The EconomistJanuary 27th 2018 Books and arts 7112 liberals experimented with a range of
ideas from devolving power from the cen-
tre to creating national education systems.
Mr Deneen’s fixation on the essence of
liberalism leads to the second big problem
of his book: his failure to recognise liberal-
ism’s ability to reform itself and address its
internal problems. The late 19th century
saw America suffering from many of the
problems that are reappearing today, in-
cluding the creation ofa businessaristocra-
cy, the rise of vast companies, the corrup-
tion of politics and the sense that society
was dividing into winners and losers. But a
wide variety of reformers, working within
the liberal tradition, tackled these pro-
blems head on. Theodore Roosevelt took
on the trusts. Progressives cleaned up gov-
ernment corruption. University reformers
modernised academic syllabuses and
built ladders of opportunity. Rather than
dying, liberalism reformed itself.
Mr Deneen is right to point out that the
record of liberalism in recent years has
been dismal. He is also right to assert that
the world has much to learn from the pre-
modern notions of libertyas self-mastery
and self-denial. The biggestenemy of liber-
alism is not so much atomisation but old-
fashioned greed, as members of the Davos
elite pile theirplates ever higher with perks
and share options. But he is wrong to argue
that the only way for people to liberate
themselves from the contradictions of lib-
eralism is “liberation from liberalism it-
self”. The best way to read “Why Liberal-
ism Failed” is not as a funeral oration but as
a call to action: up your game, or else. 7F
RENCH railway crossings bearwarning
signs that writers of books about Do-
nald Trump should heed. “One Train Can
Hide Another” their neat enamel plaques
declare. The risks of Trump-distraction are
great, because the 45th president is such a
spectacle—a tooting, puffing, brass-and-
steam-whistle commotion liable to draw
all gazes, all the time. But a narrow focus on
the man risks a potentially grave mistake:
paying too little attention to large, slow-
rolling yet remorseless political forces thatwere in motion long before Mr Trump
chugged into view.
Two new books about the president flirt
with just such an accident. For they share
the same distracting aim: to prove that Mr
Trump has already shown himself to be a
proto-despot.
The first, “Trumpocracy” by David
Frum, devotes long pages to cataloguing
alarming, deceitful and plain unseemly
acts and statements by Mr Trump, his cro-
nies and enablers. Mr Frum, a centrist con-
servative who worked as a White House
speechwriter for President George W. Bush,
has a crisp way with words. “A rule-of-law
state can withstand a certain amount of of-
ficial corruption. What it cannot withstand
is a culture of impunity,” he observes at
one point, as he reminds readers that Mr
Trump is the first president since Gerald
Ford not to release his tax returns in full,
and the first ever to merge political and
business interests so unblushingly. The
clear prose style isjust as well, for “Trum-
pocracy”, which draws heavily on quotes
from published news reports, can resem-
ble a first draft of articles of impeachment.
Grander, more didactic ambitions un-
derpin a second book, “How Democracies
Die”, by two Harvard professors, Steven
Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt. The pair are
experts on populism, demagoguery and
autocracy, notably in Europe and Latin
America in the 19th and 20th centuries.
Their aim is to warn Americans, in particu-
lar, that their republic—for all its vaunted
checks and balances—is not immune to the
pathologies which, over the years, have
infected and diseased other democracies.
Like Mr Frum, the professors correctly
stress the importance of unwritten norms
that buttress the formal protections that
are set out in America’s constitution and
legal codes. Independent courts and agen-cies like the FBIhave done much to defend
the rule of law, they note. But a surprisingly
thin “tissue of convention”, according to
Aziz Huq and Tom Ginsburg, two constitu-
tional scholars Mr Frum quotes, together
with the courage of political leaders and
members of Congress, are all that stand in
the way of a bad president who is deter-
mined to pack courts with loyal judges, or
to appoint crooks to run nominally inde-
pendent agencies.
Mr Levitsky and Mr Ziblatt go beyond
anxious scanning for danger. They declare
that, on the evidence, Mr Trump has prob-
ably crossed the line from rough-around-
the-edges populist to would-be strong-
man. Mr Frum considers what is already
known about Russian meddling in the
election of 2016, and bluntly concludes: “A
presidentbeholden to Russia had been
installed in the Oval Office.”
The professors take a more scholarly
approach. They offer a neat table, setting
out “Four Key Indicators of Authoritarian
Behaviour” to help readers decide wheth-
er Mr Trump isan autocrat. The table is
enough to make Trump-sceptics leap from
their armchairs in happy vindication. Un-
der the first heading, “Rejection of (or weak
commitment to) democratic rules of the
game”, readers find not just blatant dicta-
tor-conduct (backing military coups, can-
celling elections) but a more subtle last test,
“Do they attempt to undermine the legiti-
macy of elections, for example, by refusing
to accept credible electoral results?” Mr
Trump has repeatedly and falsely suggest-
ed that he would have beaten Hillary Clin-
ton in a landslide, had millions not illegally
voted. Then there are Mr Trump’s attacks
on the press, and his snarling promises to
tighten libel laws against what he calls
“fake news”. Such statements trigger the
professors’ fourth indicator: “Readiness toDemocracyThe Trump train
Trumpocracy: The Corruption of the
American Republic.By David Frum. Harper;
320 pages; $25.99. To be published in Britain
in February; £20
How Democracies Die: What History Tells
Us About Our Future.By Steven Levitsky
and Daniel Ziblatt. Crown; 265 pages; $26.
Viking; £16.99But does he love what it stands for?РЕЛИЗ
ГРУППЫ"What'sNews"