I'm reading this article on the Republican party and the coup type activities that have come to impact half of the districts (...according to the article. I wouldn't think the aggressiveness in half the districts but let us wait and see what happens.). I'm a light Right Republican often known in modern form as a Rino-Dino by critics and by some perhaps an Old Guard Republican connected to the ideological line that goes back to the beginning for those who still believe in the founding of Republicanism and its inherent freedoms (At least in some party history books that discuss core ideologies.)
I've seen the party move more right then initially thought. Its not like believing in smaller government, lower taxes and gun ownership in and of itself that causes a problem; assuming its a problem. (I guess it depends on who you ask.) These are part, not whole, of the essential beliefs. Its the application method and the finiteness of the solution that doesn't consider other stakeholders that might not work (Taking from a longer term whole nation and international community perspective. Remember what we do here isn't in isolation globally.).
Not all the ideas are inherently bad or good. For example, one could make an argument that more efficient government that uses less resources, improves personal freedoms/choice, and is more responsive to people would be helpful. That is awesome stuff that can be sold to people because they know its helpful to their long term collective needs!
We might also argue that efficient use of government resources, effective deficit reduction, and actions that improve revenue would help reduce taxes while funding those programs we find are worthwhile on a national level. The better we can make government, the better off we will be as a people and a nation. This is something that Democrats and Republicans can sort of agree with as a central idea.
I guess, if we were on a roll we might even throw in an argument that general gun ownership for hunting, self-defense, and sport is ok and would be a nice recreational outlet. Assuming these are bought for peaceful purposes, designed for non military uses, and can't be used on your neighbors who might have different opinions and/or voted differently (From any ideological perspective right or left. I'm not against gun ownership, I'm against gun misuse designed to infringe on the rights others with a bent toward violence and power dynamics.).
However, there was mention of armed guards and/or intimidation tactics used against fellow Americans. None of that should factor into Republicanism in any way, shape, or form and no longer represents a viable party behavior party that will lead to a positive end. You will also drop supporters quickly I think if such behaviors are true and continue (Its an article so I cannot say if its true or not I can only say that is my understanding of the meaning of the words in the article.)
I think at this point donors need to really think about the long term health of the nation, and their business environment, and find candidates they trust to place their money. There are different value systems at play and while both claim Republicanism not both will likely keep the party in tact if moving too far right outstrips the larger traditional conservative (non vocal) base. Penny wise and pound foolish is not a normally admirable trait in executives.
My recommendations are to support critical thinking candidates that know how to compromise and have a single conception of a nation. No matter who wins, such candidates will bring us closer even if we don't like their ideas. That is of course if we did a risk assessment and looked to see whom is likely to provide stronger growth policies that create an inclusive nation. There is actually research that will show which style leads to an expanding economy.
I see a few candidates out there that would fit that mix but I think they are trying to keep the elephant manageable and at some point that might not be possible depending on internal party politics. If there is a split it will be a little chaotic in party shifts and adjustments but there will eventually be a homeostasis that arrives. That is when different parties will have interactive negotiation to collaborate on shared agendas (or not) and will likely limit the power of the other (Which might push some party fringes more radical.)
There is no good path that comes from far right and left radical ideologies using intimidation tactics (Its only alleged at this moment. I have not experienced it by active members but I'm not really that active. I have heard some creepy stuff but its not from central members. These are sort of fringe members that would be present in both parties.). The evidence rational center is where we want to be. I understand its not popular to think critically and do the right thing for ones nation (both parties). Some of us believe in our oaths and many of us have perverted that message. It will be the sanctity of that central method that will determine our path to a more universal democracy.
Let us be careful about who represents us. Will you step/vote toward national growth or national decline?
The choices continue......
Far-right Republican groups surge in swing state Michigan*Again, this article is just to get you think. Some of the stuff is likely true and some likely only a possibility depending on thoughts, choices and actions of the many. If you tell me its not true and its an impossibility then I will say "I agree! But which parts?" For that we have to wait to see how the possibilities turn out. In other words, feel free to continue to read or click off and enjoy your day. My only opinion is that under certain circumstances there are always possibilities; however unlikely.
No comments:
Post a Comment