Posted on 04/01/2015 6:12:46 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Internal dissension not only blunts the Republican attack; it hands Democrats a convenient stick with which to beat them. No one on the right, whether conservative or Republican, thinks this is a healthy situation. Why, then, is it the case? What is it that unites Democrats that Republicans lack?
Anyone who pays attention to politics can see that when Democrats attack, they speak from the same text, and when they vote, they march in lockstep. If one Democrat says the wealthy must pay their “fair share,” all Democrats do — regardless of the merits of the charge. If their leaders say Republicans want to shut down the government in order to deny Americans affordable care, the rest of the party will follow their lead — whether the claim is true or not. When a key program like Obamacare is the issue, not only do Democrats back it with one voice, but every player on the political left — journalists, professors, talk-show hosts, union heads, MoveOn radicals, and Occupy anarchists — falls into line and promotes it with virtually identical words. They act in “solidarity” in fair political weather and foul, and they do it even for a program like Obamacare, which (as some of them must surely see) is ill-conceived, falsely presented, incompetently executed, and fiscally unsustainable.
When the voices of the Left all come together, the amplification is stupefying. The result is that a morally bankrupt, politically tyrannical, economically destructive party is able to set the course of an entire nation and put it on the road to disaster.
Republicans, in contrast, speak with multiple voices, and in words that often have no relation to each other. If one Republican says “defund Obamacare,” another says, “fund the government,” even if that might mean funding Obamacare. The argument and the dissension are over tactics, not substance, since all Republicans oppose Obamacare. If one Republican says “don’t intervene in Syria,” another says “don’t hesitate”; if one says “Obama-supported immigration reform is a dagger aimed at American sovereignty,” another says “opposition to immigration reform is a death-knell for our party.” This, again, is a tactical division, since all Republicans support enforceable borders.
These contending party voices are multiplied by conservative talking heads in the nation’s media who march to their own political drums. The result is a cacophony of talking points, which in the end point nowhere. Because Republicans speak with many voices, their message is often difficult, if not impossible, to make out.
Internal dissension not only blunts the Republican attack; it hands Democrats a convenient stick with which to beat them. No one on the right, whether conservative or Republican, thinks this is a healthy situation. Why, then, is it the case? What is it that unites Democrats that Republicans lack?
It’s not a party whip to enforce discipline, since both parties have them. Moreover, there are no whips to rein in factions like the grassroots, or media voices that command larger audiences than members of Congress. That goes for both sides. Democrats also lack a formal means to bring their media sympathizers and grassroots allies into line. So how do they do it? What unites them as they go to battle?
It is the power of a unifying idea. A unifying idea is not a consensus over policy or an agreement on tactics; unanimity in these matters is difficult to achieve and impossible to sustain. Instead, their unity is inspired — forged actually — by a missionary idea. On the eve of his election in 2008, Barack Obama said to his followers: “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.” That idea of transformation is what unites the Left. Unity in embracing a future goal — the fundamental transformation of society — is what motivates them to march together. It is what makes them “progressives” in the first place. It is their identity in the same way “Christian” and “Jew” are identities of people with a religious faith.
“Progressive,” “socialist,” and “liberal” are interchangeable terms that describe members of a moral crusade. The goal of the crusade is “social justice,” or its equivalent: equality. The quest for this utopia of social and economic equality is what forges their alliances, defines their allegiances, and justifies the means they use to get there. They may differ on particular policies and tactics to advance the cause, but if they are Democrats or supporters of the Democrats, they see the party as the practical vehicle for making the idea a reality.
To transform society, you need the power of the state; it is the only way their future can be achieved. That is why they are willing to follow the marching orders of a party that can control the state, and that is why they want to advance its fortunes. The Democrats’ perennial campaign message — Republicans are conducting a war on minorities, women, working Americans, and the poor — rests on the central idea that unites progressives behind the party: We are for equality, they are against it.
The reasoning behind such behavior was revealed by Leon Trotsky when he explained why he would not leave the Bolshevik party even after Stalin — who would eventually murder him — became its absolute leader: “We can only be right with and by the Party,” Trotsky said, “for history has provided no other way of being in the right.” “If the Party adopts a decision which one or other of us thinks unjust, he will say, just or unjust, it is my party, and I shall support the consequences of the decision to the end.”
Non-Bolsheviks may not share Trotsky’s metaphysical certitude, but they will recognize the principle. If the cause is about changing the world and there is only one party that can acquire the means to do it, then even though it may be wrong on this or that matter, its fortunes must be advanced and its power defended. This commitment is magnified when the opposition party is viewed as the enemy of the noble cause. If Republicans are seen as the party of privilege at war with minorities, women, and the poor, then their ideas are not only wrong but evil. As President Obama’s political mentor, Saul Alinsky, put it in Rules for Radicals: “One acts decisively only in the conviction that all of the angels are on one side and the devils are on the other.”.......
[SNIP of some razor sharp points]
..........National-security issues are off the political radar because the Left wants to keep them off and because conservatives who are focused on economic-policy issues have simply let them do it. But in a democracy like ours, national security is first of all about freedom and its defense. That is why the Left is not particularly happy with national-security matters and wants to shrink our military and open our borders. It does so in the name of equality — of nations.
The attack on our military and our borders is an existential threat to our freedom, the first in our modern history with such a strong domestic component. Unfortunately, conservatives and Republicans have been reluctant to frame national security as an issue in that way. Meanwhile we are confronted by a new totalitarian enemy in political Islam as promoted by the Muslim Brotherhood and the regimes in Syria and Iran. It is no accident that our president and his party have supported the Brotherhood — the spearhead of political Islam — at home and abroad, and appeased our Islamist enemies in Egypt, Syria, Libya, and Iran.
The very struggle that inspired the Right in the Cold War era — the battle between tyranny and freedom — is once again staring us in the face, but we are reluctant to name it. We have gone almost silent instead. The silence must end. It is time to connect the battle for individual freedom at home and the defense of our free society abroad, and to make them one. That is the way to advance the conservative message and unify the political forces on which the future of our nation depends. Full Essay A MUST Read
So, what idea can we use unify the masses?
Lower taxes? Half the population doesn’t pay taxes.
Smaller government? That will go over well with the elderly (Social Security and Medicare) and the 47% (EBT, Welfare, Medicaid, Section 8, etc).
Defense?
Illegal Immigration?
The Democrats have us beat because they can appeal to envy and greed. All we can do is appeal to honor, ambition, and national pride.
Read the last section again.
if Odungo’s actions don’t unite the conservatives of this county there is something seriously wrong
Democrats play to win.
Republicans play to their own egos.
Wildly incorrect as to the coming elections.
The Democrats are not ‘unified’ in any way whatsoever; there *is* a powerful Clinton machine in place, and it is hated by the people who actually care about issues (as opposed to winning) every bit as much as the GOP-E establishment is by anyone who identifies as ‘conservative’ as opposed to ‘Republican’.
Few like Clinton, it is merely like many of us would be if Jeb got the nomination- someone you dislike, or the other side winning.
There are a couple of issues about which liberals are passionate at the moment, but the same can be said for conservatives.
What the author mistakenly believes to be a weakness is actually a strength - an entire field of young, accomplished and experienced candidates; none of them ideologically perfect, and all, of course, mortal in both the personal and political senses, but a much better bench and much more cohesiveness than the Democratic party. The Democrats are not in any way marching in lockstep except for the members of the Hillary machine.
Sometimes Horowitz makes sense, this is not one of those times.
The Republicans (and Whigs before them) have always been something of a coalition of those opposed to the democrat swine and their philosophy of brainless agrarianism (19th century)/socialism (modern times). So it’s no wonder it’s hard to get everyone on the same page.
I think you have missed the point of his piece.
He understands and approves that the right isn’t monolithic.
It was snipped.
“The equality proposed by progressives and Democrats is a declaration of war on individual freedom, and therefore on the American constitutional framework. The steady erosion of that freedom is the consequence of progressives’ political successes. This is the war that divides Left and Right. Conservatives must recognize that it is a war, and prosecute it as a war to defend individual freedom. That should be the unifying idea of the conservative cause.”
