Categories
Politics

Liberal, Conservative, Independent, Centrist, Moderate, Radical, Wingnut, Snowflake?

So many labels! How’s a responsible citizen to choose? Things used to be much simpler. People were Republican or Democrat; they disagreed on specific issues but agreed on certain foundational principles. They for the most part were cordial to each other, and each respected the other’s right to hold a different opinion. They could have conversations, sometimes heated ones, even verbally duke it out, and then have a drink together at the end of the day. Candidates for office were more or less acceptable to both parties; people preferred their own party’s candidate but could somewhat graciously grit their teeth, accept, and live with the other candidate if that person became the majority’s choice.

That was then, before mayhem ensued and the fragments flew. That was before the Internet, which opened the door to daily conversations with complete strangers, conversations which are anything but cordial. That was before the lines in the sand became thick walls separating Americans of different opinions into tribes and cults, each having its own inviolable code of belief and conduct which anyone who wishes to be a member must agree to. That was before cordial conversation died and was replaced by shouting across the thick walls of separation and never listening to the other group’s response.

There’s so much to say about the demise of our two-party system, but what troubles me most are the other labels applied to various groups, such as “liberal” and “conservative,” labels which used to be descriptive of the groups’ positions and values but which now have devolved to nothing more than disparaging names spewed in disgust by opposing tribes. Most troubling to me, as a word lover, is that labels are no longer accurately indicative of what each group stands for; and in some cases, even those who ascribe to a particular way of thinking find themselves baffled by the confusing disconnect between standard definitions of terms and their meaning in actual usage.

Am I a liberal or a progressive? Some say they’re two names for the same thing; others clearly spell out the nuances of difference between the two. I’m not sure I really care, just so I’m identified as being on what I consider the side most conducive to sane government and peaceful, loving, compassionate coexistence. By strictest definition, I even think of myself as conservative: one who loves and wishes to preserve the institutions which are the bedrock of our social order. Today, however, I would never whisper that word in reference to myself because of the craziness currently associated with it.

To sort this out, let’s just go ahead and begin with Donald Trump, shall we? As the whole planet knows, he won the presidency as the Republican candidate, but he in no way embodies the historic principles or values of the Republican Party. Let’s just say he is NO Abe Lincoln! He’s not even a Ronald Reagan or a George W. Bush. Trump is neither Republican nor Democrat; he’s an opportunist. He’ll say anything, do anything, and join any party necessary to achieve his own narcissistic ends.

According to a June 16, 2015, article in the Washington Times, Trump has changed his party affiliation at least five times since the late 1980s. The article says he first registered as a Republican in 1987; by my math, he would have been in his 40s at that time, which would make him a late-comer to the party. In 1999, he switched to the Independent Party; in 2001, he became a Democrat; in 2009, he returned to the Republican Party for two years before deciding in 2011 that he wanted no party affiliation. In April 2012, he registered once again as a Republican–just in time for his 2015 announcement that he wanted to be the party’s presidential nominee. What a coincidence! Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, whom you may recognize as senior advisers to the current “president,” were unable to vote for him in New York’s Republican primary because they were not at that time registered as Republicans.

Why does any of this matter? This family’s loose connection to the party which they ostensibly represent says a whole lot, I think. First, it says that Donald Trump is an opportunist who would have resurrected the Whig Party or run on the Magic Dragon or Purple People Eater ticket if it would have gotten him elected. He has no loyalty to the GOP yet demands the party’s unquestioned loyalty to him. Pre-Tea Party Republicans, those still trying to be the standard bearers for the Party of Lincoln, are beginning to admit defeat and abandon the ship before it hits bottom.

Mark P. Painter, a 30-year judge and author of six books, explains his reasons for leaving the GOP:

This was once my party. And even when the wingnuts took it over, I had hopes for a return to sanity. I had worked for many candidates, was president of the 11th Ward Republican Club for 10 years, and was a candidate and officeholder myself. . . . . . .

I took pride in belonging to the party of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, Dwight Eisenhower and Ronald Reagan.

Now we have a Republican Party that stands for cruelty, hatred, bullying, proud stupidity, trade barriers, science denial, massive deficits and strangling debt. The president wants to build a colossal boondoggle of a wall to keep ‘them’ out. If Reagan were here today, he would say ‘Mr. Trump, don’t build that wall.’

