In Defense of the Republican Party and Partisanship

It’s become very in vogue among conservatives to beat up the Republican Party over the last couple of years. And many Republicans have deserved to be criticized for their liberal votes and policies. Medicare part D is one of the worst pieces of legislation in the last several years. There certainly have been some bad Republicans lately, both in policy and personal behavior. I believe that some have taken the easy way out by adopting a populist-yet-conservative philosophy. They say they don’t care about party, they just want people in office that listen to the people. They want politicians who believe in and understand the Constitution. They want politicians with “common sense.” They don’t care what party you’re in if you are a true conservative.
The problem with this is it doesn’t work that way. It might sound good. It might feel good, like you’re proclaiming your independence from any given party. You’re no partisan hack, you’re a free thinker! Or maybe you’re even a “libertarian.” You don’t vote for Libertarians and think they get carried away sometimes, but you like that they’re so individualistic they have absolutely no cooperation or cohesive strategy. Well, stop patting yourself on the back for a minute and think about this critically for a second. You don’t care what party someone’s in? I think you do. Have you ever once found a conservative Democrat? Can you think of one Democrat that you are glad you voted for or wanted to vote for? Have you ever seen a race in which the Democrat was more conservative than the Republican? Of course, the answer for any conservative to these questions would be no. Perhaps there’s an exception to this out there somewhere, but it would be an extremely rare exception. (Zell Miller, perhaps?) And it doesn’t pay to vote for third party candidates. Third party candidates are automatic losers. If a third party candidate actually wins election it is a candidate that is more liberal than the Republican. Libertarians have yet to win a national office. Furthermore, which would be more feasible: to elect a conservative Republican or a third party candidate? While all Republicans aren’t perfect, and there are some that are almost just as liberal as Democrats, following a rigidly idealist voting strategy is simply not helpful. A vote which is wasted on a third party candidate is not only one vote which a Republican should get, it is also an encouragement to the needless and harmful third party.
But before I go further, let me just point out how great some of our conservative Republicans are. You wouldn’t know it by listening to those “conservatives” who enjoy defaming everything Republican, but there are some great leaders in both the House and the Senate who stand for individual liberty, a strong national defense, real family values, and limited government. Leaders like Jim DeMint, John Thune, James Imhofe, and Jon Kyl in the Senate. True conservatives such as Michele Bachmann, Mike Pence, Jeff Miller, Eric Cantor, and Paul Ryan in the House. While none of these are perfect, they are all true conservatives, and they’re all Republicans. They could very well agree with those conservatives who express antipathy towards the Republican party on 100% of the issues. Aren’t the conservatives who demonize the Republican party attacking real conservatives like these? I would argue yes. By turning “Republican” into some dirty word, they are besmirching all Republicans. They are throwing the  baby out with the bath water in some delusional and self serving attempt at “objectivity” or ”fairness.”
The question is, what can an average person do to help more conservatives elected, how can we as individuals affect national politics in a way that favors individual liberty? The answer is not to waste a vote on a meaningless loser. The answer is to get involved at the local level first. Get involved in your local Republican party. Read the Republican platform. You can find it right here: http://platform.gop.com/2008Platform.pdf. I dare you to find something you disagree with in it. More importantly, get involved in the primary process. Inform yourself on the primary candidates, find the best conservative leader and advocate for him. I realize this isn’t easy. It takes work to actually make an impact in politics. But just like those who don’t vote shouldn’t complain about our politicians, those who don’t vote in the Republican primary shouldn’t complain about the Republican Party. Unless you’re a Democrat.
Finally, let me say that there is certainly more to life than politics. This is, as Jefferson might say, self evident. But politics does require a great deal of passion and knowledge from those who would wish to actually serve their country in a seemingly self-serving profession. Indeed, our founding fathers truly saw themselves and office holders as public servants. For this reason they gave office holders a meager salary. Higher office was an honor bestowed, not a duly chosen position of power. Great conservatives tend to not make a career out of politics, though it could be argued that they could better serve their country if they remained in the system. But conservatives don’t treasure the power. They don’t tolerate the types of strain that public life puts on their families. They have interests outside of politics and they realize there is more to life. But it is commitment to those individual, Judeo-Christian principles which animates a true conservative. A passion for politics does not strip someone of his social or cultural ideals, nor does it require that he lose his moral and religious foundation. Rather, true men of integrity recognize that they are inseparable. An exposition of religious principles naturally relates to certain corresponding political philosophies and vice versa. These worldviews are what separates left from right, pagan from orthodoxy.

