I can almost hear the gasps and gulps as people read this. Donald John Trump was and is a “type” of Christ.
(Sound of internet exploding)
Here is what I mean. Trump left a “heavenly” life of wealth, comfort, luxury, fame, and celebrity. He left that to take on a mission that would result in his “virtual” death—constant attacks, derision, being shunned by his former “friends,” and ostracism from groups that once lauded him. He was betrayed by almost everyone, save his own family. Despite doing nothing but bringing good into their lives, he was hated and cursed. Yet, he continued to bless the country that had to cheat to remove him from his position. Trump may have suffered a “political death,” and certainly may come back stronger than ever. But it’s also possible Trump was not a “type” of Jesus at all, but a type of someone much more human.
In the Bible, even Jesus needed a herald. The stage had to be set for His arrival.
Is it possible that, in fact, Trump was the “John the Baptist” of the movement that will save America? That, in political terms, the “savior” still awaits?
Perhaps a better model of this is the story of William Wallace (“Braveheart”) and Robert the Bruce, the first King of Scotland.
In fact, Trump is not Robert the Bruce, and neither in style, strategy, nor appeal was in the same mold. For example, Trump is not the one who united the elites and the commoners, the workers and the nobility, in a single cause. Trump never actively sought to remake the Republican brand and, more importantly, never developed a strategy to remove Republicans who allied with the English (Democrats). His general approach of campaigning for Republicans he favored did not apply a litmus test, nor did it ensure loyalty after the fact—as seen in the case of Kelly Loeffler. Rather, Trump was William Wallace, the force who ignited the rebellion and united the commoners but still left them short of controlling the apparatus of resistance at the top.
On the other hand, there was Robert the Bruce. After assisting in revolt against the English by William Wallace, the Bruce had an amazing personal struggle against the English. At one time, he was left with only a handful of followers (some say he was absolutely alone, hiding in a cave). His wife and daughters were displayed in cages outside a castle’s walls under horrific conditions. But Bruce understood his purpose and his strategy. He knew he not only had to defeat the English but had to absolutely crush any and all Scottish “friendly” contenders to the throne of Scotland. In a series of battles—as many of them against other Scots as the English—Bruce did what Wallace could not. He solidified support at sword point from the nobility.
There are many similarities between William Wallace and Donald Trump—far more so than the ultimate unifier of Scotland, Robert the Bruce. Like Wallace, Trump’s campaign for America was largely waged with the commoners, the Deplorables, the “smelly hillbillies” who clung to God and guns. Like Wallace, Trump lacked any true connection to the nobility—the GOP elites who hated him for his common appeal—and even in victory with Trump, the “nobles” badmouthed him, undercut him, and looked for the first opportunity to take back what was in their view rightfully theirs. Like Wallace, Trump eventually succumbed to not just the English (Democrats) attacks but was betrayed by those in his own party, given up as a sacrifice to “get back to normal.” He was and is America’s Braveheart.
But that leaves the unanswered question: is there another coming who indeed can bring the “nobles” on the right to heel? Such a person—-a “Bruce”—would have to utterly crush such deceitful and thoroughly evil groups as the Lincoln Project (or, as I call it, the George Lincoln Rockwell Project), or the remnants of the Romney/Sasse/McCain faction in the states. These are necessary battles that must be fought. Wallace’s rage against the English led him to ignore the traitorous elements on his own side to his peril. He paid the ultimate price.
The Bruce’s genius was that despite being one of the greatest guerilla leaders of all time, he also knew that his enemy was the other clan leaders, not just the English. Any successor to America’s Braveheart must enter the combat prepared to utterly raze the strongholds of the American right held by the English sympathizers . . . er, the Democrat sympathizers. Wallace failed to realize they were more dangerous to him than the English. His successor cannot make the same mistake.
Larry Schweikart is the co-author, with Michael Allen, of the New York Times #1 bestseller, A Patriot’s History of the United States, author of Reagan: The American President, and founder of the Wild World of History, a history curriculum website that features U.S. and World History curricula that include teacher’s guides, student workbooks, tests/answer keys, maps/graphs, and video lessons accompanying every unit (www.wildworldofhistory.com).