Trump is a danger to our nation and a disgrace to our party. But he can’t accomplish this perversion of America alone. The Mitch McConnells and Paul Ryans are equally culpable. They are fellow travelers with disaster. The next generations will pay for their folly.

Paul Best, who says “Trump was the first Republican nominee I did not vote for in a presidential election,” is also finding the exit, according to a letter he published in the Chicago Tribune. Steve Schmidt, prominent and widely respected Republican strategist, this week announced his departure from the party he has served because of Donald Trump’s policy on separating children from their parents as a deterrent to those crossing our southern border in search of asylum. On June 20 2018, he tweeted:

29 years and nine months ago I registered to vote and became a member of The Republican Party which was founded in 1854 to oppose slavery and stand for the dignity of human life. Today I renounce my membership in the Republican Party. It is fully the party of Trump.

In a series of tweets written on the same day, he added:

It [the GOP] is corrupt, indecent and immoral. With the exception of a few Governors like Baker, Hogan and Kasich it is filled with feckless cowards who disgrace and dishonor the legacies of the party’s greatest leaders. This child separation policy is connected to the worst abuses of humanity in our history. It is connected by the same evil that separated families during slavery and dislocated tribes and broke up Native American families. It is immoral and must be repudiated. Our country is in trouble. Our politics are badly broken. The first step to a season of renewal in our land is the absolute and utter repudiation of Trump and his vile enablers in the 2018 election by electing Democratic majorities. I do not say this as an advocate of a progressive agenda. I say it as someone who retains belief in DEMOCRACY and decency.

Those are damning words from a lifelong Republican voter and public servant.

George Will, well-known Washington Post columnist, renounced his GOP membership in 2016, switching to “unaffiliated” and urging other Republicans to do the same. Will cited Paul Ryan’s endorsement of Trump for the 2020 election as the trigger for his decision. Mary Matalan, another long-time strategist, left the party in May 2016; her departure, she says, was not related to Trump. I would add that Trump, as I have said many times, is the result–not the cause–of the problems in the Republican Party; so it doesn’t much matter whether one leaves directly because of Trump or because of the internal rot that caused Trump to become the party’s nominee.

I come from a Republican family, and most of my extended family are still Republican. My stepfather joined our clan in 1973 and was the first Democrat in the immediate family. My sister switched her party affiliation when the GOP nominated Ronald Reagan; my mother, the first time George W. Bush was elected; and I, the second time he was elected (I gave them one more chance to get it right).

The Republican Party freed the slaves while the Democrats fought against the passage of the 13th Amendment, yet today it’s the Republicans who are holding over 2000 children hostage in cages and in some cases can’t return them because they forgot to keep track of who and where their parents are, while the Democrats are calling for their release. Don’t misunderstand. I think some of our Democratic officials are rather feckless in their opposition and at times more talk than action, but at least none of them are supporting the continued internment of these innocent children.

The dilemma for today’s intelligent, responsible, morally upright Republicans–now that many analysts agree the GOP has become fully the Party of Trump–is whether to stay and attempt to save it and return it to its former position of respect or to save their own reputations by dropping out. Those choosing the latter option feel they can do more good by joining forces with like-minded people of other parties and political persuasions.

Perhaps the most confusing, misunderstood, and misused words in the jumbled jargon of today’s politics are the words “liberal” and “conservative.” The website lps.org offers a comparison of “liberals” and “conservatives.”

Liberals generally believe in governmental action to achieve equal opportunity and equality for all, and that it is the duty of the government to reduce community issues and to protect civil liberties and individual and human rights. Also believe the role of the government should be to guarantee that no one is in need. Liberal policies generally emphasize the need for the government to solve people’s problems. Liberals are often referred to as being on the LEFT when put into a political spectrum. Democrats are often viewed as more liberal.

In contrast,

Conservatives generally believe in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional American values, and a strong national defense. Also believe the role of government should be to provide people the freedom necessary to pursue their own goals. Conservative policies generally emphasize empowerment of the individual to solve problems. Conservatives are often referred to as being on the RIGHT when put into a political spectrum. Republicans are often viewed as more conservative.

