The Republican Party Today Is Similar To The Democratic Party Of The Late 1850s [Click] I must admit that the Democratic Party of the 1850's is a better analogy for today's GOP than the Whigs; but a very similar dynamic seems to have operated in both parties, just as seems to be the case in the current Democratic (to a lesser degree) and Republican (to a far greater degree) parties. The Democratic Party of the 1850's was too big to be destroyed, and that may be true of the current Republican Party as well. I think we may well be seeing the greatest political realignment in the US since the Civil War. But we won't see a civil war this time--we have a standing army, far better communications and transportation.
Penny and I are back from Windycon. And, relevant to a recent link, we took the bus for an hour + each way. But there a post from two days ago I really must respond to.
Anonymous: "A worthwhile read, puddle. It doesn't emphasize, but is consistent with, some more recent psychological and psychiatric research. I am offended by such people being called "conservatives," when I think they should be called anarchists and radicals. I recall one person who argued that the single thread connecting "conservative" government philosophies from Roman times to the present is the belief in the value of a hierarchical society--that is, a society of the governing and the governed, or better the ruling and the ruled. Hmmm...if the problem comes from the amygdala, or more generally from the fear-sensing portion of the brain, might that not be a developmental abnormality akin to various types of sex-identification problems? Just thinkin'."
As you might expect, I strongly object to them being called "anarchists." Indeed, the post talks about conservatives favoring a society of the ruling and the ruled. Surely it is obvious that nothing could be more diametrically opposite to anarchy?
It seems to me that the Tea Party, Freedom Caucus and similar types are effectively bent on preventing government rather than participating in it; and that is the literal meaning of anarchism--no government. That's not conservative, no matter how many times they call themselves conservative. And they do promote various changes that I consider radical.
It's very possible that because I didn't read the linked article I misunderstood who you meant by "those people." I've never so much had the feeling they are against government as against paying for it. Or having it tell *them* what to do.
A new JMC Analytics poll in Alabama finds Doug Jones (D) now leading Roy Moore (R) in the U.S. Senate special election run off, 46% to 42%, with 9% undecided =====================================
McCONNELL SAID TO BE WILLING TO LOSE ALABAMA SEAT
A Republican close to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) tells Axios: “McConnell is a very pragmatic guy, but he’s very principled guy. And he’s willing to lose the seat to prevent someone who’s guilty of these things from taking it.” ================================== And I wonder if Mr. Mueller will have anything for us on the morrow? Sort of a welcome home for Mr. Trump?
Too bad: it must have been a lovely tree.
ReplyDeleteIt looks like one limb is still viable, and grafting might be considered.
DeleteAlan
Trumpers teeing up their next abject failure: A Middle East peace plan. [Click]
ReplyDeleteRepublicans Have a Big Retirement Problem [Click] Quite remarkable, actually, particularly when displayed as a graph. Reminds me of the last days of the Whigs.
The Republican Party Today Is Similar To The Democratic Party Of The Late 1850s [Click] I must admit that the Democratic Party of the 1850's is a better analogy for today's GOP than the Whigs; but a very similar dynamic seems to have operated in both parties, just as seems to be the case in the current Democratic (to a lesser degree) and Republican (to a far greater degree) parties. The Democratic Party of the 1850's was too big to be destroyed, and that may be true of the current Republican Party as well. I think we may well be seeing the greatest political realignment in the US since the Civil War. But we won't see a civil war this time--we have a standing army, far better communications and transportation.
--Alan
Penny and I are back from Windycon. And, relevant to a recent link, we took the bus for an hour + each way. But there a post from two days ago I really must respond to.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous: "A worthwhile read, puddle. It doesn't emphasize, but is consistent with, some more recent psychological and psychiatric research. I am offended by such people being called "conservatives," when I think they should be called anarchists and radicals. I recall one person who argued that the single thread connecting "conservative" government philosophies from Roman times to the present is the belief in the value of a hierarchical society--that is, a society of the governing and the governed, or better the ruling and the ruled. Hmmm...if the problem comes from the amygdala, or more generally from the fear-sensing portion of the brain, might that not be a developmental abnormality akin to various types of sex-identification problems?
Just thinkin'."
As you might expect, I strongly object to them being called "anarchists." Indeed, the post talks about conservatives favoring a society of the ruling and the ruled. Surely it is obvious that nothing could be more diametrically opposite to anarchy?
It seems to me that the Tea Party, Freedom Caucus and similar types are effectively bent on preventing government rather than participating in it; and that is the literal meaning of anarchism--no government. That's not conservative, no matter how many times they call themselves conservative. And they do promote various changes that I consider radical.
Delete--Alan
It's very possible that because I didn't read the linked article I misunderstood who you meant by "those people." I've never so much had the feeling they are against government as against paying for it. Or having it tell *them* what to do.
DeleteIt wouldn't be the first time I have made an unclear reference, Bill.
DeleteAlan
JONES GRABS LEAD IN ALABAMA
ReplyDeleteA new JMC Analytics poll in Alabama finds Doug Jones (D) now leading Roy Moore (R) in the U.S. Senate special election run off, 46% to 42%, with 9% undecided
=====================================
McCONNELL SAID TO BE WILLING TO LOSE ALABAMA SEAT
A Republican close to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) tells Axios: “McConnell is a very pragmatic guy, but he’s very principled guy. And he’s willing to lose the seat to prevent someone who’s guilty of these things from taking it.”
==================================
And I wonder if Mr. Mueller will have anything for us on the morrow? Sort of a welcome home for Mr. Trump?
--Alan