141Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With QuoteProbably not. We've been moving to the left for 20-odd years, the pendulum needs to swing the other way for a while.Originally Posted by astralis
-dale
indeed. one wonders what conservatives today would think of Eisenhower, or Rockefeller Republicans.Jeb Bush harkening back to Reagan as the salad days of moderate Republicans is rather amusing. When Reagan ran for president the media and old time Republicans were lamenting that Regan was too far right.
OTOH, we already know what they think of dems...
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov
Probably not. We've been moving to the left for 20-odd years, the pendulum needs to swing the other way for a while.
-dale
dale,
see what JAD just wrote. how do you figure that? even prior to the rise of the Tea Party, the average congressional Republican today is considerably more conservative than his 1980s' counterpart-- whom in turn was considerably more conservative than his 1950s or 60s counterpart.Probably not. We've been moving to the left for 20-odd years, the pendulum needs to swing the other way for a while.
-dale
although i agree that i also don't see a real scenario where moderate Republicanism strikes back.
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov
Slightly tongue in cheek.indeed. one wonders what conservatives today would think of Eisenhower, or Rockefeller Republicans.
OTOH, we already know what they think of dems...
Ike
Ran a surplus thus proving reagonimcs
Did not allow gays to marry or serve in the military proving he is a solid social conservative.
Led a crusader against the national SOCIALIST
Rockerfeller Republicans-
The cabal secretly in cahoots with the Democrats to bring about the NWO...
Z:
I'd dispute he was any more conservative then the average Dem back then.You're looking back through today's prism. Those were very different times socially. (And BTW he was more likely a Democrat before he was asked to run on the GOP ticket.)
You didn't have to be conservative to be against gays in the military. No one was for it.
Same does for anything socialist--they were seen as commie. Everyone was spooked by the red menace.
To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato
Rhetoric vs. execution vs. context. Use the Bush (W) Repub senate & congress for an example - talked the talk of, say, fiscal conservatism but did not walk the walk. Not a "considerably conservative" congress at all. Nor a "considerably conservative" President, IMO either.
You or JAD see something "considerably conservative" over the last 20 years. I don't. I see a bunch of govt expansion and growing entitlements.
-dale
I believe those were Asty's words. I didn't see anything "considerably conservative" in Congress over the 20 years preceding Obama's taking office. But I have over the past 3 years.
To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato
Agreed. Faced with a true Lefty spear pointed at their faces, some Repubs actually found some spine. Hope they can keep it. This week it's apparently time to roll out all the moderate Repubs for soundbytes.
-dale
d-ale
dale,
seems to me more political opportunism than actual ideological change, though. it wasn't as if republicans in congress decided to "pull a clinton" and remake the Republican Party by taking some dem principles, a la the New Democrats of the 90s. yes, there was a "compassionate conservative" moment but as far i know that was really just a Dubya thing, which quickly disappeared a year later in the aftermath of 9-11.talked the talk of, say, fiscal conservatism but did not walk the walk. Not a "considerably conservative" congress at all. Nor a "considerably conservative" President, IMO either.
the rest was just opportunistic attempts to snipe off potential Dem voters, ie medicare part D.
we've seen a visible acceleration of the trend in the last three years, as mentioned.
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov
Okay, let's say you're right - if that political opportunism walks, quacks, and looks like non-conservatism, does it matter what the root reason was? Or is the outcome more important? Motivation vs. Action.
Also, and you may not agree with this because we are all somewhat blinkered by our own ideological stances, you need to remember that, to the average conservative, the liberal Dems have gone WAY over to the left over the last 50 years, so the conservative swing to the right, if there, should be seen as something of a response. The advancement of liberal-left ideas (socialism, big brother, nanny-stateism, infantalism, appeasement) has pretty much taken over the major media organs and educational institutions, and it is an uncompromising, intolerant worldview that brooks no dissent. Some of us have seen enough.
-dale
Last edited by dalem; 13 Jun 12, at 17:38. Reason: I just woke up. Forgot some stuff.
dale,
i'd say the root reason matters. a change in ideology means your rep is THINKING differently, ie his worldview is that "perhaps government here might actually be a good thing." if it's political opportunism, then his default worldview may still be conservative but he's willing to pander to the other side when politically advantageous. that's certainly not going to be all the time or even most of the time; it's a more limited situation.Okay, let's say you're right - if that political opportunism walks, quacks, and looks like non-conservatism, does it matter what the root reason was? Or is the outcome more important? Motivation vs. Action.
frankly, i'm trying to view this from a non-partisan, long-term lens.Also, and you may not agree with this because we are all somewhat blinkered by our own ideological stances, you need to remember that, to the average conservative, the liberal Dems have gone WAY over to the left over the last 50 years, so the conservative swing to the right, if there, should be seen as something of a response. The advancement of liberal-left ideas (socialism, big brother, nanny-stateism, infantalism, appeasement) has pretty much taken over the major media organs and educational institutions, and it is an uncompromising, intolerant worldview that brooks no dissent. Some of us have seen enough.
