A Question of Conservative Philosophy

[Pablo Sanchez]

The Republicans, lately at least, have been solidifying more and more the notion that everyone is on the same sheet of music and adhered strictly to all their dogma, or they're run out of the party.

This isn't a new phenomena as it pertains to the House of Representatives, in which the GOP has been very regimented and ideologically homogeneous for more than a decade--Tom "The Hammer" DeLay was famous for always delivering lockstep voting from the House Republicans. The base is now demanding the same purity from other elected Republicans who previously maintained some independence, like governors and senators. I think a big part of it is the delayed recognition that the GOP leadership doesn't deliver on its promises and has different goals from its base. The majority of the party's votes were supplied by the base, who were the social conservatives, but the party's policies were set by the minority of neoconservatives and pro-business Republicans, often with an eye towards attracting just enough independents to let the party win elections.

Now the base has finally realized that the leadership isn't giving them what they want, really has no intention of giving it to them, and they're asserting themselves. Because they can't recognize the real problem--their policy desires, a ban on abortion being the best example, are unfeasible and moreover can't attract a governing majority of voters--they're blaming moderates for preventing them from getting what they want. The notion that everybody is supposed to be marching to the same conservative drum is not new, what's new is the base demanding in no uncertain terms that it actually happens. It's going to be highly destructive to the GOP if it continues to go on.

[Darth Wong]

It's not just the Republican politicians who move in lock-step; it's their entire base. You can argue with a Republican on one forum, go to a different forum, and hear the exact same arguments and opinions, almost word for word, from a totally different Republican.

Even when they express doubts about the party, they all express the same doubts. We saw that in the most recent election, where everyone from the Republican candidates down to the fans were criticizing the Republican party's own performance over the past 8 years ... in exactly the same ways, using exactly the same carefully chosen targets. It's just a carefully orchestrated show in which they collectively absolve themselves of responsibility for their past mistakes.

It's too bad they oppose collectivism so much: they're actually superb collectivists.

[Knife]

This isn't a new phenomena as it pertains to the House of Representatives, in which the GOP has been very regimented and ideologically homogeneous for more than a decade--Tom "The Hammer" DeLay was famous for always delivering lockstep voting from the House Republicans. The base is now demanding the same purity from other elected Republicans who previously maintained some independence, like governors and senators.

Don't you feel, though, that this is the spoiled brat syndrome? Not necessarily a realistic party plank?

I think a big part of it is the delayed recognition that the GOP leadership doesn't deliver on its promises and has different goals from its base.

I think this is key. Party goals can be designed not to be met, so they can have it still as a plank.

The majority of the party's votes were supplied by the base, who were the social conservatives, but the party's policies were set by the minority of neoconservatives and pro-business Republicans, often with an eye towards attracting just enough independents to let the party win elections.[e pr/quote]

Hence the problem they have now. The big tent is crumbling now. Neo-cons and bible thumpers are still strong but, short of needing the GOPers to bail themselves out, the big business faction has gotten marginalized and fucked in the last decade by the GOP. If it wasn't for Wall Street fucking us and wanting safe harbor, I'd say the GOPers would be less than the 21% they are now.

Now the base has finally realized that the leadership isn't giving them what they want, really has no intention of giving it to them, and they're asserting themselves.

Whose base? Oh yea, the neo-cons or the the bible thumpers. They got rid of the other factions bases.

Because they can't recognize the real problem--their policy desires, a ban on abortion being the best example, are unfeasible and moreover can't attract a governing majority of voters--they're blaming moderates for preventing them from getting what they want. The notion that everybody is supposed to be marching to the same conservative drum is not new, what's new is the base demanding in no uncertain terms that it actually happens. It's going to be highly destructive to the GOP if it continues to go on.

Their problem was success. With a 'big tent' they had enough ideas to dominate for decades. They got used to that, yet got arrogant and believed their base was for granted or even unified. Now they are eating their own and still expect the same goals and outcome.

[Knife]

It's not just the Republican politicians who move in lock-step; it's their entire base. You can argue with a Republican on one forum, go to a different forum, and hear the exact same arguments and opinions, almost word for word, from a totally different Republican.

I run across this myself. I attribute it to the arrogance of being on top for so long.

Even when they express doubts about the party, they all express the same doubts. We saw that in the most recent election, where everyone from the Republican candidates down to the fans were criticizing the Republican party's own performance over the past 8 years ... in exactly the same ways, using exactly the same carefully chosen targets. It's just a carefully orchestrated show in which they collectively absolve themselves of responsibility for their past mistakes.

Same arrogance but they regress to something more base than party...ideology. That's why you have all those 'conservatives first' fucks instead of GOPers. They loved the big tent when it got them what they wanted, hate it when they lost and blame the big tent for it.

I wouldn't have voted for him, but look at Mitt Romney. All the good things of a GOPer and even a good Conservative except he was a Mormon. Granted, Utah GOPers went nuts for him but that was BECAUSE he's a Mormon. Southern GOPers, whom are a bigger chunk of the GOP,don't like Mormons and told the uppity mormons they could vote for good standing GOPers but Mormon GOPers aren't allowed.

See, arrogance.

It's too bad they oppose collectivism so much: they're actually superb collectivists.

Walks like a duck, smells like a duct...etc. Willing to let all others in, even by pretext, as long as they vote the 'right' way.

[The Yosemite Bear]

They appear to be about projecting a lot, gays are evil, so we will let in the closet types that like the really kinky stuff, socialism & collectivism are bad, so we will provide welfare for big corperate enities and demand everyone toe our line.

[Jalinth]

Having not found or heard satisfactory answers to this question, I figured I'd ask it here. I ask this because it appears that nowadays, with few exceptions, the agenda of the Religious Right is inextricable from that of purveyors of Conservative philosophy.

How does the U.S. Conservative philosophy of "small government" and "keeping government out of people's lives" fit with pushing to have the governments have a dictum in:

A) who one can and cannot marry (e.g. gay marriage);
or B) what one can and cannot place into their bodies (e.g. the War on Drugs)?

You are assuming that the "conservative philosophy" you quoted and the GOP version are actually related in anything but name. The "conservative" end of US politics at one time had social, fiscal and libertarian (the moderate strain) "factions" under it. At one time, all three wanted a small government for different reasons. Then the religious right got pulled in/pushed themselves in and viewed that government was a way to have everyone live the "right" way. So small government wasn't a good thing anymore for them.

Fiscal conservatives became basically sheep with a skin of an endangered tiger - people talked like fiscal conservatives, but the numbers walking the walk are pretty damn thin. Spouting "We'll cut the deficit by eliminating waste" and other platitudes without being willing to make the hard choices. Libertarians withdrew/were ejected outside of the US west - some were labelled RINOs (Republican in Name only), others drifted to the Democrats, or withdrew

Then you had the "neo" conservative influence come in. Not sure how I'd ascribe this philosophy barring that it was a cluster fuck in practice.

As far as the war on drugs, I'd call it a bizarre worldview held by US politicians generally. How many high-profile liberal ones have argued for it? Almost like a cult - they can't accept evidence to the contrary. 2+2=5