Although an interesting comparison between two figures and two times in our nation’s history, the problem is that The Donald cannot really be compared to The Great Commoner on an individual level. I, at a personal level, have read and re-read countless times Bryan’s “Cross of Gold” speech. I cannot recall one momentous utterance of Trump’s that really sung to me. But then again, I enjoy words well-joined and well-spoken, whether I agree with the political principle or economic theory those words were or are trying to advance in the public’s minds and trying to arouse in the peoples’ hearts.
But the comparison fails because, as you rightly point out, Trump is not Bryan.
Both men, however, share the historical role of “cockroaches” to their party’s political success and spoilers in the life stories of aspiring individuals who try to march under a party’s banner or hitch themselves to another candidates wagon in order to advance their own political goals and careers. But thus is ever politics.
I somehow sense that the changes in the structural dynamics of the functions played by parties in the way issues and candidates are put forth on our national stage as have evolved over 200 years, and certainly over the last century, play a large part in the ultimate failure of the comparison.
Parties and most aspirants lose sight of the reality that elections for the most part are not the selection of the “best and the brightest,” but the elimination of the “alternative.” When that is lost, coupled with the personal and collective denial of the fact that, on the given days designated by each state legislature as the window of election decision-making opportunity, more voters than not deemed the candidate and party standard bearer as the “alternative,” rather than the “best and brightest, disaster looms.
I neither know, nor can know how it will all work out. But, because it provides me with moments of humor, I eagerly, if not anxiously, look forward to watching. After all, there are only so many versions and episodes of Taylor Sheridan’s “Yellowstone” that can be viewed.
Post script: Republican Solution-at the next convention, broker a Secretary of the Treasury appointment for Trump, so that he can put the nation on a bitcoin standard. That solution is probably not realistic, since he would want Florida to be the “bitcoin hub” instead of Texas, thereby costing him the Lone Star State’s delegation-California’s, too.
There's a solid economic reasoning behind Bryan's bi-metalism as it was then called. America was stuck on the gold standard and only allowed the amount of dollars to circulate that was backed by government gold inventory. In short the money supply could not expand which limited loans to farmers as well as dampened economic growth.
While still steeped in using metal as backing for our paper dollars, Bryan's attempt to add silver to that backing would have vastly expanded the money supply and facilitated economic growth.
Hitting new gold reserves as you pointed out literally did the same thing- as well as caused a measure of inflation.
As an aside, the goldbugs (people who want a return to the gold standard) fail to realize that ALL money- even that 'backed by gold' - is really a human construct anyway.
Always enjoy your writing, Mr Brands. Looking forward to reading The Last Campaign as well as your next presentation at the Hauenstein Center in Grand Rapids
There are some similarities between Bryan and Bernie Sanders. The Democratic Party establishment robbed Bernie of the nomination in both 2016 and 2020. If Bernie seeks the nomination again in 2024 (and polls show him number #2 behind Biden) and Biden bows out, I wonder if the party bosses will gang up on him again. By the way, I saw a vicious anti-Bernie Sanders, pro-Joe Biden cartoon during the fight for the nomination two years ago. The cartoon showed two toppled statues, one of Lenin and the other of Bernie. Do moderate/conservative Democratis really fail to see the difference between authoritarian socialism (like in the former USSR) and the democratic socialism practiced in Scandinavia?
Although an interesting comparison between two figures and two times in our nation’s history, the problem is that The Donald cannot really be compared to The Great Commoner on an individual level. I, at a personal level, have read and re-read countless times Bryan’s “Cross of Gold” speech. I cannot recall one momentous utterance of Trump’s that really sung to me. But then again, I enjoy words well-joined and well-spoken, whether I agree with the political principle or economic theory those words were or are trying to advance in the public’s minds and trying to arouse in the peoples’ hearts.
But the comparison fails because, as you rightly point out, Trump is not Bryan.
Both men, however, share the historical role of “cockroaches” to their party’s political success and spoilers in the life stories of aspiring individuals who try to march under a party’s banner or hitch themselves to another candidates wagon in order to advance their own political goals and careers. But thus is ever politics.
I somehow sense that the changes in the structural dynamics of the functions played by parties in the way issues and candidates are put forth on our national stage as have evolved over 200 years, and certainly over the last century, play a large part in the ultimate failure of the comparison.
Parties and most aspirants lose sight of the reality that elections for the most part are not the selection of the “best and the brightest,” but the elimination of the “alternative.” When that is lost, coupled with the personal and collective denial of the fact that, on the given days designated by each state legislature as the window of election decision-making opportunity, more voters than not deemed the candidate and party standard bearer as the “alternative,” rather than the “best and brightest, disaster looms.
I neither know, nor can know how it will all work out. But, because it provides me with moments of humor, I eagerly, if not anxiously, look forward to watching. After all, there are only so many versions and episodes of Taylor Sheridan’s “Yellowstone” that can be viewed.
Post script: Republican Solution-at the next convention, broker a Secretary of the Treasury appointment for Trump, so that he can put the nation on a bitcoin standard. That solution is probably not realistic, since he would want Florida to be the “bitcoin hub” instead of Texas, thereby costing him the Lone Star State’s delegation-California’s, too.
There's a solid economic reasoning behind Bryan's bi-metalism as it was then called. America was stuck on the gold standard and only allowed the amount of dollars to circulate that was backed by government gold inventory. In short the money supply could not expand which limited loans to farmers as well as dampened economic growth.
While still steeped in using metal as backing for our paper dollars, Bryan's attempt to add silver to that backing would have vastly expanded the money supply and facilitated economic growth.
Hitting new gold reserves as you pointed out literally did the same thing- as well as caused a measure of inflation.
As an aside, the goldbugs (people who want a return to the gold standard) fail to realize that ALL money- even that 'backed by gold' - is really a human construct anyway.
Always enjoy your writing, Mr Brands. Looking forward to reading The Last Campaign as well as your next presentation at the Hauenstein Center in Grand Rapids
I, for one, just hope Trump rides off into the Mar A Lago sunset. I doubt he will go quietly, but I wish he would just go away.
There are some similarities between Bryan and Bernie Sanders. The Democratic Party establishment robbed Bernie of the nomination in both 2016 and 2020. If Bernie seeks the nomination again in 2024 (and polls show him number #2 behind Biden) and Biden bows out, I wonder if the party bosses will gang up on him again. By the way, I saw a vicious anti-Bernie Sanders, pro-Joe Biden cartoon during the fight for the nomination two years ago. The cartoon showed two toppled statues, one of Lenin and the other of Bernie. Do moderate/conservative Democratis really fail to see the difference between authoritarian socialism (like in the former USSR) and the democratic socialism practiced in Scandinavia?