"This was back when the far right wing of the Republican party was called “the Tea Party”—a populist movement that arose after the government bailed out the investment banks who’d caused the economic collapse but let the people who’d lost their homes and savings go broke." Thanks for the nod! I was one of those people... 10 years later I'm still living in an apartment.
"I'm starting to think I was right the first time.": You were.
Those "guarantees about security and stability"? Do appreciate that for many Americans, they were frustrations. The "conservatives" who raised me yearned to return to what they considered the good old days, when brown people and women, let alone homosexuals and atheists, "knew their place" or were forcibly "taught" it. However, back in the 1970s, they despaired of overcoming the "security and stability" of the American system, which had allowed a modicum of progress. Then demagogues like Roger Ailes backed by plutocrats like Rupert Murdoch inflamed and exploited widespread bigotry and superstition on an unprecedented scale. As Republican presidents became increasingly sociopathic, the "base" became increasingly hopeful. With the ascendancy of Donald Trump, long-cherished goals such as overturning Roe v. Wade came within reach. Now, at last, it seems the "security and stability" of the American system can be overcome after all.
That, by the way, is why I write "conservatives", with quotation marks. It's conventional to call them conservatives, but with respect to the USA of my childhood, they are, in fact, radicals. They're more than willing to replace American democracy, badly flawed though it already is, with a sham of voter suppression, gerrymandering, and outright fraud (e.g., "alternative electors") in order to maintain the dominance of their tribe. They'll burn down the country rather than accept sharing it with the rest of us as anything like equals.
"So far as I can tell Republicans don't seem to experience any cognitive dissonance between ends and means at all": Frankly, people like the ones who raised me are amoral. That is, they don't really believe in universal moral standards. Their moralistic rhetoric is mere "virtue signaling" toward other members of the tribe and one-upmanship toward outsiders. They would vehemently reject this characterization, but actions such as those you've mentioned speak much, much louder than words.
"there's also something alarmingly ineffectual, dithery and Weimarish about it all": Weimarish indeed. In 1924, the Weimar Republic sentenced the leader of the failed "beer hall putsch", a fellow named Adolf Hitler, to five years in prison. They released him after a bit over eight months, for good behavior and for the sake of healing, unity, and all that.
Also, by the way, "The Tea Party proved, in hindsight, to have been a proto-fascist movement, the larval form of Trumpism ... the party ... is now unabashedly authoritarian, racist and theocratic": The character of both the "Tea Party" and the Republican party was evident to some of us at the time. For example, ten years ago, during the "Tea Party" era and well before the rise of Cheetolini, Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein, writing in the Washington Post, commented as follows:
"The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition."
Even at the time, that was putting it mildly. It was mild, because Mann and Ornstein aren't radicals or even left-leaning: Mann was and is an employee of the Brookings Institution, and Ornstein was an employee of the American Enterprise Institute.
If you didn't have, as I had, the misfortune to grow up among Republican "base" voters, I suppose it's difficult to comprehend how delusional and vicious they are. I've seen the current debacle and worse coming for decades, because it's what they've always wanted, and their irrational fears and hatreds are useful to those "people who regard them as livestock". However, even now, most nice, liberal Americans seem to be in denial about what they're up against. They still expect politics as usual will prevail. It's long past time to grasp that, indeed, "the other team has brought guns".
Hey, you're the one who said "in hindsight". I assumed you meant it.
Like I said, most nice, liberal Americans seem to be in denial about what they're up against. That was true ten years ago, and amazingly, it still is. You're not, but far too many decent people were then and still are.
That under belly has been burbling a long time witness Philip Roth Plot Against America 2004 back to the FDR Lindbergh Ford Hitler nexus mess keeps seething
Why do we have to have flawed humans running for office and not just perfect saints? /s Using years old behaviors to disqualify candidates seems like a mistake. I would rather look at "patterns" of behavior. Sadly, it seems the sociopaths who can lie so sincerely are now the most successful candidates. I would like a law that makes it a felony to knowingly lie to obtain public office.
Meanwhile the movie The Blob seems appropriate. Or even better Eugene Ionesco play The Rinoceros
"This was back when the far right wing of the Republican party was called “the Tea Party”—a populist movement that arose after the government bailed out the investment banks who’d caused the economic collapse but let the people who’d lost their homes and savings go broke." Thanks for the nod! I was one of those people... 10 years later I'm still living in an apartment.
