Following are 8 examples of the 125 (including Spengler):
9/28/16, "Conservatives For Trump: A Symposium Featuring Scholars and Writers For Trump," The Editors, American Greatness, amgreatness.com
"Today, 125 scholars and writers have pledged to support Donald Trump for president. While we too rely upon divine Providence today, it is because of those risks taken by those men that we live in a republic where declaring support for a candidate does not imperil life or limb. But fortunes and sacred honor are always at stake, rarely more so than in a contentious election that will decide the future of this republic. We believe the stakes are high and that all Americans must stand up and be counted.
When scholars and academics offer public support to Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton they risk nothing. It is expected and applauded. Not so, for supporters of Donald Trump. Today we host a symposium of leading conservative writers and scholars who have declared their support for Donald J. Trump for president.
All of them are part of Scholars and Writers for Trump. Here, they explain why. These men and women are known for their intellectual and political achievements, but we selected them for their experience and, most of all, for their wisdom.
"Conservatives for Trump: An American Greatness Symposium"
— F.H. Buckley —I have some sympathy for people who can imagine a better Republican candidate this year, but from the very beginning I always thought that Donald Trump was perfect.
Maybe I should define perfection, however. For me it meant Trump was the only person who could defeat Hillary Clinton. What with her corrupt ways, her alliance with the most destructive policies imaginable, and especially the manner in which through her immigration policies she’d render it impossible for any conservative to win in my lifetime, this was an easy one. It became easier still when I saw the fainéants and milquetoasts on stage with Trump at the first candidates’ debate in Cleveland in 2015.
But on the positive side I also saw in Trump someone who could rescue what is living from what is dead in conservatism. And by dead I mean what passes for the higher thinking of today’s conservatism, the contempt for the poorest Americans, the indifference to mobility, the compromises with corruption, and mostly the sense of failure, the small-souled man’s belief that our best days are behind us. Against that, I take my stand.
F.H. Buckley is a law professor at George Mason University and the author of The Way Back: Restoring the Promise of America (Encounter, 2016).
James Piereson —
There are many reasons for Americans of varying political persuasions to support Donald Trump for President. Among these reasons, three are especially important:
First, Donald Trump has a plan to re-energize the U.S. economy after more than a decade of slow growth, stagnating incomes, and rising government debt. He will slash corporate taxes to encourage businesses to repatriate more than $3 trillion that they are holding offshore because of the current corporate tax rate that is the highest in the industrial world. Those funds once brought back home can be invested in American enterprises to provide jobs and incomes for American workers. He will cut individual income taxes to encourage work and investment, and economic growth. Just as important, he will cut regulations that have accumulated during the Obama years and that are discouraging investment and the hiring of U.S. workers.
Second, Mr. Trump will focus on national security in all of its dimensions by attacking the interlocking problems of terrorism, illegal immigration, and rising crime in the inner cities. He is committed to restoring America’s borders as an essential feature of national sovereignty and to fulfilling the first duty of government, which is to protect the security of its citizens
Third, Donald Trump is by far the preferred alternative to Hillary Clinton who promises to entrench further the failed economic and foreign policies of the past eight years. For conservatives and moderates who hope for a stronger and more dynamic America, and a nation of rising incomes, strong communities, and secure borders, the choice could not be clearer. Donald Trump—not Hillary Clinton—is the candidate in this race who promises to restore American greatness.
James Piereson is, most recently, the author of Shattered Consensus: The Rise and Decline of America’s Post War Political Order (Encounter, 2015). His essays appear in many newspaper and journals, including The Weekly Standard, The American Spectator, The Wall Street Journal, Commentary, and The New Criterion.
William J. Bennett —...
Beyond legal interpretations having to do with everything from religious liberty, the Second Amendment, property rights, illegal immigration, constitutional interpretation, and beyond, a Trump presidency would be staffed by Republicans and conservatives. A Clinton presidency would be staffed by Democrats and liberals—all committed to preserving and building on the last eight years. Now think about the regulatory state and the Code of Federal Regulations.
Voting for Donald Trump is not a hard choice for me, not if I want any shot at seriously fighting terrorism while undoing the damage of the past. As a Republican, as a conservative, I simply cannot hesitate between the two choices before me. The stakes are too high.
William J. Bennett is former Secretary of Education and author of America: The Last, Best Hope.
Roger L. Simon —
We live in a time that is a depressing throwback to the 1950s, only in reverse. In those days, members of the academy, the media and the entertainment industry were terrified they would be “outed” as communists and lose their jobs, even be ostracized and forced to leave the country to support their families.
Now, in those same provinces, people fear being exposed as Republicans or, even worse, supporters of Donald Trump, with basically the same results, albeit the foreign ports are less welcoming.
