The Fake Interview Series: Bannon, Part One

I’ve never interviewed Steve Bannon, and probably never will.  But if I did, it would look something like this:

I enter the offices of Breitbart, where Bannon is waiting for me.

C:  Thanks for taking the time to meet with me.

B:  No problem.  Do you know why I agreed to the interview?

C:  I have no idea.  It certainly isn’t because we agree on very much.

B:  It’s the name of your blog!  I have an affinity for Cromwell, you know.

C:  Did you read my analysis of that issue?

B:  No.

C:  It’s just as well.  You probably wouldn’t like it, although I thought there was some merit to the Trump/Henry VIII analogy.

B:  Oh, well.  What do you want to talk about?

C:  A variety of things, starting with your relationship with the Republican Party.

B:  A lot of people want to talk about that.

C:  My theory is that there are four separate, and often conflicting, ideological threads running through the party.  I’d like to get your reaction to that.

B:  Sounds interesting.  Shoot.

C:  The first faction is the Christian Democrats.  They’re a one-world, moralistic faction that supports traditional values and authority, but supports expansions of the welfare state for the benefit of all Americans.  They used to be one of the larger party factions, but Bush discredited them, and now they’re Democrats in all but name.

B:  That makes sense.  Most of the so-called conservative commentators in the MSM meet that standard.  Susan Collins comes to mind, too.

C:  The second is the Conservative Libertarians, who want to shrink the state to enhance personal freedom, regardless of the circumstances.  They’re also a pretty small faction.

B:  The Koch brothers, and Rand Paul.  Ted Cruz on a bad day.

C:  The third is the Pro-Business Pragmatists, consisting of business people who want power, deregulation, and tax cuts, and who will make deals with virtually anyone to get them.  They don’t have strong opinions on social issues.

B:  Sounds like most of the leadership of the GOP.  They’re the ones I’m doing battle with.

C:  Finally, we have the Reactionaries, who have no inherent objection to a strong government, but believe the government has been run to damage the interests of real Americans with traditional values.  Reactionaries want to bring back the world of the 1950’s to the maximum extent possible.

B:  That’s me!  And Donald Trump, to some extent.

C:  I agree.  Some people call your faction “conservative,” but I don’t think they’re anything of the sort.  Do you agree?

B:  I’ve called myself a Leninist, and I mean it.  I’m trying to bring the revolution to the GOP.  Kind of like Sanders within the Democratic Party.

C:  Is Trump a perfect Reactionary?

B:  Far from it, but he’s what we’ve got.

C:  What are his strengths, in your view?

B:  He has an unmatched ability to communicate simple, but profound, ideas to his base, and his heart is in the right place.

C:  What are his weaknesses?

B:  He gets distracted.  He makes deals with so-called pragmatists when he shouldn’t.  He likes big businessmen and generals too much.

C:  Obviously, you have a big problem with Mitch McConnell.

B:  Obviously.

C:  What are you trying to accomplish by taking him on?

B:  For years, the GOP has been screwing over its most loyal voters by offering them meaningless promises on social issues in exchange for real tax cuts for businessmen.  I’m trying to change that.

C:  But how can you do that?  Your faction isn’t a majority of the GOP.  Even Trump’s victory in the primaries was a plurality, not a majority.

B:  Trump’s victory is just one example of how it can happen, if we’re clear-eyed and ruthless.

C:  Don’t you worry about handing victories to the Democrats?

B:  Of course, but, from my perspective, there isn’t that much difference between the GOP establishment and the Democrats.  At least the Democrats don’t try to pretend they’re not screwing us over.

C:  How can you win elections without the support of the people you say you’re at war with?

B:  We can’t, but the establishment will fall into line.  In the final analysis, we can always persuade them that the Democrats are worse, no matter how extreme our candidates sound.

C:  What if you’re wrong?

B:  I’m not. I know what I’m doing.

End of Part One.