America is a divided nation. Deeply divided. The political/ideology divisions that exist today started a half century ago. Donald J. Trump is simply the ultimate end to that which was set in motion in 1968.
Division has gradually made our government institutions less effective in resolving important issues, government has become less representative of the people, party has become more important than country, and fabrication has become more important than truth. Party and party agenda, as determined by the ideologues in power, now drives whatever might remain of the mythical American dream.
Journalists and the press are now under almost daily attack by an administration more concerned with its leader’s own self image than with truth. Trump’s methodology is rather common to an authoritarian leader. He is repeatedly and methodically denigrating the credible media to convince the American people it presents fake news so a large share of the public will summarily dismiss everything it says. Especially anything thing negative about him.
We’re reminded of two well known phrases, Divide and conquer and United we stand, divided we fall. For the last half century there has been an increasing focus on, and shift towards the former rather than the later.
Near absolute power is the sought after crown jewel in politics. The party most effective at controlling the machinations of the power structure reap the reward of almost total power. Power to force their agenda and enact law enforcing it. Since 1968 the republican party and conservative movement have, by and large, been the party and ideology shaping the national political landscape. The result of this was the election of Donald J. Trump to the most powerful office in the land and across the globe. Division provided the results desired by the conservatives and the GOP.
The Trump presidency exists in a bubble, an article in The Washington Post today highlights the issue of division in our country in the present.
I think you are right. I sometimes wonder about the divide going all the way back to the civil war, where the slavery issue became a states right issue, first as
carpet bag Republicans, then as southern Democrats and finally as Nixon’s
‘southern strategy’, once again southern Republicans. Same people, same issues, just a few name changes. We look at the GOP voter demographics and see
the effects of different conservative flavors from intellectual fiscal, all the way through to the anti-intellectual evangelical fundamentalists. Strange bedfellows
all. In the end, IMO, the difference between them and the progressive is one of empathy: hence the well worn term ‘bleeding heart’. And we note the love affair with ‘TrickleDown’ (lower taxes on wealth/business and deregulate). Hard to
ignore its effect starting with Reagan: constant growing wealth disparity between
producer/worker and investor/banker. We posit that TrickleDown is a cause,
not a cure and wonder at the gullibility of the voter.
Our founders were liberals, indeed radicals in their time. But I suppose as things have changed over the last 2 & 1/4 centuries it has resulted in our founders becoming conservatives. I’m not smart enough to figure it all out. I wish I was.
As for the states right issue, well, there is some logic behind it. Had the founders insisted on a federal government that had immediate and total control over every state there would be no United States today. For individual states to have control over local and state affairs is simply good sense IMO. However, having said this states right should not supersede universal human rights nor should it supersede federal law that the congress and senate have enacted. A great topic for further discussion. I can argue either side of the states right issue comfortably because both sides have valid arguments. Yet neither side is totally right. My classical liberalism and modern realism at work here I guess.
The anti intellectual evengelicals simply have me scratching my hrad. Always have, always will. Religous conservatism is perhaps at the top of the most dangerous of the coservatisms. I’ll leave it at that.
Progressivism in the extreme I suspect is as dangerous as concervatism in the extreme. Extremism fuels and drives division. In today’s America conservatism and big L libertarianism are by far more responsible for driving American division at present than is modern lberalism. IMNHO.
My first experience in states rights was a assignment to Army officer training in Alabama in 1964. The state was seething over the issue of civil rights and in
hindsight I understand the deep cultural milieu behind the shouting and violence. I had a buddy from base, a tall Mississippi black kid, son of a physician. If we walked down the street in the nearby town, cars with the
rebel flag on front and full of young guys would slow down and shout, “Which one’s the nigger?!” Being a Wisconsin kid, I was dumbfounded by such hatred
and the society that not only tolerated, but encouraged it. From the governor
to the bull sheriff to the kids in the car, any federal interference was an impingement on their states rights. For the blacks, the feds were the only
thing between them and the state.
Here in Idaho there is also a strong states rights movement. It is driven by
lust for the many acres of federal land, national forests, land management etc.
which sit on mineral and timber resources. In other words, $$$. While the
feds are vilified for interference, the same state government thinks nothing of overriding counties and communities, in particular on the questions of firearms in public places and places of higher learning. (the legislature forced the law
despite an 80-20 opinion of Idahoans about concealed and open carry in
universities. (yes, we are talking Idahoans here)
And we recall that much of the states rights ideology derives from the time
of Indpendence, the smaller states concerned that the larger ones would outvote them on issues…particularly slavery, but also taxes and economics.
Shortly, thereafter the feds over rode the states when non other than president Washington sent troops to put down the ‘Whisky Rebellion’. So, while I understand the idea that powers not delegated in the constitution are reserved to the states, it is hard to imagine a series of states along some major river
in which some control environmental damage and others do not, or some
states airports meet entirely different standards than other states.
I guess my thoughts on state rights would be more positive say should the
federal government become despotic. A possibility perhaps. But in your
studies, you can probably provide instances of the good of states rights?
‘A divided America’-
We note the outrage in the latest Town Hall meetings of congressmen and their
constituents and consider that the Trump mandate rests on 27% of the vote. Clinton got 28.2% and a yuuuuge 44.8% did not vote. We are tempted to conclude that apathy breeds chaos.
I think you are right BB. When a majority are too lazy or disinterested to vote the result is the empowerment of the largest minority group. Trump and crew represents the smallest minority by virtue of the EC.