I'm still reading Rick Perlstein's Before the Storm, the book about how the far right created a groundswell of massive support for a reluctant Barry Goldwater that resulted in Goldwater's selection as the Republican nominee for President in 1964.
The book explains how the far right captured the Republican party back in the early 60s and hasn't let go since.
What we see in Perlstein's book is that the right wing nutters have always been with us. Always. At any given time 20-30% of our population is ripe for scary conspiracy theories, easily convinced our nation is in grave danger of attack or invasion or from subversives in our government.
Perlstein relates the kind of rumors that swept the nutters back then. For example Sen. Tom Kuchel complained that at one point about 10% of his mail dealt with two rumors that were sweeping the nation: 1) Chinese commandos were training in Mexico for an invasion of the U.S. through San Diego, and 2) that 100,000 UN troops, including 16,000 "African Negro troops," who were cannibals, were secretly training under a Russian colonel for a UN martial-law takeover of the U.S.
The latter rumor gained credibility when it appeared in a constituent's newsletter from Rep. James Utt, who represented Orange County, California! In other words, what we are experiencing today with the birthers, tenthers, and tea-baggers is nothing new. Back in the 60's there was the John Birch Society, which was bigger and just as loony as the tea-baggers.
I'm also seeing a lot of parallels between the Republican party of the early '60s and the Republican party of 2009.
In the late '50s Barry Goldwater emerged as a straight-talking, authentic, son-of-a-pioneer who was an outspoken anti-communist. He also advocated getting the government off of everyone's back, letting capitalism and the free market solve our problems and make everyone prosperous. He was just what the far-right was looking for to lead them out of the hated New Deal programs, unions, and wimpy politicians who were cowardly to use bombs on our enemies. The right wing of the Republican party, energized by Ayn Rand's writings and the Birchers, set out to take over their moribund party of moderates. They caught the party leadership off guard and took it over. Then they began pushing their hero, Barry Goldwater, to run for President.
Goldwater knew he wasn't Presidential material, but as his popularity grew by leaps and bounds, the pressure for him to run became overwhelming. He finally gave in, but he insisted that he run the campaign his way. He was determined to run as an honest citizen who spoke his mind rather than a scripted politician.
That, of course, was a mistake. Goldwater spoke his mind and the voters began to see that Goldwater's ideas were actually a bit nutty - even dangerous, and he lost the election by a landslide.
I see the same thing happening today. The far-right nutters already own the Republican party, and they are now searching for their savior, someone who will be just as nutty as President as they are. Right now they are fixating on Sarah Palin, but unlike Goldwater, Palin is a true lightweight who will soon show the nutters that she really, really is too stupid even for them. I give her a year before she, too, joins Joe the Plumber in the annals of nutter history.
Once Palin falters, who will they pick as their new savior? The closest thing to Sarah Palin in looniness is Michele Bachmann. Michele could turn out to be their standard bearer in 2012 because I suspect she's a lot smarter than she lets on. She's certainly smarter than Palin (Bachmann has a masters degree in tax law from William and Mary).
If the nutters, now the Republican party's base, embrace Palin or someone like Bachmann for President in 2012, we will see one of the angriest, looniest Presidential elections ever, but they will probably lose big, just like Goldwater did in 1964. The more energized the nutters get, the more voters they turn off. The only way they could come close to winning is if Obama totally alienates his base (like he seems on his way to doing) and they (we) stay home or votes third party.
I highly recommend Before the Storm. This is the background story of how the far right took over the Republican party back in the '60s and consciously, willingly, turned it into the white man's party. It contains some great lessons for us in 2009. One of the biggest lessons for us is that even though things are loony today, they were even loonier back in the '60s at the height of anti-communism and the fear of angry negroes.
--Trakker
Follow me to the promised land
We still don't know how to deal with minority tribes, gangs writ large who operate entirely in their own interest. They seek to force the world to accommodate their needs (by any means necessary), rather than accommodate themselves to the world.
Plausibility is their tribe's stock in trade. Individually, their hallmarks are religious and ideological purity, and a monopoly on wisdom. That there is no way to implement their programs doesn't stop them from proposing them.
Posted by: horsec | November 10, 2009 at 12:06 PM
Prediction exists for the purpose of prevention
Posted by: horsec | November 10, 2009 at 02:45 PM
"Either some Caesar or Napoleon will seize the reins of government with a strong hand; or your republic will be as fearfully plundered and laid waste by barbarians in the twentieth Century as the Roman Empire was in the fifth; - with this difference, that the Huns and Vandals who ravaged the Roman Empire came from without, and that your Huns and Vandals will have been engendered within your own country by your own institutions.