"I'm starting to think I was right the first time.": You were.
Those "guarantees about security and stability"? Do appreciate that for many Americans, they were frustrations. The "conservatives" who raised me yearned to return to what they considered the good old days, when brown people and women, let alone homosexuals and atheists, "knew their place" or were forcibly "taught" it. However, back in the 1970s, they despaired of overcoming the "security and stability" of the American system, which had allowed a modicum of progress. Then demagogues like Roger Ailes backed by plutocrats like Rupert Murdoch inflamed and exploited widespread bigotry and superstition on an unprecedented scale. As Republican presidents became increasingly sociopathic, the "base" became increasingly hopeful. With the ascendancy of Donald Trump, long-cherished goals such as overturning Roe v. Wade came within reach. Now, at last, it seems the "security and stability" of the American system can be overcome after all.
That, by the way, is why I write "conservatives", with quotation marks. It's conventional to call them conservatives, but with respect to the USA of my childhood, they are, in fact, radicals. They're more than willing to replace American democracy, badly flawed though it already is, with a sham of voter suppression, gerrymandering, and outright fraud (e.g., "alternative electors") in order to maintain the dominance of their tribe. They'll burn down the country rather than accept sharing it with the rest of us as anything like equals.
"So far as I can tell Republicans don't seem to experience any cognitive dissonance between ends and means at all": Frankly, people like the ones who raised me are amoral. That is, they don't really believe in universal moral standards. Their moralistic rhetoric is mere "virtue signaling" toward other members of the tribe and one-upmanship toward outsiders. They would vehemently reject this characterization, but actions such as those you've mentioned speak much, much louder than words.
"there's also something alarmingly ineffectual, dithery and Weimarish about it all": Weimarish indeed. In 1924, the Weimar Republic sentenced the leader of the failed "beer hall putsch", a fellow named Adolf Hitler, to five years in prison. They released him after a bit over eight months, for good behavior and for the sake of healing, unity, and all that.
Also, by the way, "The Tea Party proved, in hindsight, to have been a proto-fascist movement, the larval form of Trumpism ... the party ... is now unabashedly authoritarian, racist and theocratic": The character of both the "Tea Party" and the Republican party was evident to some of us at the time. For example, ten years ago, during the "Tea Party" era and well before the rise of Cheetolini, Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein, writing in the Washington Post, commented as follows:
"The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition."
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/lets-just-say-it-the-republicans-are-the-problem/2012/04/27/gIQAxCVUlT_story.html)
Even at the time, that was putting it mildly. It was mild, because Mann and Ornstein aren't radicals or even left-leaning: Mann was and is an employee of the Brookings Institution, and Ornstein was an employee of the American Enterprise Institute.
If you didn't have, as I had, the misfortune to grow up among Republican "base" voters, I suppose it's difficult to comprehend how delusional and vicious they are. I've seen the current debacle and worse coming for decades, because it's what they've always wanted, and their irrational fears and hatreds are useful to those "people who regard them as livestock". However, even now, most nice, liberal Americans seem to be in denial about what they're up against. They still expect politics as usual will prevail. It's long past time to grasp that, indeed, "the other team has brought guns".
Please see my decade-long career as political cartoonist
Hey, you're the one who said "in hindsight". I assumed you meant it.
Like I said, most nice, liberal Americans seem to be in denial about what they're up against. That was true ten years ago, and amazingly, it still is. You're not, but far too many decent people were then and still are.
That under belly has been burbling a long time witness Philip Roth Plot Against America 2004 back to the FDR Lindbergh Ford Hitler nexus mess keeps seething
Heartbreaking and fantastic. Thank you.
Why do we have to have flawed humans running for office and not just perfect saints? /s Using years old behaviors to disqualify candidates seems like a mistake. I would rather look at "patterns" of behavior. Sadly, it seems the sociopaths who can lie so sincerely are now the most successful candidates. I would like a law that makes it a felony to knowingly lie to obtain public office.
Meanwhile the movie The Blob seems appropriate. Or even better Eugene Ionesco play The Rinoceros
Gee, these are quite the movie reviews. Laughing/not laughing
Another brilliant essay. Now what? Pack the Supreme Court and abolish the electoral college. Restore power to the many rather than the few.