The Republican Divide

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.