Will anyone listen? The divisiveness of conservatives is also apparent on our religion forum. If the Christians here would stand together on God’s righteousness alone and concentrate on glorifying only Him in His Spirit, what a revival would occur.
Respectfully, I see and agree with what you say, except I think he sees the left as being much more uniform, monolithic and cohesive than it currently is, and sees much more difference between the parties, as regards the tension between principle and practicality, than exists (or probably can exist outside of cases like the communists).
I see where you’re going. The Democratic party has been pulled to the far left and that is their control center. Certainly they don’t all agree, but you will not see much of this division played out on the national stage (media will focus on making us the devils and their party the angels for the benefit of vote getting).
Perception is a very, very powerful tool.
Unfortunately, Islam is protected as a religion under the First Amendment, at least until we figure out that the Islam is not so much a religion as it is a charter for a theocratic empire.
That is only during the primary season. Wait until the general election comes.
FTA: “Here is another statement from Rules for Radicals: “We are always moral and our enemies always immoral.” The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the immorality of the opposition, of conservatives and Republicans. If they are perceived as immoral and indecent, their policies and arguments can be dismissed, and even those constituencies that are non-political or “low-information” can be mobilized to do battle against an evil party. In 1996 Senator Bob Dole — a moderate Republican and deal-maker — ran for president against the incumbent, Bill Clinton. At the time, Dick Morris was Clinton’s political adviser. As they were heading into the election campaign, Clinton — a centrist Democrat — told Morris, “You have to understand, Dick, Bob Dole is evil.” That is how even centrist Democrats view the political battle.
Because Democrats and progressives regard politics as a battle of good versus evil, their focus is not on policies that work and ideas that make sense, but on what will make their party win. Demonizing the opposition is one answer; unity is another. If we are divided, we will fail, and that means evil will triumph.
They have a saying that expresses this attitude: “We are on the right side of history.” President Obama placed a carpet in the Oval Office on which these words are inscribed: The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice. That’s their justice, their cause. The issues are never the issues; the issue is always what will bring power to those who are on the right side of history, because their cause — not any particular policy or tactic — is enlightened and just. This intoxicating belief is the key not only to the power of the party but to the sense of individual achievement and self-worth of its members, as soldiers in a moral cause.” [end of article excerpt]
Dems, mostly, have rejected the Judeo-Christian religion and its god. But they still need a transcendent meaning and purpose for living. Their moral cause of a utopian world of equality is their religion. THEY will be the saviors of the world, who will usher in an era of heaven on earth.
Spot on!!
No kidding!
Exhibit A:
April 1, 2015: Harry Reid Justifies Lying About Romney’s Taxes from Senate Floor: ‘He Didn’t Win, Did He?’
".....The Senate minority leader dismissed claims that he is the problem with Washington and said he his proud of taking on the Koch brothers when no one else would.
Reid appeared to take some joy of being a part of the Democrat machine that took down (presidential candidate Mitt) Romney in 2012.
“Let him prove that he has paid taxes, because he hasn’t,” Reid said on the Senate floor without any evidence to back his accusations.
When asked about his comments by CNN’s Dana Bash, Reid never rejected the notion his words were “McCarthyite” in nature. He admitted no wrongdoing.
“Well, they can call it whatever they want,” Reid said. “Romney didn’t win, did he?”
Reid’s approach of the ends justifying the means is sure to upset many and is likely to further propel Reid’s reputation of being a dirty politician."
Good stuff as usual from Horowitz. He’s got that Whittaker Chambers thing going where he fully appreciates the power of the leftist monolith from having been part of it and having seen it from the inside, and you can feel his sense of slight peril as he turns and looks at the people who are supposed to oppose it and what he sees is sort of the equivalent of a hobbit village in the ever-divided political right. What’s interesting is that in Ted Cruz we actually have someone with the gumption and the skill to frame the battle in the way Horowitz recommends it be framed in this piece. I wonder what Horowitz thinks about Cruz?
I don’t know what Horowitz’s assessment is of the gop primary field, but he sure knows who we’re fighting.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.