Columnist S. E. Cupp puts it bluntly.  "He is a solutionist."  Solutionists are people who suffer from the fatal conceit, with an overweening sense of "I can do it."
Solutionists are highly successful in one area and believe their natural next step is running the whole damn country.

While anyone who believes they should be president of the United States must have an outsized sense of self, the solutionist’s arrogance is boundless. Not only they seem to think they can solve all the complex socioeconomic, structural and cultural problems that have stymied brilliant scholars and political leaders for generations, they think it won’t take them all that long either.
Unfortunately, solutionists don't necessarily have much respect for institutional constraints, let alone for the possibility that complex adaptive systems tend to do what they d**n well please.
[A]ny solutionism is dangerous in that it tends to ignore or reject the necessary limitations of important systems and institutions — things like basic economics, the Constitution, the law and human nature. To the solutionist, these are just nuisances a clever workaround can easily abate.

No matter the party, good governance should recognize that the best solutions often come from individual citizens, local municipal governments and the private sector, and not the magical imagination of a single powerful man who says he has all the answers.
Ms Cupp's salary depends on being a political pundit, and not surprisingly, she has another column today praying for a third presidential party, on the grounds that "Solving problems isn't as politically profitable as keeping them broken" for the existing political class.

No, let's have less reliance on Government as the way to Solve Problems.  Bet on emergence.

David Von Drehle isn't quite there yet (perhaps his masters at Washington's Post won't have it) but perhaps he'll figure it out.
Leading Democratic theorists tend to explain their loss of the working class in terms of race, gender, patriarchy and disruption — favorite frames of reference that are necessary to understand our politics but far from sufficient. What these frames fail to capture is the practicality of working people and their hard-earned allergy to egghead notions that cannot be made to work efficiently in the field. They’ve seen just enough college grads who design server racks that can’t be bolted into place to become skeptical of self-declared “smart” people in general. And they won’t be won over by politicians with grand, impractical plans.
The house organ of the Political Class in the home base of the Political Class is unlikely to turn against the Social Engineering Vice in any systematic way any time soon. And yet if there are residents of the Swamp who begin to recognize, even dimly, that governing modestly might be governing better, the lived experience of practical people, whether they buy Carhartts or not, might well improve.

No comments: