I read a fascinating article today on the fall of conservatism and how the politics of polarization pioneered by Republicans in the Nixon era has basically reached the end of the line. In a nutshell - the thesis is that the conservative movement focused entirely on obtaining power and then removing government -operating perenially in campaign mode, then failing abjectly to govern when needed (Iraq, New Orleans) which is the core of government. Long but worth reading, here is the first few paras. CONTINUED: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/05/26/080526fa_fact_packer?printable=true
Good article. An excerpt of the core argument that people want folks who actually want to be in government to do positive things for them. At the end of that year, when the radical conservatives in the Gingrich Congress shut down the federal government, they learned that the American public was genuinely attached to the modern state. “An anti-government philosophy turned out to be politically unpopular and fundamentally un-American,” Brooks said. “People want something melioristic, they want government to do things.” Instead of governing, the Republican majority in Congress—along with right-wing authors, journalists, talk-radio personalities, think tanks, and foundations—surrendered to the negative strain of modern conservatism. As political strategy, this strain went back to the Nixon era, but its philosophical roots were older and deeper. It extended back to William F. Buckley, Jr.,’s mission statement, in the inaugural issue of National Review, in 1955, that the new magazine “stands athwart history, yelling Stop”; and to Goldwater’s seminal 1960 book, “The Conscience of a Conservative,” in which he wrote, “I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones.” By the end of the century, a movement inspired by sophisticated works such as Russell Kirk’s 1953 “The Conservative Mind: From Burke to Eliot” churned out degenerate descendants with titles like “How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must).” Shortly after engineering President Bill Clinton’s impeachment on a narrow party-line basis, Gingrich was gone. Though conservatives were not much interested in governing, they understood the art of politics. They hadn’t made much of a dent in the bureaucracy, and they had done nothing to provide universal health-care coverage or arrest growing economic inequality, but they had created a political culture that was inhospitable to welfare, to an indulgent view of criminals, to high rates of taxation.
Great Article I think the most relevant part was that the conservative movement wasn't interested in governing. as stated before, this culminated in gwb's presidency and the glowing moment of truth was Katrina.
Under this hypothesis, when shall we expect the Fall of the Liberalism? It too has become a movement focused entirely on obtaining power and then removing government -- operating perenially in campaign mode, then failing abjectly to govern when needed (Pelosi on energy/oil, environment), which is the core of government. The story, while well-written, was total b...s...
no, both can't be in power, the point was one was winning, conservatism, now its on its last legs, because it broke its promises and secondly americans weren't all to thrilled with less government. liberalism died along time ago, despite conservative b****ing about it. unless you count GWB's expansion of government
There has always been a contradiction between the type of conservative who says: " I hate government. It can do virtually nothing well. Put me in charge." It is interesting to see how these types have come to the end of the road by not running government well--surprise. Thumbs, BTW the Dems have the barest of technical majorities and Bush the GOP has a veto (not sure of the term) proof minority in the Senate and Bush vetoes or threatens to veto bills, yet you would say they can't perform.
As someone who's significant other is an executive in state government, it's about time people recognized what those government employees, on all levels, do for the average American. Government employees have been under assault here in Texas and the result has been a catastrophe for the elderly, the young, and the students of this state. The refusal to raise taxes to fund essential state services has placed Texas on a level, in many areas, on par with states like Mississippi... for so long the best example of state government shirking its responsibilties. I'm glad to hear government being recognized again as needed. Republicans have cut taxes for the wealthy and squeezed the middle class. Time for the middle class to get their due. They are the backbone of this country. Impeach Bush.
The fall of liberalism occurred in the post-Vietnam era w/the rejection of the new deal - as was explained repeatedly in the article w/the analogies to McGovern. Anyway the money quotes don't come from the writer but from the various conservative thinkers who are pronouncing it dead. Nancy Pelosi has pretty much zero to do with this and smacks of sour grapes on your end.
