermined by the goals of these individuals." So I see the points of overlap between Trump and the pope as existing more in the perception of the columnist than in an absolute way.
189
Yeah. Intelligent comment. Ross gives every appearance of a pundit in search of a new set of issues, as he seems to have played out the Trump matter pretty thoroughly: an intellectual proffer desperately in search of a third supporting leg.
48
It's tough to write realistic political commentary if you never leave New York, be kind.
Nice analysis. Douthat came up with a perspective and let it play out. That's his job.
Now here is a perspective I ask of readers....
Douthat says that Neoliberalism needs critics.
Would Donald Trump be getting any different level of popularity if he were running as a Democrat?
It's not the institutions so much as the times and the people.
Now here is a perspective I ask of readers....
Douthat says that Neoliberalism needs critics.
Would Donald Trump be getting any different level of popularity if he were running as a Democrat?
It's not the institutions so much as the times and the people.
1
Oh, boy. The comments that will be forthcoming will be a thing to behold.
Yes, Ross. The Pope and The Donald have so much in common. Both are men.
As an aside, and not really pertinent to the discussion, is a question for Ross:
Did you ever see the Bergman film "The Seventh Seal"? We're all playing a losing game of chess with death. Some people, like Pope Francis, see the suffering in the world and ask why?
Then there are people like Trump.
The Pope is "dangerous"? How many nukes does the Pope have? How many divisions of troops? Pope Francis is dangerous to the far-right and the neo-liberals. So is Bernie.
Trump is not dangerous; Trump is absurd, as is Ross's argument.
Yes, Ross. The Pope and The Donald have so much in common. Both are men.
As an aside, and not really pertinent to the discussion, is a question for Ross:
Did you ever see the Bergman film "The Seventh Seal"? We're all playing a losing game of chess with death. Some people, like Pope Francis, see the suffering in the world and ask why?
Then there are people like Trump.
The Pope is "dangerous"? How many nukes does the Pope have? How many divisions of troops? Pope Francis is dangerous to the far-right and the neo-liberals. So is Bernie.
Trump is not dangerous; Trump is absurd, as is Ross's argument.
429
Ross, where do I start?
How about your line that neoliberalism need critics? If you really mean that, where have you been all these years as a writer of NYT op-eds? I don't recall even a hint of criticism from you.
“The Catholic Church needs reform”, you say. Yet whenever there's any whiff of reform in the air, you're right there in the trenches blocking the way. Especially since the advent of Pope Frances, you have sounded both literally and figuratively more catholic than the pope.
Again, “the Republican party needs reinvention”. Is that why, regardless of the merits, you have been an unwavering champion for your party?
You conclude that both the Pope and Mr. Trump are dangerous, but you leave us hanging – dangerous to whom? Yes, the Pope is dangerous to his church’s establishment, which is all to the good. But Trump is not dangerous his party’s establishment because the establishment has already lost that battle. He says out loud what most of the party thinks. The danger of Trump is that, if elected, he would shake even further this country’s confidence in government. Since we the people are supposed to be the government, we should be wary of handing even more power to people who don’t believe in government, whether it's Trump or anyone else.
If you want a valid secular equivalent in our politics to Pope Francis, you need only look as far as Bernie Sanders.
I suspect that this column is an attempt to be cute when you have little to say.
How about your line that neoliberalism need critics? If you really mean that, where have you been all these years as a writer of NYT op-eds? I don't recall even a hint of criticism from you.
“The Catholic Church needs reform”, you say. Yet whenever there's any whiff of reform in the air, you're right there in the trenches blocking the way. Especially since the advent of Pope Frances, you have sounded both literally and figuratively more catholic than the pope.
Again, “the Republican party needs reinvention”. Is that why, regardless of the merits, you have been an unwavering champion for your party?
You conclude that both the Pope and Mr. Trump are dangerous, but you leave us hanging – dangerous to whom? Yes, the Pope is dangerous to his church’s establishment, which is all to the good. But Trump is not dangerous his party’s establishment because the establishment has already lost that battle. He says out loud what most of the party thinks. The danger of Trump is that, if elected, he would shake even further this country’s confidence in government. Since we the people are supposed to be the government, we should be wary of handing even more power to people who don’t believe in government, whether it's Trump or anyone else.
If you want a valid secular equivalent in our politics to Pope Francis, you need only look as far as Bernie Sanders.
I suspect that this column is an attempt to be cute when you have little to say.
309
"I suspect that this column is an attempt to be cute when you have little to say."
... except "I don't like Trump, I reallllllly don't like the Pope and the GOP should change but we really like it just the way it is."
... except "I don't like Trump, I reallllllly don't like the Pope and the GOP should change but we really like it just the way it is."
74
"I suspect that this column is an attempt to be cute when you have little to say."
Spot on.
But cut Ross a little slack, his contract with the Times requires a column.
Do any readers besides me detect that he enjoys his job less?
He seems to have lost that spring in his step.
Is his heart no longer in it?
I'm a very partisan Democrat, but he's my favorite conservative Times columnist since Bill Safire.
I think Paul Krugman likes David Brooks more than I do.
Maybe the Pope has instilled a crisis in confidence in our most Catholic correspondent. One he rebels against acknowledging.
See the light, Ross, and cross over to the secular, liberal side, where intelligent people belong. I know you have it in you.
Danger is in the eye of the beholder.
Trump is very dangerous to the Republicans, and I rejoice in it.
I hope he wins the Republican nomination.
I dread any Republican President, but, I think, him the least.
I prefer him to Kasich.
Trump is a vulgar carnival barker, but he isn't crazy. He won't start WWlll.
The Republican party, with him at the helm, can't help but founder.
He will accelerate the inevitable suicide.
Can you imagine his interaction and identification with Republicans in Congress.
That would be a carnival show I wouldn't miss for the world.
Spot on.
But cut Ross a little slack, his contract with the Times requires a column.
Do any readers besides me detect that he enjoys his job less?
He seems to have lost that spring in his step.
Is his heart no longer in it?
I'm a very partisan Democrat, but he's my favorite conservative Times columnist since Bill Safire.
I think Paul Krugman likes David Brooks more than I do.
Maybe the Pope has instilled a crisis in confidence in our most Catholic correspondent. One he rebels against acknowledging.
See the light, Ross, and cross over to the secular, liberal side, where intelligent people belong. I know you have it in you.
Danger is in the eye of the beholder.
Trump is very dangerous to the Republicans, and I rejoice in it.
I hope he wins the Republican nomination.
I dread any Republican President, but, I think, him the least.
I prefer him to Kasich.
Trump is a vulgar carnival barker, but he isn't crazy. He won't start WWlll.
The Republican party, with him at the helm, can't help but founder.
He will accelerate the inevitable suicide.
Can you imagine his interaction and identification with Republicans in Congress.
That would be a carnival show I wouldn't miss for the world.
3
"This is always populism’s peril: That it relies too much on the power of charisma, and tears down too much in the quest to make America or Catholic Christianity great again."
Douthat's brand of conservatism seems to be based on a personal fear of actually trying to change things.
Douthat's brand of conservatism seems to be based on a personal fear of actually trying to change things.
The Pope criticized a fairly major platform of the Republican Party. This analysis, and much of the reaction, simply seems like a way to avoid doing the work of reinventing the Republican Party as Douthat says needs to happen.
108
Leave it to Douthat to find parallels between Trump and the Pope*. He’s written against them both, Trump for signaling the end of conservative credibility, and the Pope for daring to tamper with tenets that have served the Church well for millennia. Both are shaking up establishments that need a good shaking, but Mr. Douthat isn’t happy.
He criticizes Trump because he damages the Republican brand. This assumes that the brand was worth saving, and that the last 15 years of Bush, Cheney, endless war, a ruined economy and the willful stagnation of Obama’s presidency represented success. Trump is the unmasked face of the party, a grotesque and clownish caricature of anything Lincoln or Eisenhower stood for, and a worthy spokesman for the party with nothing to say.
Mr. Douthat criticizes the pope for taking carnivorous capitalists to task, but especially for taking the pain out of religion. No need to breed like rabbits. Contraception isn’t so bad, if it’s to prevent disease. Maybe we can lighten up on the gay thing. What’s so wrong about Catholics remarrying and receiving communion?
A LOT is wrong, according to Douthat. So what if the Catholic Church hurts people while it’s saving them? It’s supposed to be painful. I’m unworthy, I tell you! I need to be punished!
Trump and the Pope aren’t dangerous. They’re a necessary wake-up call for institutions that have slept too long.
------------------------
*Note to self: Pursue sitcom idea.
He criticizes Trump because he damages the Republican brand. This assumes that the brand was worth saving, and that the last 15 years of Bush, Cheney, endless war, a ruined economy and the willful stagnation of Obama’s presidency represented success. Trump is the unmasked face of the party, a grotesque and clownish caricature of anything Lincoln or Eisenhower stood for, and a worthy spokesman for the party with nothing to say.
Mr. Douthat criticizes the pope for taking carnivorous capitalists to task, but especially for taking the pain out of religion. No need to breed like rabbits. Contraception isn’t so bad, if it’s to prevent disease. Maybe we can lighten up on the gay thing. What’s so wrong about Catholics remarrying and receiving communion?
A LOT is wrong, according to Douthat. So what if the Catholic Church hurts people while it’s saving them? It’s supposed to be painful. I’m unworthy, I tell you! I need to be punished!
Trump and the Pope aren’t dangerous. They’re a necessary wake-up call for institutions that have slept too long.
------------------------
*Note to self: Pursue sitcom idea.
268
Yes. Rather than stealing the emperor's clothes, Trump is merely a con-man who has figured out how to capitalize on the fact the emperor is naked.
