The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Republicans: Political Party, or Apocalyptic Cult?
Thanatos
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
So, for those of you who have been living under a rock for the past week or so, the inspiration for this thread is an article posted to Truth-Out.org by a former Congressional Republican Staffer. The article is a little long (it clocks in at a bit over 6000 words), and if you've been paying attention for the past decade or so, doesn't really tell you anything you don't already know. However, if you're going to be posting in this thread, you should at least read the article, so you know what we're referencing. And no, I'm not going to tl;dr it for you.
So, if there's nothing really new here, then why does it matter? A big part of the reason why it matters is that it's just gotten a lot of play. Unlike a lot of the blogs talking about what's wrong with the Republican party, this one has bee nspread around a lot. I've been linked to it at least half a dozen times in the last couple of weeks. So, people are paying attention, and that matters.
The second reason it matters (and is probably the main reason people are paying attention) is that this article isn't from a Michael Moore, or a Markos Moulitsas, or even an Al Franken. Mike Lofgren is a guy who, up until last year, was pulling down six figures working for Congressional Republicans. According to James Fallows, a longtime journalist and former Carter speech writer, the guy is fairly reputable. He's been working on the Hill for 28 years, almost entirely for Republicans, and up until he wrote that article, was fairly well-respected.
So, the reason this is such a big deal is the source. It's not coming from the crazy left, it's not coming from rage-filled young people, it's not coming from Marxists, it's not even coming from Democrats; this is an old, white, Republican who made his bones on Republican values. The money shot of this article, I think, is:
Essentially, the modern Republican party is what the KKK has morphed into. The difference is, instead of summoning the specter of minorities to scare people into supporting them, they're summoning the specter of big government and minorities to scare people into voting for them. They are nakedly manipulating people through lies and astroturfing groups (like Freedomworks' Tea Party). Lofgren presents the arguments very well.
I mean, just to illustrate a recent point, at the debate tonight, the Republican candidates were asked whether it would be better for a 30-year-old without insurance to die, or to have the government pay for their healthcare, the audience actually cheered when they said "die." These are people who are rooting for you and me to fucking die, and yet every single candidate, when asked about social security and Medicare, said "oh, we need to keep it for current recipients." So, what these people are really saying is "I have mine, fuck the rest of you."
So, that being said, the questions I'd like to ask are: 1) why does it matter? and 2) What should we do about it?
It matters because where you have reasonable people disagreeing, I think there are tactics you refrain from using. If this was a debate about whether we should have an income tax or a sales tax, there is absolutely room for disagreement; however, this is a debate about whether we should have a functional government, or a non-functional one, and we're being engaged with tactics that we need to meet with a proportional response.
So, the solution for this, I think, is to remove the kid gloves. Stop playing with the Republicans. Stop pretending that this is just reasonable people disagreeing, that they have anything at all positive to contribute to this country. They get secret million-dollar donations from God knows where (this guy came forward, but that doesn't really prove anything), that they use to pander to the politically disengaged via PACs that are unconnected to them. I mean, the left has MoveOn, but what does MoveOn have on a group like American Crossroads (Karl Rove's Super PAC)?
It's time to start getting creative, and start fighting dirty. For instance, start a Super PAC that is dedicated to "promoting Biblical values and Biblical candidates for election." Hire a bunch of kids with clipboards to gather donations from Republican strongholds. Then, use those donations to run ads in moderate districts pointing out that Republicans endorse candidates who think women should be executed for adultery; flash pictures of Jihadists during these ads. Run ads in conservative districts saying that the Republican candidates think that rich people should give away all of their money. Candidates who say they believe in the literal truth of the Bible are actually saying this shit, and it's such a thoroughly retarded position that it should be brought to light. And it's not like you're going to offend people who were going to vote Democrat, anyway.