Although there are clearly shades of blue, I think they may not be quite as confusing as today’s shades of red. A favorite article, which I review periodically, especially during election season, is called “Why Voters Should Turn from the Pseudoconservative Party of the Great Recession,” by Louis Guenin.

Edmund Burke (1729-1797), widely regarded as the Father of Conservatism, wrote that conservatism ‘advocates esteem for government and established institutions. It holds that within them lies an accumulated wisdom that citizens and their leaders should respect and consult. Revering the established order, its constitution, and its history, conservatism cultivates a cautious disposition’ (paraphrased by Louis Guenin, Huffington Post, 24 Dec 2012).

Guenin adds:

Today’s Republican Party consists of pseudoconservatives, wearers of the ‘conservative’ mantle who repudiate conservatism. Rather than esteeming government, they disdain it. They seem to delight in ridiculing government’s failings.

Mr. Guenin further suggests that liberals and conservatives have somewhat switched places in today’s politics:

The politicians who now travel under the banner of ‘conservatism’ happen to espouse views and methods that . . . are incompatible with the philosophy bearing that name. Meanwhile members of the opposing political party have imbibed a dose of the wisdom conveyed by conservatism.

Other standard definitions of “conservatism” include this one from an online dictionary:

Conservatism (or conservativism) is any political philosophy that favours tradition (in the sense of various religious, cultural, or nationally-defined beliefs and customs) in the face of external forces for change, and is critical of proposals for radical social change.

Today’s conservatives also belie that definition; but then, according to Corey Robin in The Reactionary Mind, the conservative movement has always been characterized by “racism, populism, violence, and a pervasive contempt for custom, convention, law, institutions, and established elites.” Now THAT sounds like the conservatives I’ve talked to lately! “From its inception,” says Robin, “conservatism has relied on some mix of these elements to build a broad-based movement of elites and masses against the emancipation of the lower orders.” He goes on to call Donald Trump “the most successful practitioner of the mass politics of privilege in contemporary America.”

Not only can Donald Trump not be called a Republican in the historic sense, he can’t be called conservative either, unless you agree with Corey Robin’s assessment that the movement is characterized by “racism, populism, violence, and . . . contempt for” all that forms the foundation of our country, our government, and our culture. By that definition, he’s the most fitting standard bearer ever born.

Today, our “conservative” leader stood on a stage in Helsinki, Finland, and denigrated our own intelligence agencies, previous government leaders, and the work of independent counsel Robert Mueller while heaping praise on our chief adversary and proclaiming that he accepts at face value the words of Vladimir Putin who says he did not interfere in our 2016 election. Even if Trump did not collude with Russia in 2016 (and I believe he absolutely DID!), he’s colluding now. He’s destroying every pillar of our democracy under the flag of “conservatism,” supported and defended by the “conservative” masses. This treasonous man and his treasonous followers need to find another label for themselves, because they are not conservative. True conservatives want to conserve, not destroy.

The Free Dictionary (online) offers this definition of “conservatism”: “The inclination, especially in politics, to maintain the existing or traditional order. Caution or moderation, as in behavior or outlook.” Never in the history of our country have leaders acted with less caution or moderation or exhibited less respect for the existing or traditional order. Donald Trump would burn the whole country to the ground and sell the ashes if doing so would further enrich him and make him more powerful, and his base of deplorables would cheer him on, even as they themselves were being destroyed. The fact that all of this is happening in the innocuous-sounding name of “conservatism” makes it all the more sinister and deceptive. We liberals, in the prevailing view, are the evil ones who want to steal their guns, allow immigrants to come in and kill our citizens, and allow Muslims to establish sharia law.

One of my favorite quotations from Ralph Waldo Emerson is this: “A sect or party is an elegant incognito devised to save a [person] from the vexation of thinking.” I think he nailed it. Religious affiliations and political parties allow us the security of being surrounded by like-minded people and the luxury of having someone else articulate the beliefs to which we profess allegiance, whether or not we know or understand them. Our country has reached a crisis; this is emergency mode. We no longer have the luxury of letting someone else do the thinking and tell us where to sign our names. Every single citizen has to think and act. Republican or Democrat, liberal or conservative–whatever those terms mean!–the only label that matters now is “American.” Americans have been attacked by a common enemy, and it’s up to each of us to respond. Either we ALL win or we ALL lose. I’d like to win!