is the average dem today more lefty than the average dem in 1965? how about in 1935? if it's true that "liberal Dems have gone WAY over to the left", then we should see a huge difference in the platform of the Democratic Party.
and looking at what passes for a Democratic agenda today and comparing them to the 1960s Great Society/War on Poverty, or the New Deal, i think it's very hard to really make a case that the liberal-left tide is growing vice receding.
similarly, compare the platforms of the Republican Party of today vice where it was in the 1950s, where Eisenhower pushed for "Modern Republicanism".
so how does one argue that we as a country have moved towards the liberal left in the past 50 years vice towards the conservative right?
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov
Patriotism is now something to be mocked and derided instead of encouraged.
Government is more intrusive in our professional and private lives than ever.
Corporate entanglement with government and vice versa is at a high level. High water mark? Doubtful, but it's pretty high.
The concept of thoughtcrime has truly come into its own.
America is taught as the problem more than as the solution.
Melting pot = Out. Enclavization and tribalism = In.
These are all liberal-left ideals and they have become endemic in many of the institutions of the country, in some cases with Republican complicity or instigation.
-dale
dale,
the problem with all these examples is that they're unmeasurable, or at least not readily so-- unlike the examples of legislation and political platforms i pointed to.Patriotism is now something to be mocked and derided instead of encouraged.
Government is more intrusive in our professional and private lives than ever.
Corporate entanglement with government and vice versa is at a high level. High water mark? Doubtful, but it's pretty high.
The concept of thoughtcrime has truly come into its own.
America is taught as the problem more than as the solution.
Melting pot = Out. Enclavization and tribalism = In.
These are all liberal-left ideals and they have become endemic in many of the institutions of the country, in some cases with Republican complicity or instigation.
even then, let's look at a few points.
as compared to the 60s? don't see a lot of hippies spitting on soldiers or jane fonda posing with the taliban. even the anti-war people will cloak themselves in the flag and emphasize how they're 'for the troops, against the war'. it's almost impossible to control defense spending because the reflexive attack is that anybody who does so is 'against the troops'.Patriotism is now something to be mocked and derided instead of encouraged.
again, not sure how this is measured, but if you read what the FBI and CIA were up to in the 1960s i'm not sure i'd agree. on the economic side, lowest tax rates since the 1920s, both upper rates and as a proportion of the overall economy. on the civil side, government no longer dictates about interracial marriage/voting rights/etc. i suppose there is the Patriot Act, but that wasn't a liberal doing, either.Government is more intrusive in our professional and private lives than ever.
this is probably true, but it's hard to say this is a liberal-left idea. after all, the liberal epithet of the business friendly New Dems was "corporatist sellout", which is actually their epithet for obamacare, for instance.Corporate entanglement with government and vice versa is at a high level. High water mark? Doubtful, but it's pretty high.
etc etc.
it seems to me the conservative worldview-- not just of liberals but of the state of american society-- hasn't changed much since the 1960s. i saw all of your arguments being used, and rather more accurately, by conservatives of liberals...in 1968.
frankly, what Reagan did for the right, Clinton did for the left. their legacy is still with us today.
Last edited by astralis; 13 Jun 12, at 20:46.
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov
Mmm hmm. How about as compared to the 1950s?
How easy is it to start a business these days? To prove a piece of land? To buy some real estate? To own a car? To simply throw something away? Regulations, licenses, taxes, fees, inspections, environmental impact, etc. have ALL increased over the last 50-60 years or so. I agree that not all of it is due to "the left", but most of the restrictive items are.again, not sure how this is measured, but if you read what the FBI and CIA were up to in the 1960s i'm not sure i'd agree. on the economic side, lowest tax rates since the 1920s, both upper rates and as a proportion of the overall economy. on the civil side, government no longer dictates about interracial marriage/voting rights/etc. i suppose there is the Patriot Act, but that wasn't a liberal doing, either.
I think this level of "hand-in-handedness" is definitely a liberal ideal.this is probably true, but it's hard to say this is a liberal-left idea. after all, the liberal epithet of the business friendly New Dems was "corporatist sellout", which is actually their epithet for obamacare, for instance.
Okay.etc etc.
it seems to me the conservative worldview-- not just of liberals but of the state of american society-- hasn't changed much since the 1960s. i saw all of your arguments being used, and rather more accurately, by conservatives of liberals...in 1968.
frankly, what Reagan did for the right, Clinton did for the left. their legacy is still with us today.
-dale
Asty:
I would take issue with the way you frame the argument. We're not arguing that the liberal left is more liberal today or that the conservative right is more conservative. You're right; neither side has changed very much since 1935. We're arguing that the liberal agenda has dominated American politics for too long. 77 years is a long time.
To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Share this thread with friends: