Sunday, October 02, 2022

What Now Is The Republican Party?

It's the elephant in the national living room. Parties no longer exist; only personalities do. Why else are MTG and Boebert and Gaetz actually national figures? No political party in American history would tolerate them on their ballot, much less in elected office. Imagine what “Mr. Sam” Rayburn would do to them, or how LBJ would have handled Cruz or Rubio or even McConnell when he was Senate Majority Leader. But their power came from having a party behind them. Even McConnell is starting to realize the problem of not having a party.

Somewhere in the’60’s, in a fit of democratic reform, we began to do away with smoke-filled rooms and conventions where candidates were chosen by horse-trading. We slowly but surely turned it over to the people. And there our new troubles began.

The apotheosis of that noble effort at democratizing the selection of the POTUS is Donald Trump; and the fear we will re-elect him (we won’t). But we didn’t come to this pass because of Newt Gingrich or Rush Limbaugh or Barry Goldwater or even the Koch Brothers. We did it because we failed to heed the lessons of the “Founding Fathers.”

You have no idea how much I hate saying that.

I learned (didn’t you?) that the writers of the Constitution had a horror of unleashed democracy. Of course blacks were not citizens, but only white, male landowners were citizens who could vote. Women and non-landowners were not to be trusted; or allowed. Senators were not elected directly (the better to control the passions of even the landowners), and Presidents were elected through a “college” that was ceremonially overseen by the Congress, to underscore where the power in government lay: through the elected representatives of the white, male landowners.

Everything as far from the hoi polloi as possible, in other words.

The hope was that political parties would not arise. That was dashed as soon as Washington ended his term. But even as democratic reforms changed the face of the Constitution, that resistance to direct democracy remained when it came to choosing Presidential candidates. Yes, it was a terrible system that yielded only two viable candidates, always white men. Efforts to open it to women and blacks started in the’60’s, and from those good intentions we paved the road to…Trump.

Before primaries replaced conventions (what’s the point of conventions now?), no major American political party would have let Trump near their selection process. Our problem now is not that we have gone collectively mad; the problem is that we flew too close to the mob the “Founding Fathers” feared.

Who can deny it? Our greatest political problem is that our politics is in thrall to the craziest people in America, the “base” of the party. Not so long ago that was the Democrats (McGovern? And we had to learn our lesson with Clinton?). But the GOP has put it on steroids and LSD. They’re conspiracy mad and even the lunatic fringe thinks they’re beyond the fringe ( Democrats want to kill Republicans?), and our best hope as a nation is voter turnout of ahistorical proportions. In short, this is the problem the “Founders” tried to warn us about. Or near enough for dammit, anyway. And where do we go from here?

I don’t have a solution to this problem (more fool me), but I think we need to at least recognize the real problem. Yes we need to build more equitable and inclusive political systems, but what we’ve done so far is unleash the worst in democratic rule. Clearly we need to address that. What I’m proposing is simply that we strike at the roots of this tree, rather than at its branches.

I do think culture is an unappreciated component here. Of course it is the culture of racism (which literally began with Columbus) that is still the main problem. But the culture of democracy (v. mob rule or fascism) is strong, too, and that’s a powerful countervailing force. I truly don’t think Trump is getting back into the White House, even as a visitor. The democratic culture of America, both social and political, simply won’t support him. We’re not on the verge of collapse and chaos, we’re simply on the edge of change.

And I think that change is going to go the right way. But it would help us to recognize it for what it is; and to recognize what we need. We need to change the way we choose our elected officials. I don’t know what that looks like, but nobody knew what getting it out of smoke filled rooms looked like either; not at first. Maybe ranked choice voting is the way. Maybe not. But we need first to identify the problem correctly. And the answer to “what is the problem?” ain’t “partisanship” and the solution ain’t a “third way.”

Beyond that? We gotta work on it.*

*(Whaddaya want for what you pay for this? World peace? 🌍  ☮️ 

2 comments:

  1. Two additional actions have weakened parties. Citizen United freed candidates from the party funding structure. The parties just wouldn't fund fringe candidates and on the whole without adequate funding most remained fringe. With Citizen United, Peter Thiel can give us J.F. Vance. Previously, Vance would have suffered a humiliating defeat because he wouldn't have been able to raise funds.

    The second was what turned out to be the negative consequences of virtue. We got rid of earmarks. The consequences were the parties lost a lot of leverage over their elected members. Previously a member of Congress could vote for legislation that might be cast as negative, but get an earmark to make up for it that was popular at home. Without that, why would anyone vote for anything that might anger your base? The result is more and more extremism.

    There is a lot more at play, but here are two places to consider. As for Citizens United, this SCOTUS will never reverse it. The second has been slowly weakened by the Democrats, understand it strengthens the party. Be a fringe a fringe jerk and you get nothing. That helps.

    ReplyDelete
  2. My only quibble is that we had immediate factionalization during Washington's first term in the form of an Anti-Administration "party" (a wafer thing distinction), which evolved into the Democratic-Republicans in 1792.

    ReplyDelete