As one who has worked in all three areas, I can attest to this extreme level of discrimination. It is a drastic and perhaps even terminal threat to the democratic republic created by our Founders.
Because the situation is so grave, my reaction is and has been to be convinced that Donald Trump, for all his rough edges, is the “bad medicine” necessary to fix an increasingly acute situation.
The standard form politician would not be enough to derail a “progressive” agenda that is leading our country into economic and cultural oblivion. Sometimes an outsider is needed—and this is one of them. The Founders would have approved.
Roger L. Simon is an Academy Award-nominated screenwriter, award-winning novelist and blogger, and the co-founder of PJ Media. He is the author most recently of I Know Best: How Moral Narcissism Is Destroying Our Republic, If It Hasn’t Already (Encounter, 2016).
Darren Beattie —
I register my support on this list not as a conservative partisan, but rather as a young academic with a critical perspective on the prevailing left-right political paradigm—a subject I have taught at the university level both in the United States and in Europe....
The Bush-Clinton politics of the past 30 years is the rotten carcass of a politics that perhaps made sense in the past but has proven woefully inadequate to address the contemporary challenges we face. Donald J. Trump is the first major politician to reflect an understanding of this post- Cold War reality and to point boldly toward an alternative—for this he has my admiration and my support.
Darren Beattie is Visiting Assistant Professor Department of Political Science, Duke University.
Ronald D. Rotunda —
Shortly before the first Presidential debate, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that half of those who opposed her candidacy and supported Donald Trump were “Racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, you name it”—they were a “basket of deplorables.” The other half suffered from “economic anxiety,” what one might call losers. They are, in fact, neither. They are people who see the need for change, appreciate the importance of economic growth, and who cannot trust Clinton, who (the FBI Director told us) repeatedly lied to the American people about the emails she destroyed and the computer server she created.
They realize that we cannot tax the country into prosperity, and they include people like professors from Duke, Amherst, the University of Texas, the Claremont Institute, Tel-Aviv University, University of Colorado, Oxford University, Johns Hopkins University, Northwestern University, University of Chicago, University of Southern California, Vanderbilt, University of Illinois, and too many others to list here. Then there are the writers and creative artists not affiliated with any university, and stars in their own right, like Conrad Black, a former newspaper publisher and author (among other books), of a “brilliant and provocative biography of Franklin Roosevelt.” And Bill Bennett, former Secretary of Education and author of America: The Last, Best Hope. These are the people that Hillary Clinton tars as deplorables and losers.
Ronald D. Rotunda is the Doy and Dee Henley Chair and Distinguished Professor of Jurisprudence at Chapman University’s Dale E. Fowler School of Law
Esther Goldberg —
Despite the fact that Donald Trump expresses himself, not in the Queen’s English, but in Queens’ English, his ideas have clarity and logic rarely found in politics, and this is what draws me to him:
Islamic terrorists are not misguided youth seeking social acceptance and a bourgeoisie lifestyle. They are fanatics who want to hurt us, and the role of Government is to stop them.
Groups like Black Lives Matter are not rioting and looting to protest racism and police brutality. While they undoubtedly had legitimate grievances, their unlawful behavior cannot be tolerated by a society that values the rule of law.
Nationalism—the love of country—does not threaten our democracy. Corporate fascism—the control of our election process by monied interests—constitutes such a threat.
Our desire to maintain social cohesion by limiting immigration to those whom we can integrate into our way of life is not “nativism,” for we welcome any newcomer who promises to abide by our Constitution.
A trade policy that privileges capital at the cost of lowering wages creates a class system that is antithetical to our democracy.
Our Constitution guarantees free speech and free exercise of religion; it is not intended to protect against all hurt feelings, howsoever unreasonable these might be.
Esther Goldberg is a lawyer and writer for The American Spectator."
David P. Goldman (Spengler) —
Of all the contenders for the office of president in the primaries and general, Donald Trump was alone in recognizing the seriousness of our national condition, and declaring that his goal was to make America great again. He understands that our national standing is on the line. A third of our adults do not “participate” in the labor force. Entrepreneurship and innovation are frozen.
The stifling tax and regulatory policies of the last eight years have left us with the lowest productivity and family income growth in three generations.
These are big problems, and Mr. Trump is willing to apply big solutions. Small-ball economics won’t save us. In national security matters, he has had the courage to break with past Republican mistakes and focus on America’s national security interests. We still have an opportunity to reverse course; after another four years of Democratic governance, it may be too late. Donald Trump is our last, best hope.
David P. Goldman (Spengler) is a columnist for Asia Times and PJ Media, and the author of How Civilizations Die (and Why Islam is Dying, Too) (Regnery, 2016). He directed debt research at Bank of America and credit strategy at Credit Suisse, and advises institutional investors on macro investment strategy."