Well, we barely made it through the twentieth century without the republic being plundered (at least no more plundered than it was in the 19th century).
The only thing that gives me hope for the future of this country is the Internet which allows bright people (both left and right) to debate politics daily. We are no longer limited to the spin from politicians and their corporatist MSM mouthpieces. When it comes to politics, the people I spend time with are all more knowledgeable today than at anytime in the past.
Posted by: Trakker | November 10, 2009 at 03:14 PM
the people I spend time with
Therein lies the rub, your sample is too small.
It's true that more today can be learned from open sources. What's lacking is the propensity to seek knowledge, among the majority of voters and a minority of congressmen, congressmen being somewhat smarter than average. The average citizen's interest is in seeking and finding a free lunch, not destroying his personal illusion by embracing the fact that There Is No Free Lunch. How else does one explain the 'volunteer' army, other than as a free lunch for a people who are too self-important to fight the nation's wars?
Posted by: horsec | November 11, 2009 at 10:04 AM
"Therein lies the rub, your sample is too small"
I agree, the sample size is small, but the point is, we now have an alternative source of opinion writing, and I believe that the numbers who read these alternative sources is rising, even while the MSM is losing readership.
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury."
That's a provocative statement. I think it is one of those statements that sound logical but don't have a lot of evidence to back it up. We've been a nation for 233 years and we still don't have universal, government paid, health care, and there is not a chance in hell we'll get any time soon. Other stable nations have had it for decades and they are still thriving. That's government largesse that is badly needed but after 233 years the voters still haven't pressed for it.
Personally I see government largesse as a mark of a successful civilization. I believe we would be much better off as a nation if health care was free for all and college was either free or cheap enough for everyone who qualified could attend. I think we should have more free legal aid for the poor, free mental health clinics, free drug rehabilitation clinics for those who want to get off drugs. I think job training should be free. But there's not a snowball's chance in hell the American people would ever vote for any of this.
Posted by: Trakker | November 11, 2009 at 10:58 AM
California, land formerly belonging to Mexico now thought to be part of the United States
Proposition 13, officially titled the "People's Initiative to Limit Property Taxation," ... The proposition's passage resulted in a cap on property tax rates in the state, reducing them by an average of 57%.
Posted by: horsec | November 12, 2009 at 12:22 PM
"The proposition's passage resulted in a cap on property tax rates in the state, reducing them by an average of 57%."
Isn't this a case where the public rejected government largesse? I assume the people who voted for this knew that it would result in fewer government services.
I suspect that a national referendum cutting the federal tax rate for everyone 50% would probably pass today despite the fact that it would almost certainly mean the end of hundreds of government services, some quite vital to the nation.
Posted by: Trakker | November 12, 2009 at 06:02 PM
'The end of hundreds of government services, some quite vital to the nation'
... like the Army
In nature there is no right or wrong, there are only acts and consequences. Offer people a free lunch today and and they'll trade away tomorrow's freedom. It not only can happen, it has happened. The 'volunteer' army and Prop. 13 are two examples.
Training the Afghan Army founders on a lack of trainers. The reason we don't have trainers is because a 'volunteer' army, a/k/a a professional army, a/k/a an army of mercenaries, doesn't need a lot of training because they're fighting all the time. A draftee army, a/k/a a citizen's army, needs a lot of trainers because there's continuous turnover in the ranks that require training. No citizen's army, no trainers, no Afghan Army.
Massive fail: We can't do the mission because we have a volunteer army.
Posted by: horsec | November 13, 2009 at 10:45 AM
"We can't do the mission because we have a volunteer army."
Agreed. If we're going to fight war after war we need a draft that no one is exempt from.
Posted by: Trakker | November 13, 2009 at 12:12 PM
If we're going to fight war after war we need a draft
A congress of cowards that is focused on keeping their jobs over the welfare of the troops (and the nation) is not about to hit that sleeping mule between the eyes with a 2x4.
Everyone has sympathy for military families but not enough to join them. 'You're digging our ditch. F U.' The volunteer army will bite us in the rear. Maybe not tomorrow, but soon.
Coup d'etat.
Posted by: horsec | November 14, 2009 at 10:06 AM