So, what are your ideas for fighting the anti-democracy forces that dominate the Republican party right now? Or am I (and this article) wrong? Do Republicans just have a difference of opinion from the rest of us? Are they just being reasonable people in disagreement? Should we not stoop to the levels I'm suggesting, and instead use a kinder, gentler strategy to win people over? If so, what is that strategy?
So, if there's nothing really new here, then why does it matter? A big part of the reason why it matters is that it's just gotten a lot of play. Unlike a lot of the blogs talking about what's wrong with the Republican party, this one has bee nspread around a lot. I've been linked to it at least half a dozen times in the last couple of weeks. So, people are paying attention, and that matters.
The second reason it matters (and is probably the main reason people are paying attention) is that this article isn't from a Michael Moore, or a Markos Moulitsas, or even an Al Franken. Mike Lofgren is a guy who, up until last year, was pulling down six figures working for Congressional Republicans. According to James Fallows, a longtime journalist and former Carter speech writer, the guy is fairly reputable. He's been working on the Hill for 28 years, almost entirely for Republicans, and up until he wrote that article, was fairly well-respected.
So, the reason this is such a big deal is the source. It's not coming from the crazy left, it's not coming from rage-filled young people, it's not coming from Marxists, it's not even coming from Democrats; this is an old, white, Republican who made his bones on Republican values. The money shot of this article, I think, is:
It should have been evident to clear-eyed observers that the Republican Party is becoming less and less like a traditional political party in a representative democracy and becoming more like an apocalyptic cult, or one of the intensely ideological authoritarian parties of 20th century Europe. This trend has several implications, none of them pleasant.
Essentially, the modern Republican party is what the KKK has morphed into. The difference is, instead of summoning the specter of minorities to scare people into supporting them, they're summoning the specter of big government and minorities to scare people into voting for them. They are nakedly manipulating people through lies and astroturfing groups (like Freedomworks' Tea Party). Lofgren presents the arguments very well.
I mean, just to illustrate a recent point, at the debate tonight, the Republican candidates were asked whether it would be better for a 30-year-old without insurance to die, or to have the government pay for their healthcare, the audience actually cheered when they said "die." These are people who are rooting for you and me to fucking die, and yet every single candidate, when asked about social security and Medicare, said "oh, we need to keep it for current recipients." So, what these people are really saying is "I have mine, fuck the rest of you."
So, that being said, the questions I'd like to ask are: 1) why does it matter? and 2) What should we do about it?
It matters because where you have reasonable people disagreeing, I think there are tactics you refrain from using. If this was a debate about whether we should have an income tax or a sales tax, there is absolutely room for disagreement; however, this is a debate about whether we should have a functional government, or a non-functional one, and we're being engaged with tactics that we need to meet with a proportional response.
So, the solution for this, I think, is to remove the kid gloves. Stop playing with the Republicans. Stop pretending that this is just reasonable people disagreeing, that they have anything at all positive to contribute to this country. They get secret million-dollar donations from God knows where (this guy came forward, but that doesn't really prove anything), that they use to pander to the politically disengaged via PACs that are unconnected to them. I mean, the left has MoveOn, but what does MoveOn have on a group like American Crossroads (Karl Rove's Super PAC)?
It's time to start getting creative, and start fighting dirty. For instance, start a Super PAC that is dedicated to "promoting Biblical values and Biblical candidates for election." Hire a bunch of kids with clipboards to gather donations from Republican strongholds. Then, use those donations to run ads in moderate districts pointing out that Republicans endorse candidates who think women should be executed for adultery; flash pictures of Jihadists during these ads. Run ads in conservative districts saying that the Republican candidates think that rich people should give away all of their money. Candidates who say they believe in the literal truth of the Bible are actually saying this shit, and it's such a thoroughly retarded position that it should be brought to light. And it's not like you're going to offend people who were going to vote Democrat, anyway.
So, what are your ideas for fighting the anti-democracy forces that dominate the Republican party right now? Or am I (and this article) wrong? Do Republicans just have a difference of opinion from the rest of us? Are they just being reasonable people in disagreement? Should we not stoop to the levels I'm suggesting, and instead use a kinder, gentler strategy to win people over? If so, what is that strategy?
Thanatos on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
I like your ideas for carpetbombing them.
Hell, I never thought i'd see the day when Rick Perry could receive jubilant cheers from what I assumed was a relatively sane conservative crowd, for claiming that he oversaw the executions of over 200 people. I thought that sort of thing was relegated to schlocky "post-insanity" movies like "Escape from New York", with the suicide chairs, and such.
That being said, you're insane if you think the Republicans and, especially, right wing organizations like Murdoch's Fox (Well, mainly any organization owned by Rupert Murdoch at this point.) wouldn't come down on any "underhanded" movement like a sack of bricks. Even if the Republicans are doing many of the same underhanded ideas you suggested right now.
See them trying to run Republican nominees in the Democratic primaries for re-election in Wisconsin, as an example. Or holding the countries debt ceiling hostage, and then using spin and media control to switch it to somehow being the Democrats fault after the fact. Or just the entire thing in Wisconsin, from start to finish, even. These are some of the more prominent examples that TV media has by far and large, failed to cover, cover adequately, or cover in a way that didn't have an agenda.
I think I have to agree with John Stewart's joke, that it's pretty fucking sad that I have to rely mostly on my own investigative skills and the internet, and occasionally the Daily Show to get a reliable feed of information on politics nowadays. Hell, even the newspaper and radio organizations have largely gone to shit.
TV, radio, and newspaper media still controls ninety percent of the opinion in this country. Most people can't go out, and research a topic, and form an actual coherent opinion for themselves. Especially given the nature of confirmation bias, and the ease of access to media that will gladly aid in that particular process. The easiest fix to the problem is to start pressuring news agencies that blatantly lie or slander on TV in the name of personal profit/political agenda to start telling the truth.
Doing that, and pushing extremist/money grubbing assholes like Glenn Beck (Look up his days as a shock jock. He did a complete 360 when it came to many of his political beliefs upon being hired by Fox. And some of his actions in how he treats his followers are just sickening.) off the national stage. Making organizations like Fox News put a disclaimer at the start of every show, saying it was "opinion journalism" (As they've claimed they do both real journalism and fake journalism.) or "actual journalism" would make leagues of progress to restoring some sanity to the national discourse in this country.
Mind you, i'm not advocating the restriction of free speech when it comes to governmental practices. But at this point, there are individuals who are willfully using their power and influence, along with people's assumptions about the what news agencies really are, to push their own agendas in a way that is detrimental to a great many people. Hell, at least one other country (Canada comes to mind.), has barred Fox from broadcasting there, because of the fact that ninety percent of their current line-up is grade-A political bullshit.
A simple disclaimer stating whether something is an opinion, or actual factually based journalism would go a hell of a long way to solving that issue, while not infringing on the constitutional rights of those involved.
Most of the damage done to the political process these past few years could at least be partially traced back to the long-term results of manipulative information control and distribution, and the nature of how people are. If you have agencies like Fox, or other right wing media sources whipping people into a frenzy over doom-saying and such, while distorting the media process, then yes, crazy-ass semi-racist movements like the Tea Party are going to gain significant traction amongst portions of the population.
Unfortunately, the most likely candidate for that sort of action, Fox News, somehow won the right to lie on national TV about people, and actually legally damage people's reputations and livelihoods in a court case. So the odds of that happening are slim to none for the forseeable future.
Now, you might be able to find some traction with single-issue voters if you can cram down their throats how the republicans who SAY they agree with them actually work against them, but in the more general sense a lot of this comes down to kids.
Children, despite the extreme degree of brainwashing some of them receive now, are still more malleable than adults, and less set in their ways, but you can reach them if you appeal to their personal sensibilities. Unfortunately, the liberal cause is often associated with hippies and grunge and so forth, which isn't going to appeal to most who aren't outright rebellious. If you want to gain attention, you need more sexy librarians and romance novel cover guys who bail hay and pray thrice a day. Add activities and social life to the cause - use the tools that churches are using to lock children into their ideology. Appeal to well-off socialites who don't comprehend the suffering of others and think they did it all on their own.
The joke is they're not all that old so they'll destroy the world long before they would die.
Especially since if you run a few of these ads, the media will start playing them like crazy, and start interviewing the people who make them. Free exposure, free publicity, and it will bring the issue to the fore.
I really worry for the future of the United States when these people are getting so much pull.
They're violent, sociopathic religious fundamentalists.
The Taliban, by contrast, would have taken a much more overt stance in pursuing their agenda. Most of the GOP/Tea Party stuff is much more subtle in approach, working through our system of politics to achieve their agendas and ambitions.
I know people who are not complete morons that vote for the GOP, and I can't figure out how that works.
I also need to check out the recent debate - if they said that (re die comment) I need to see it myself to believe it.
80% of American political history can be explained by racism. Soooo
While that element is absolutely there, I really am personally sold on the main driver of the rightward lurch being the combination of technology, cheating, and tribalism. Basically democratic institutions are often pretty vulnerable on the policy or voter turn out sides to people acting in bad faith. Combine that with the wealthy finally hitting on effective ways to use fractured media to drive confirmation bias as Thanatos pointed out and you have the tools to allow a disproportionate impact from a small fanatical voting block. Since tribalism is so fundamental to the human condition and still haunts most of our social institutions it really is the natural driver for the current GOP/Tea Party movements.
What bothers me personally is I have spent a lot of time analyzing these movements at both the macro/micro levels (Yah fishing out motivations in South Carolina!) and I really can't conceive of a way to weaken them without using undemocratic means. I suspect we might have the perfect democracy killer here, which doesn't mean I don't volunteer a lot of time to stop them.
That is the reality we live in and until it changes, this shit the GOP is pulling is going to keep happening because it's effective.
While the idea of going door to door and raising a bunch of money to run culture-jamming campaign ads is viscerally entertaining, it'll never work because the money isn't coming from actual people on the ground in republican strongholds. It's coming from a relatively few wealthy donors (the Koch brothers et al) via such fine institutions as the American Legislative Exchange Council (and even if you did get funding, good luck finding a station or network that'll run them.)
I do generally agree that ought to be explicitly calling it what it is, though. Somehow we've been scared off the idea of waging class war, while the right has never stopped fighting it. If you ultimately want this stuff to stop, the Koches et al are the fuckers you need to bring it to.
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
Well, here's the thing. This is the GOP in its most essential form. What was the foundation of the modern GOP? It's opposition to the Civil Rights Act in the 1964 campaign and Nixon exploitation of white southern racism to flip the South in 1968. Opposition to entitlements is couched in libertarian theory, but if you believe Atwater (I tend to), it's really giving minorities stuff.
The hospital isn't going to just let him die whether or not he has private insurance or Medicare or nothing at all because if they let him die, they can't get paid.
They will keep him alive, put him thru a bare minimum or physical therapy, and then send him a bill for $750,000 and then file suit against him when he tries to file bankruptcy.
Besides, even if he had health insurance, he would still be screwed anyway because the current state of health insurance in this country is a joke.
Mafia comparisons are also valid IMO.
At the top of the party is a small group of bosses with their own gangs of followers. The bosses don't necessarily see eye to eye and will pounce on one another at signs of weakness. The end goal for any crew boss is to be the next Don. The gangs are expected to carry out orders, and if a member balks then they can have their careers stalled, ruined, or outright ended. Businesses give them money and in exchange the organization sees to it that the businesses prosper, often via dubious means. If there's a fuckup in a plan, then whoever is perceived as a liability or underperformer can be set up as a patsy. Outside organizations are a threat to the bottom line and are therefore fair game to anyone that wants to have a go at them. Traditions are considered important and superstitions abound among members; violating either is grounds for being expelled or having to make amends.
I could probably go on but I won't as it isn't really adding much to the debate/discourse aspect of the thread..
With Dems, everything said about Republicans is mostly true, even when skewed, like saying Republicans want people to die in the streets. Now, Republicans don't actually want people dying in the street, but they will support policies that just happen to result in the street being littered with dead bodies. That's how Republicans are; they support policies solely based on emotional appeal and make no consideration as to how those policies will actually affect people. No more abortions? Great, now where's the money for orphanages and single mothers?
The GOP base, however, has become a bloc entirely based around ignorance and fear of boogeymen vis a vis ludicrous conspiracy theories. I know, because my dad and all his friends are hard-core right wingers, and I had to spend all weekend with them last week. Among their chief fears from Dems and Obama: giving money to all the minorities, instituting Sharia law, taking their guns away, shutting down churches, forcing women to have abortions, and giving all our jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those things range from unfounded logical fallacy to flat-out lunacy, many of which have no origination outside of far-right fearmongering outlets, like Glenn Beck and whatnot. Worse, these people often don't see the obvious parallel in their beliefs in what they're fighting against. A Christian fundamentalist worried about Sharia law taking away Americans' freedom is fucking looney tunes.
Ordinary everyday Republicans do not go to pre-primary debates put on by the Tea Party.
The most radical element of the Republican party is what was represented there, and there were only a couple people who shouted that, followed by laughter, since I am sure a non-zero number of them thought it was a joke.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Nope. Wolf Blitzer asked, straight up "Should the hospital just let some 30 year old with a sudden long term condition, who never bought insurance, die?" Before Ron Paul could answer, the Audience was screaming "yes!"
But then again, the 60's.
America's Christian Values on display.
I think they only had CRT in the 60s.
That is literally what happened.
This seems to have shifted last night to literally wanting people to die in the streets.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PepQF7G-It0
Am I retarded? For some reason I can't embed videos?
Well that's just great.
I don't know, guys. I'm at my wits' end. When the other party cheerfully endorses every negative thing you could say about them, where do you go?
My only though w/r/t plan of attack is assailing them right at their core: attack them as being ignorant of and bad at practicing their own religion. Loudly and repeatedly.
More than this, I think the problem is actually the media coverage of the GOP. Somewhere along the line the media confused passivity with impartiality, so now we have things where in a debate in which people cheered the hypothetical death of an innocent man, the network that sponsored the debate doesn't reference the moment at all in their continuing coverage.
Though as much as I dislike Perry, I'm glad that he seemingly drank up all of Bachmann's milkshake. That woman can't buy coverage at this point.
You force people to sit in the ER when that 30 year old is getting worked on and is about to die and I am willing to bet most will change their mind.
Hate to say it, but things simply haven't gotten bad enough yet. The dead are not littering the streets yet. There is nothing bad enough happening yet that will force these people out of their delusion. There are simply too many people powerful enough to remove themselves from even having to witness first hand the ramifications of their decisions. Ron Paul talks about responsibility, but it's the rich white folk that have the ability to escape responsibility time and time again so there is nothing that forces them to live up to their own rhetoric. you want responsibility? That's the big lie right there...They don't want responsibility and they have the power to shield themselves from it. take away that shield and their tune will change quickly.
Things really do have to get worse before they get better. So there is this part of me that almost even wants total Republican rule so that they actually do have the ability to implement their craziest whims if only to speed up the whole "getting worse" part so we can get to the getting better part sooner.
Enlist in Star Citizen! Citizenship must be earned!
That media moment was the moment Fox News became popular and had their "Fair and Balanced" slogan.
Also, Re: Bachmann, that's not true. CNN couldn't NOT cover her this morning. This morning they had an interview with her, so I went to take a shower. I came back and they were recapping the interview they did not 20 minutes before.