Recent
articles in The New York Times describe a divide between
establishment versus Tea Party party elements in the Republican
party. The pro-business group have money and the populist have
heart. Apparently the more exclusionary, through gerrymandering and
restrictive voter registration, the local elections the greater the
influence of the morally indignant so that the conflict encountered
by business interests can be greater among it's own evangelical
members than with Democrats! This conflict is an existential threat
to the G.O.P
Can
it really be that bad for the Republican Party? Yes, because the
seed taking root has a prejudice insulting away recent immigrants, no
matter how conservative and traditional they tend to be. This
demographic loss is already apparent in California and it leads to
Texas becoming a Democrat stronghold again by 2020. With Texas gone
the rest of the west will follow. Congress will have a Democrat
majority within this decade. Okay, but once thoroughly in the tank a
party has a tendency to reform itself and comeback. True, but
Republican's can not square this Authoritarian - Libertarian divide.
The
problem of misunderstood values and message is one suffered by both
parties because of the current left right political shorthand. The
left is a government is the solution ideology combined with a
forgiving moral attitude versus the right's distrust of government
combined with a strict moral message. If the construct were an
Authoritarian versus Libertarian, then one would conclude that both
Democrats and Republicans are authoritarian, with Republicans more so
and conflicted. Conflicted because a free market less government
ideology is libertarian and enforcing strict moral values is
stridently authoritarian. It's a difficult pill to swallow. One not
easily ignored by pro business types who play along with the
evangelical populists thinking what is the harm until it hurts
business so that they have to spend huge money to fight for a
reasonable candidate, such as in a recent Republican primary in
Alabama.
The
Democrat advantage in this Authoritarian – Libertarian political
spectrum is that they are consistent. The radical right's depiction
of Obama as a socialist traitor deliberately trashing the country is
just name calling to a progressive liberal well to the right of his
party's standard bearer, FDR. Republican's, on the other hand, are
forever declared Rhinos, Republican in name only, because there isn't
a way to square a small government with a large military industrial
complex. Nor a giant intruding, jailing and life wrecking machine
that is our drug enforcement regime. Finally it is difficult to
square the free flow of labor and capital with restrictive
immigration laws. The conflict must be acute among those who
understand that making a good illegal creates scarcity which then
incentivizes criminal behavior versus the simple minded instinct to
prohibit by law, better yet by constitutional amendment.
The
threat to the Republican party comes from the contraction of red
states to the lower center right, excepting Florida, region best
described as poor and stagnant. In the vacuum of the blue states a
Libertarian party may take hold where it would be embarrassing for
those not caring for Democrat hand holding to join those that
insist that creation theory is scientific. Congressman Ron Paul's
quixotic run for the Republican nomination showed that an old man
could garner energetic youthful support. Possibly big university
towns would be the seedling grounds of Libertarians. An alternative
party such as Green is authoritarian and therefore susceptible to be
co-opted by Democrats in such environment. Libertarians on the other
hand have an open field. Also they could be cooperative rather than
belligerent with progressive legislators in state and federal
capitals with the following Pac Man proposition. Support for a new
legislative proposal is given if the proponent would just write in
the elimination of ten older useless laws and regulations.