Rejecting Populism

Dictionary.com describes populism as follows: 1.the political philosophy of the People’s party 2.(lowercase) any of various, often antiestablishment or anti-intellectual political movements or philosophies that offer unorthodox solutions or policies and appeal to the common person rather than according with traditional party or partisan ideologies. 3.(lowercase) grass-roots democracy; working-class activism; egalitarianism. 4. (lowercase) representation or extolling of the common person, the working class, the underdog, etc.: populism in the arts.  Actually explaining the concept of populism is more complicated. The simplest way for me to explain it is that populism is the victimhood of the common man. Typical populist gripes are about how someone makes too much money (very popular are professional athletes and CEOs) and usually include defeatist attitudes and the general idea of a conspiracy or collusion among the powerful and wealthy against “us.”
In short, populism is an appealing but dangerously insidious force that politicians use in the most cynical ways in order to control people. It takes an educated and critical thinker to resist the siren’s song of populism, but resist we must. We must reject deifying “the common man” or “average joe” as politicians so often like to do. It is a pernicious self-delusion appealing to a false idealization. Populism is the politics of the narcissist. It fails to look the at country, particularly the ever-so-divine middle class with a critical eye. Populism is ugly, self serving and self destructive.
Even conservatives get it wrong, in so many ways about populism. There are so many maxims, myths, and general pie in the sky ideas that are used in common political talk that are based in populist myths, it would take dozens of blogs to debunk them all. Good thing I don’t have many blog ideas right now. I guess this is the start of another series of blogs. Here are just a few examples of populist folklore which politicians run to whenever they are running for office or see their poll numbers tanking: energy independence, outsourcing, price gouging, collusion among businesses, windfall profits, conspiracy theories, golden parachutes, the ridiculously populist and factually incorrect song “shutting detroit down” (which totally drives me nuts), the precautionary principle, global climate change, the two party system has to go, and reality tv. Okay, so I threw in reality tv there at the end, which isn’t really an issue but is totally populist, which is probably why I despise it so much.
In summation, populism is the result of lazy thinking. There, I said it. Now that I called you stupid, since you probably believe in a lot or all of those things you’ll probably hate me. But that’s the risk of going against populist myth. People have already had their minds made up for them about these things because they have failed to look at these issues critically. Instead, they have followed the path of least resistance and are floating downstream like so many dead fish. Please take some time with me, if you’ve read this far and try to look at these issues objectively. Instead of envying the rich, realize that many, if not most of these people are poorer than you in many ways and really have sad existences. This website chronicles some of the really sad stories of those “lucky” lottery winners: http://www.lottoreport.com/sadbuttrue.htm Make it a practice every day like Michael Medved does, to say “I am not a victim!” And understand that returning to a production economy, to return low paying jobs which have been shipped overseas is no way to improve an economy. Realize that in a global economy, “energy independence” isn’t a viable or even attractive goal. And this isn’t a nation of “haves” and “have nots.” We are not stuck in one particular class all our lives and we can always better ourselves financially and otherwise, so long as we live in a free country.
The more I write about this, the more important I think this topic is. It really is something that needs to be heard. I don’t care about being offensive as long as I speak the truth as best I know it. But voicing these opinions in polite conversation probably would result in bitter arguments, that is why I am writing this blog without any provocation. There is no specific impetus for this blog, only my continual displeasure with both friends and family and nearly everyone I ever attempt to talk politics with on these issues. My purpose is not to alienate, but inform. My desire is to put an end to the tactful sidestepping of populist issues. I am no longer willing to just play devil’s advocate to populist screeds. It is time to demolish these myths and insist on logical arguments. Because populism never passes a logical analysis.

Raising the Level of Discourse

I don’t know if you have noticed it or not, but with the continuing assault on the English language, with the constant abuse of expression and words in general, we’ve (collectively of course, not individually) all gotten dumber. There are countless examples of this truth everyday. From the inanity of text messaging and instant messaging to the explosion of cursing on tv and in public, communication has gone from conveying meaning to white noise. While the volume of communication taking place has grown exponentially, the actual meaning and logic conveyed has shriveled correspondingly. Obviously, part of this is a supply problem–it is very easy to communicate and because of this, people communicate without thinking about what they’re saying. But more and more we are flooded with increasingly meaningless chatter and bombarded with F-bombs.
You will notice that there is a great deal of hate being spewed out on the internet on tv and in public in general. And despite how often liberals attempt to characterize conservatives as hateful, hate mongers, and nearly every noun that they can come up with their fourth grade reading level that they can throw behind the word hate, they are the ones who spew hate. I will add that hate is a noun and a verb, not an adjective. This is another way that the less-than-thoughtful abuse the English language and display ignorance (I swear if I hear another sports coach use the words game plan as a single word, particularly a verb, I will throw the offending object out the nearest window). Perhaps it is because they often choose emotions over logic, but it is almost impossible to find a thoughtful criticism of conservative thought. Instead, 9 times out of 10 you will find vitriol, hatred, and a general explosion of caricatured generalizations that reflect more on the writer or speaker than the target of their hatred. There is no critical thinking taking place during these noxious rants, just pure animosity. And once the speaker or writer has given voice to these emotions, he hides and runs away from any criticism or objections.
Of course it isn’t only liberals who are filling the air with expletives and emotion filled, meaningless rants, but I would propose that the majority, if not the vast majority is by liberals. That which liberals might label “hate speech” could be well reasoned, cooly delivered and without any apparent animus.
Perhaps it is wishful thinking to hope that we could adopt a more thoughtful, civilized society in which people use whole words to communicate. Perhaps it is naivete to think that we might be able to express ourselves without using bodily functions and expletives as puchlines. Just call me a dreamer.