As some of you may know, I have left the teaparty, or should I say, "It has left me (?)." I believe in the dream of the Founding Fathers, despite the sad dialectic that was (and is) faith versus a very certain worldly bias for self service, within the political class.
In the beginning, 1776 and the years immediately before and after, we were divided - politically speaking - between big government with is preference for "central planning and authority," and, on the other hand, individual liberties/states rights.
While there is much that can be criticized as relates to the Founding
Fathers and the intellectual challenge found in creating a national circumstance that was non-existent in the annals of human history, still, they got the major points, correct. The Democrats have their beginnings in the early years of this country. A structured Republican Party (GOP) had its beginnings in the years leading up to the Civil War and the fight against Southern Democrats for the freedom of the slave population (and don't let anyone tell you that the Civil War was not about slavery).
Over the years, the Democrat Party has devolved into a collection of constituencies (especially the angry black community - not all blacks are angry, btw) and factions who have come to believe that the Constitution, the Declaration and the Bill of Rights were all "white man documents," that the Christian god with its "white Jesus" are part of a plantation mentality, and, the notions of private property rights and ownership are no longer sustainable/shared values. Included in this rejection is "capitalism" apart from greed and in counter-distinction to "the welfare state" with its persistent agenda manifest in increasing taxation. Let's not forget the related and growing restrictions limiting free, unfettered political speech, states' rights as governing bodies, and governance in partnership with a faith based directive (short of "theocracy, of course), and you have a dynamic definition of the political wars of today.
Understand that all of these [rejected] issues are part of a certain political leaning that is markedly "conservative" and popular to varying degrees. Gallup has documented the fact that this country is a Right leaning body politic, and that [polling] conclusion has remained surprisingly consistent over the past 40 years . . . . . . even to this day and time. Having said that, clearly, the expression and very definitions of "liberal" and "conservative" have changed, over the years. What may surprise many, is the fact that our attachment to "individual responsibility," domestic/societal success as the result of personal effort on any number of levels, the demand of the population to be safe in a world that hates our nation, and the sovereignty of our private lives, are not political issues. These are part of our way of life, our "historicity" if you will, and effect the agendas of most political persuasions in this country.
The world of Liberalism finds its power in the political party. Conservatism finds its power in the desire for individual freedoms, and, the two worlds are less and less related. While we may be looking at the demise of the GOP as a traditional institution, and, its subsequent re-invention, "conservatism" as the predicate of societal values will have a place in the national agenda for as long as we can see into the future.
Perhaps the following brief (immediately below) will help put things into context as relates to the GOP and this election year. Just know this (and I am talking to myself as much as to any who read this blog), the so-called "death of the GOP" is not, in any way, the end of a broad-based conservative preference. In the end, all political parties and persuasions must answer to pragmatic realities that demand that government "work" for the people. At the center of this pragmatism, is the popular vote. In other words, Democrat/Republican/Libertarian/Progressive/Socialist - in this country - define the political class with its several ideologies, and are not an expression of the people's will, in and of themselves . . . . apart from confirmation at the ballot. It is always "politics versus the will of the people."
In short, the people own the ballot box and the subsequent direction of this nation . . . . not the political parties.
This country "votes" for its leadership more often than any nation on earth. We have midterms that determine regional representation, every two years. Our national campaigns (the presidency) and Senatorial races are in addition to the two year election cycle. As to the presidency, it takes a full year to vett and elect our president, a full year if not more. And that selection process includes more than 50 primary elections for each of the two major parties, and a national election that is states-based as well . . . more than 150 individual elections. No nation spends as much time, money and energy as the United States, in the selection of its leadership . . . . . none.
But enough, already. In time, fiscal realities will supersede Obama's immature agenda. Trump, should he win the national election, would not be the end of the world, either. Again, "reality" is our friend despite all the hand wringing and name calling.
Many observers have begun to compare today’s GOP to the Whig Party, a
major party that collapsed in the years leading up to the American
Civil War. Is this a fair comparison? To explore the similarities and
differences between the two political parties and the forces threatening
their existence, we turned to the man who literally wrote the book on
the Whigs: Michael F. Holt, Langbourne M. Williams Professor of American
History Emeritus at the University of Virginia. We are honored to
feature the following piece by Prof. Holt, the author of six books,
including the award-winning The Rise and Fall of the American Whig Party: Jacksonian Politics and the Onset of the Civil War and By One Vote: The Disputed Presidential Election of 1876.
-- The Editors (Larry Sabato at the Crystal Ball and the University of Virginia).
No comments:
Post a Comment