|
What would you call a president who raised taxes on the rich, introduced new environmental protection measures, proposed a universal health care system and basic minimum income? Why sure, that must be a liberal democrat. Quite liberal too. Even moderate Democrats don't dare to actually propose a minimum income (though all developed countries, except us have one, acheived through universal income support). The man I speak of, however, was not a Democrat. It was Richard Nixon. Think Nixon was an analomy within the GOP? Nope. Nixon repesented what was then the mainstream of the GOP. Eisenhower and Ford, would probably be denounced as "socialists" by modern day conservatives (Eisenhower actually refered to those Republicans who wanted to undo the New Deal as "stupid" in a letter he sent to his borther - yes, he actually wrote "they are stupid"). It was not until the late 1970s and early 1980 that Goldwater-style redicals (by the standards of the time, today's GOP would have been considered radically right-wing), hi-jacked the GOP and pushed it to the right. As Paul Krugman, the famous Princeton economist and winner of the John Bates Clark Medal (one of the most coveted awards in the field of economics) points out, In addition to proposing universal health care, Nixon pushed for a gurnateed minimum income. On the revenue side, Nixon pushed through a tax increase in 1969, including creation of the alternative minimum tax, which was intended to crack down on wealthy Americans... On another front he passed the Clean Air Act, and sent dozens of environmental measures to Congress... Nixon, in short, was a transitional figure. Although he used of the political tactics associated with movement conservatism, he was a pargmatist rather than an ideologue, as were many Republicans. The character of the Republican Party changed rapidly in the post-Nixon years... Ronald Reagan was the first movement conservative president. Within Ronald Reagan's inner circle, views that had once been confined to what Eisenhower descrived as a "tiny splinter group" reigned... [While Reagan's ability to push through as much conservative policies as he would have liked was limited by a Democratic House and the remains of the moderate GOP]... after Reagan... the GOP became thoroughly radicalized. Consider the 2004 Platform of the Texas Republican Party... It calls for the elimination of federal agencies 'including, but not limited to, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tabacco and Firearms; the position of Surgeon General; the Environmental Protection Agency; the Departments of Energy, Housing and Urban Development, Health and Human Services, Education, Commerce, and Labor.' The platform also calls for the privitization of Social Security and the abolition of the minimum wage. In effect Texas Republicans want to repeal the New Deal completely [like the folks whom Eisenhower called "stupid"]... The moder Republican Party, then, has been taken over by radicals, people who want to undo the twentieth century. There hasn't been any corresponding radicalization of the Democratic Party, so the right-wing takeover of the GOP is the underlying cause of today's bitter partisanship. (Concience of a Liberal, W. W. Norton, 2007, pp. 161-163) Modern day "movement conservatives" would love America to forget about the GOP mainstream of the 50s, 60s and 70s. They admire Reagan and Goldwater, while hardly mentioning Ford, Eishenhower, Rockefeller, LaGuardia or Nixon. McCain was one of the few remaining moderate Republicans, until he set his sights on the presidency in 2005 and converted to being a movement conservative, complete with all the rimmings, like adherence to the supply-side dogma that is dismissed by most economists as pure hogwash. Here is the answer as to why our current political discourse is so tense and partisanship so pervasive. The pragmatic and moderate GOP has been taken over by die-hard right-wing ideologues.
Trackback(0)
 |
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
