"The Republican nominations were not
made in a political convention. There was no political convention. It was
an infommercial. The only candidate with any principles and ideas, and
who had aroused any grassroots enthusiasm, was completely shut out.
"Note that the appeals for the survival of the Republican party
never say why that is a good thing or what positive results might be
expected from that survival. They simply assume that is something that is
unquestionably desirable. The simple truth is that the Republican party
survives only by the tactical employment of the great state-sponsored
wealth of people who want to keep it as it is and by election laws which
have made it nearly impossible to change the duopoly that controls
American political action and allows the media unchallenged control of
political debate. A situation which obviously violate the rules of
democracy and the spirit of the Constitution.
"Insanity has been defined as doing the same thing over and over and
expecting a different result. Those who have continued to vote Republican
are perhaps not insane, but they have certainly exhibited irrational
behavior and an inability to think outside the box that has been made to
confine them."
Why Save the Republican
Party?
by Clyde Wilson
Since the election there has been much discussion of the future of the
Republican party. Can it ever again win a national election, or is it
doomed to permanent minority status? The most common response has been
that the party must "reach out" (i.e., compete in the offer of
bribes) to the exploding Hispanic population. Rather neatly and
deceitfully avoiding the obvious fact that Republican sponsorship of mass
immigration is the cause of their minority status.
A few fringe commentators have urged that the party instead do more for
its core constituency of conservative white people. But the party
leadership has already repudiated this alternative in both word and deed.
They have apologized for "the Southern strategy" ( though not
for the numerous elections that it won for them). The alternative
strategy would not be respectable, and no people are more terrified of
being thought unrespectable than the Republican leadership. The world
view of the Sixties revolutionaries is now the mainstream, and to
challenge it identifies one at once as a clueless or malevolent occupant
of the disreputable fringe.
Conspicuously absent from this discussion is any explanation of why the
Republican party should continue to survive at all, must less flourish.
Why should we care?
It is easy to understand why people vote for Obama. He represents his
constituents. He speaks for them. He promises them ever more goodies. He
satisfies the ideological malice of leftists and gratifies the resentment
of minorities against old America. If you are a bailed-out banker, a
defense contractor, an employer of immigrant labor, or a politician eager
for the perks of office, you might be tempted to vote Republican. But why
bother? Being a Democrat would serve you just as well. There is no valid
reason for anybody else to vote Republican.
True, there has been a kind of assumption for half a century now that the
Republicans represent a conservative bulwark against leftist revolution.
But is this true? Has it ever been the case? This impression is partly
due to historical accident. The Republican leadership are elitists with
no interest in "the social issues." But in the 1960s George
Wallace demonstrated that there were votes to be had there, and so the
party leaders grudgingly began to give lip service to them. They never
had any intention of doing anything in regard to abortion, school prayer,
affirmative action, the growth of federal power, or any other
non-economic issue.
There is an impression that the Republican party is
"pro-business" or pro free enterprise. Well, yes, if your
business is big enough to buy government favors. What has the party ever
done for the other businesses that make up the bulk of American
enterprise?
The Supreme Court nominees who were supposed to turn the court back to a
more restrained role have betrayed that promise again and again. And
again. And again.
The Republican party does not represent its voters (and never has). It
represents only itself. Consider: the strength of the party is now in the
Southern, Plains, and Rocky Mountain states. The presidential and
vice-presidential candidates were both from the deepest and most liberal
North. Republican voters are conservative Christians. Neither candidate
could be said to represent that viewpoint. Republican voters are much
concerned about the effects of recent immigration policy. Neither
candidate had any sympathy for that position---quite the contrary.
Republican voters are concerned about the loss of manufacturing jobs and
the ongoing proletarianization of the middle class. Both candidates are
on record with contradictory policies.
Republican voters are opposed to Obamacare, perhaps the single policy
inclination most widely shared among them. But the head of the Republican
ticket is the inventor of Obamacare. Republican voters were clearly
disturbed by the trillion dollar bailout of misbehaving bankers. No help
there. While Republican voters are rather too inclined toward jingoistic
responses to foreign threats, it cannot really be said that they want to
start unnecessary wars, support a worldwide military empire, or watch
Americans being killed abroad and pay for the privilege. Yet Romney was
the most imperialist candidate in recent times.
The Republican nominations were not made in a political convention. There
was no political convention. It was an infommercial. The only candidate
with any principles and ideas, and who had aroused any grassroots
enthusiasm, was completely shut out.
Note that the appeals for the survival of the Republican party never say
why that is a good thing or what positive results might be expected from
that survival. They simply assume that is something that is
unquestionably desirable. The simple truth is that the Republican party
survives only by the tactical employment of the great state-sponsored
wealth of people who want to keep it as it is and by election laws which
have made it nearly impossible to change the duopoly that controls
American political action and allows the media unchallenged control of
political debate. A situation which obviously violate the rules of
democracy and the spirit of the Constitution.
Insanity has been defined as doing the same thing over and over and
expecting a different result. Those who have continued to vote Republican
are perhaps not insane, but they have certainly exhibited irrational
behavior and an inability to think outside the box that has been made to
confine them.
All in all, the Republican party is and always has been a strange and
puzzling thing. I tried to explore this subject in
an essay
published by LewRockwell.com in 2006. My historical survey, I like to
think, may be of interest to young people in search of answers or veteran
readers wanting to reprise important matters.
http://lewrockwell.com/wilson/wilson37.1.html
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