My point is that the end of conservatism or the end of liberalism is equally spurious. Party fortunes wax and wane depending on leadership. Currently, the GOP is without a rudder, and the Democratic Party is finding new resilience as a result. Once the Democratic Party has had its run, it too will wane. I'm supporting Obama based on vision and the hope for an end to vitriolic politics, but that does not mean I am abandoning my conservative roots.
Nor should you. You recognize that the only way the GOP can reform itself is to lose so badly that the current leadership is tossed in the trash heap. They need to start from scratch. Figure out how to actually do something for the middle class, instead of talking a good game and then giving the farm to the wealthy. (at least I'm guessing that! ) Impeach Bush.
Texas has raised taxes, specifically through the gross receipts tax, and school boards have significantly raised taxes all over the state. The "state government shirking its responsibilities" has, in part, created a business climate that is insulating Texas from the mess that is the national economy. Virtually everyone is doing better than if they were in any other state (except maybe public employees that can't market their skills in the private sector).
You aren't doing better if you are young, elderly, or a student. Have you checked tuition, lately? And the dig at state employees is complete BS. Believe it or not, and I'm sure you won't, large numbers of state employees could make significantly more money in the private sector, but chose to remain with the state because they like to serve. Yes, some people actually like the idea of attempting to do something for the public. Others love the give and take of the political arena that comes with working for the state, especially those in positions similar to my significant other, who talks to people all the time that you read about in the paper or hear about on the news. It can be both exciting and rewarding. The other big reason is, of course, the benefits. State employees have traditionally stayed in the public sector because they like the health insurance and they like the vacation time, along with other benefits they receive, like the retirement plan. Sorry, but I think your view is very simplistic, as well as being wrong, with all due respect. Impeach Bush.
There is iron and irony in your words, Josie Deckard. The current leadership abandoned the ideals of the party's core, so they need to swept away by the Democratic prairie fire. However, a prairie fire enriches the land and ultimately produces a lush new grassland (of Republicans).
Deckard, You missed my point. I'm not saying that many don't have it worse in Texas than before. A government inflating a money supply to pay for guns and butter affects everyone. But by holding down the increase in taxes, and similarly not as dramatically increasing public services, Texans are in a significantly better situation to weather a financial storm than say Ohio, Michigan, or California. And I wasn't trying to bash public sector workers. Some of my family and many of my friends and neighbors work in government I was drawing a distinction between public sector workers who compete directly with private sector workers, and those who don't have a private sector counterpart. My cousin, the engineer for TCEQ, and my neighbor, the firefighter, both have seen their salaries increase significantly over the past few years because of competition for their services from private industry. Another neighbor is a Game Warden, and has no private company after his skill set. His salary, while never great, has fallen even further behind, and has had to double up efforts on his side business to keep up.
I understand your post better now, so thanks for the clarification. You wouldn't believe the number of times, over the years, that I've heard people disparage government workers and state employees, in particular. I find it ironic, when my wife's working a 70 or 80 hour week on a salary, with no overtime. She gets "comp time," but amasses so much of it that frequently some is never used, so the compensation eventually is lost. There is a time limit of a year in which to use comp time. Use it or lose it, as they say. She's too busy to use it all, except for every other summer, when the Lege is not in session. That's when she tries to use that comp time and her vacation time. You wouldn't believe how much vacation time she's built up. you can hang onto it much longer because there isn't a time limit. There is an hour limit, however, based on how long you're been with the state. Go over that limit and it rolls over into sick leave, which doesn't have a limitation. So it's a pretty good deal. She's been with the state for 30 years, so she gets ten weeks vacation, if she can use it. For people who wonder why some stay with the state when they are being dumped on, not getting raises, unless you are promoted, sometimes for years, because the Lege is trying to save money, and able to get more pay in the private sector, well that explains a lot. Every two years, after the session, she can take 6 weeks for a vacation and have 4 weeks left over. We've had 8 weeks in a row before, but that's highly unusual. Impeach Bush.
The point among republican theorists is not that they abandoned th party's core - the problem is that there was no core. The ideals were a means to an end but not an end in themselves. -
