Masters, Slaves and Polygamy: A Lesson from Trump and Cruz

It seems some purveyors of views ostensibly on the alternative right are confused about Trump, Cruz and adultery. I can’t help but feel the cornerstone of this confusion is suppressed jealousy, an inability to deal with the first principle of our movement: equality is a myth. Humans are born unequal, and one of the best places to see that inequality at work is in the sexual marketplace.

Now on morality, another principle: necessity is never virtue, and virtue is never a necessity.

For the sake of this argument, let us assume that Rafael Edward Cruz has had multiple adulterous affairs (remember the National Enquirer’s excellent track record here), and that Donald Trump has had dozens, probably hundreds.

The reason Cruz is not virtuous is that he never had the option of polygamy before he gained power, and he gained power in large part by convincing beta evangelicals, who also lacked that option, that he was one of them and would remain one of them, that even though they made a false virtue of necessity, he Cruz, would not: though no longer under the same necessity to be monogamous by dint of the power they vested in him, he would nevertheless be virtuous by refraining from exercising his newfound options. Thus, when Cruz failed to so refrain, he became a moral hypocrite.

In contrast, the reason Trump is virtuous is that he has held the option of polygamy at least since high school, when he was voted Ladies’ Man by his classmates. Long before he sought political office, he had parlayed his genetic and cultural gifts into a business empire so awash in opportunities to court the highest-quality women in the world that for almost twenty years he was the majority owner of the Miss Universe pageant. Moreover, it can further be said in Trump’s favor that despite this intoxicating proximity to premium pussy (let’s not forget, it’s not a matter of the contestants alone, but also the entire world of beauty and fashion around them), sex was never the heart of his business, the way it was for Hugh Hefner, say. In addition to being a great Ladies’ Man of our time, Trump was a Man’s Man, a builder.

It’s a one-hundred-percent safe assumption that Donald Trump has had ample sexual options with many of the world’s most desirable women for forty years. Therefore, it’s also a completely safe assumption that, although surely he has often exercised those options, he has sometimes suppressed them. Though one could argue that it is consistent suppression of options over a lifetime that counts as ‘true’ virtue, I argue that at the very least, each such instance of suppression is a point of virtue.

Ted Cruz never or almost never had such moments of virtue before he gained power, because we can deduce he never had a lot of sexual options. Trump has both plenty of options and plenty of virtue. Finally, when Trump did gain power, it was not because of an implicit promise to beta evangelicals to display true virtue by not exercising his options, by rather by an appeal to the vast numbers of politically suppressed Americans, especially white, conservative, gun-using American males, i.e. other men with options, that the political system had disenfranchised them long enough.

Let’s say it again: necessity is never virtue, and virtue is never a necessity. Let’s further say this: slave morality is the slaves insisting that their necessities are really virtues, and insisting that the masters turn their actual virtues likewise into necessity.

Master morality is the only true morality, because it involves making a virtue of one’s options. And while masters like Trump have a lot of options, all of us have at least moments with options—Trump supporters more than most Americans.