But keep in mind that Douthat is a conservative of the brand who believes that the past needs to be preserved in the present--even when it is just their perception of the past rather than actual past reality.
But keep in mind that Douthat is a conservative of the brand who believes that the past needs to be preserved in the present--even when it is just their perception of the past rather than actual past reality.
6
"The Pope and the Dope". I see Ed Asner as the Pope. Trump as Himself. Feel free to steal the idea.
I am sick of hearing about both of them. The press is sophomoric in their slathering over both of them. Let's have some real news and tell the pope and all other "religious leaders" that America has SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE and what they think MUST be kept in their places of worship and homes. It is time to pull their tax-free status if they don't stick to saving souls and keep their noses out of OUR lives. DT will fade away - just like his hair has.
50
njglea,
For the political press, Donald Trump is the equivalent of Paris Hilton or Lindsey Lohan (remember them). They are all incredibly good for drawing attention to themselves while offering nothing to those who actually take the time to look. Nobody in the entertainment media took either of those two women seriously and nobody in the political media expects Trump to make it all the way. He, and they, are the equivalents of a tooth ache -- you keep touching it to confirm that it is still there, but you'll be happier when it is gone.
For the political press, Donald Trump is the equivalent of Paris Hilton or Lindsey Lohan (remember them). They are all incredibly good for drawing attention to themselves while offering nothing to those who actually take the time to look. Nobody in the entertainment media took either of those two women seriously and nobody in the political media expects Trump to make it all the way. He, and they, are the equivalents of a tooth ache -- you keep touching it to confirm that it is still there, but you'll be happier when it is gone.
7
Please try ***separation of church and state*** as a way to highlight your important point, or you will lose a large proportion of your audience as you continue to insist on yelling. Otherwise, you sound just like the ideas you rightly wish to discredit.
Otherwise, I'd agree.
Otherwise, I'd agree.
I don't see how the pope's words, spoken on an airplane to a few journalists, can have anything to do with "separation between church and state". Who is constantly (mis) quoting the bible, invoking "Jesus Christ who died for our sins", claiming "God" as his property? Etcetera etcetera. Not "religious leaders", but would-be president of the United States.
3
The Pope visited an area of Mexico that few tend to and raised the plight of people in distress; the people Trump has used as foils to demonize. Those are the people he called rapists, murderers and drug dealers.
The Pope defended their honor and pointed out that it isn't a Christian value to behave as Trump does. I see nothing controversial or wrong about what the Pope said:
"Thank God he said I was a politician because Aristotle defined the human person as "animal politicus." So at least I am a human person. As to whether I am a pawn, well, maybe, I don't know. I'll leave that up to your judgment and that of the people. And then, a person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian. This is not in the Gospel. As far as what you said about whether I would advise to vote or not to vote, I am not going to get involved in that. I say only that this man is not Christian if he has said things like that. We must see if he said things in that way and in this I give the benefit of the doubt."
Pope Francis
As a Jew, I fully sign on to Pontifex' statement. We need more courage and outspokenness from our politicians. These last eight years have been filled with a regression to some of America's ugliest times. The Catholic Church may well need reform, but not the kind Douthat calls for. Rather, more of those kinds of statements are needed from Francis for Douthat and his ilk to heed.
---
www.rimaregas.com
The Pope defended their honor and pointed out that it isn't a Christian value to behave as Trump does. I see nothing controversial or wrong about what the Pope said:
"Thank God he said I was a politician because Aristotle defined the human person as "animal politicus." So at least I am a human person. As to whether I am a pawn, well, maybe, I don't know. I'll leave that up to your judgment and that of the people. And then, a person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian. This is not in the Gospel. As far as what you said about whether I would advise to vote or not to vote, I am not going to get involved in that. I say only that this man is not Christian if he has said things like that. We must see if he said things in that way and in this I give the benefit of the doubt."
Pope Francis
As a Jew, I fully sign on to Pontifex' statement. We need more courage and outspokenness from our politicians. These last eight years have been filled with a regression to some of America's ugliest times. The Catholic Church may well need reform, but not the kind Douthat calls for. Rather, more of those kinds of statements are needed from Francis for Douthat and his ilk to heed.
---
www.rimaregas.com
288
As always,, my favorite commenter is right on target!
17
Rima--thanks for the reminder of the title 'Pontifex' as a descriptor of the pope's role: Bridge builder. So the Battle of the Millennium is on: Pontifex v. Murefex (wall builder), or Pontifex v. Pontifrax (bridge destroyer), perhaps? But surely not the apocalypse or Armageddon.
And speaking of naming battles, it occurs to me that the multi-sided fistfight within the GOP these days could be called 'The Bungle in the Jungle'.
And speaking of naming battles, it occurs to me that the multi-sided fistfight within the GOP these days could be called 'The Bungle in the Jungle'.
2
This Catholic thanks you for your wisdom and decency.
3