This morning, I heard a commentator allude to “Mitch McConnell and other conservative senators.” Yesterday, a news report described the upcoming Alaska Republican primary as pitting Trump’s “conservative wing against Murkowski’s more moderate base.” I keep seeing references to the “conservative majority” on the Supreme Court.
Can we get real? There is nothing conservative about these so-called “conservatives.” They don’t want to preserve or protect our governing institutions — the core idea of conservatism extending from Edmund Burke to William F. Buckley and Barry Goldwater. They are radicals, intent on wrecking these institutions to impose their ideology on everyone else.
The Supreme Court’s Republican appointees have all but obliterated stare decisis — the conservative principle that the Court must follow its precedents and not change or reverse them unless clearly necessary, and with near unanimity. Recent decisions reversing Roe v. Wade, elevating religious expression over the Constitution’s bar on established religion, questioning Congress’s ability to delegate rule making to the executive branch, and barring states from regulating handguns, all call into question the legitimacy of the Supreme Court as an institution.
Meanwhile, Senate Republicans, led by Mitch McConnell, are abusing the filibuster and undermining the legitimacy of the Senate.
Throughout much of the 20th century, filibusters remained rare. But after Barack Obama moved into the Oval Office in 2009, McConnell and his Republican senate minority blocked virtually every significant piece of legislation. Between 2010 and 2020, there were as many cloture motions as during the entire 60-year period from 1947 to 2006. Now McConnell and his Republicans are stopping almost everything in its tracks. Just 41 Senate Republicans, representing only 21 percent of the country, are blocking laws supported by the vast majority of Americans.
At the same time, Trump and his Republican enablers in Congress and in the states have upended the centerpiece of American democracy, the peaceful transition of power, and undermined the legitimacy of our elections.
They continue to assert without any basis in fact that the 2020 election was stolen. Trump encouraged an insurrection at the U.S. Capitol and threatened the life of the Vice President. Republican state legislatures are enacting legislation to suppress votes and take over election machinery.
Make no mistake: Republican appointees to the Supreme Court, most Republicans in Congress, and Trump Republican lawmakers across America are not conservative. They are radicals. They have embarked on a radical agenda of repudiating our governing institutions and taking over American democracy.
It is time to stop using the term “conservative” to describe them and their agenda.
And it is time it to fight back: Enlarge the size of the Supreme Court and limit the terms of justices. Abolish the filibuster and then pass laws most Americans want — protecting voting rights and reproductive rights, and controlling guns. Criminally prosecute Trump and his insurgents.
These are conservative measures. They are necessary to conserve and protect our governing institutions from the radicals now bent on destroying them.
It’s time for the term “radical regressives” to come into common usage.
I still think the term "neo-Confederates" is far more accurate, particularly since there's already been talk in some "red states" of secession, although a more practical approach is in continuing to pervert The Constitution - they recognize the economic power of the "blue states," being mostly the net beneficiaries of those tax dollars. The assault on the 14th Amendment has begun. How long before the 13th is next? I think that >to call them anything else< completely misses the true nature of those wankers, whose "battle cry" is "Forget? Hell!"
I always accepted the notion that the GOP absorbed the Jim Crow Southern Democrats with their post Jim Crow "We feel your pain" strategy, therefore expanding its turf. But now I think DZK is closer to the truth., the Jim Crow Southern Democrats took over the Republican Party, and injected their traditional White Southern angst directly into its aorta. "neo-Confederates" fits like a glove.
I must have missed something. When did they ever feel anyone’s pain?
The satisfaction of >inflicting< it?
Ha ha! Good one.
They are so self absorbed they feel only their own pain of people with darker skin being in many cases smarter and in some cases more powerful than their own white selves. It’s not pain it’s their fragile little egos.
The pain in question is that felt by many white Southerners, due to the black gains in the civil rights movements. Shedding tears for those unfortunate white dears.
heart!
Nicely characterized.
I'm not good with this, not at all. The current bunch are advocates of some of the most abusive lines of exercising states' rights. They should stand on their own, rather than using a crutch from history. I should say that we can call them Tories, Hobbésian Monarchists and such, and compare them to the source from which the Confederacy and Tory thought originated. But the "neo-Confederate" is misleading. It's hard to come up with an appropriate epithet for these rascals, given the vilification of the term "anti-Fascist;" Fascist or Falangist suits the Trumpists well.
I agree. In my mind, neo-Confederate doesn't cover the whole of what these crazies are. Radical Regressives is more inclusive.
Fascists
Fascists
Fascists
Its not states rights. Except where that helps justify their goals. So states rights in order to reverse Roe v Wade, but no states rights on gun control. When watching the magic show, don't look at the rabbit!
>Exactly!< Except for voter rights, and marriage equality, etc. I think they carve out an exception for gun control for >exactly< the same reason they killed Roe. There's nothing in The Constitution that specifies >or< prohibits, for example, knowing who keeps what kind of weapons. After all, "In order to maintain a >well regulated< militia," any militia command would need to know who has what kind of firepower, and at the time, the states provided and maintained the militias. To this day, the practice is maintained by what we all know otherwise as the "State National Guard," although they're now tacked out by taxpayer dollars, rather than private ownership, these days.
Somebody has to do it.
Yeah I can only see the falsehood of These Fascist (like Trump) referring to anyone who sees them for what they are as Fascists! Apparently the Trumpanzies are actually too stupid to understand or realize what the definition of a Fascists is!
States' Rights are the Ur Confederate issue, and >that's< according to >them< - although it >was< about keepin' their slaves - those rich enough to own 'em! I call 'em neo-Confederates, these days, who are attempting to revert civil rights to something they're more comfortable with, that involves abusing other people, citing their arbitrary religious beliefs, and not being criminals - while waving Confederate flags. Y'can't call 'em criminals if there's no law against their abuse - in their twisted ideology! How 'bout the right to secede that's nowhere in The Constitution. Then there's the >money< - or "proppity" as they all used to like to say about people!
I don’t think you need the “neo.”
I'll admit to splitting hairs with it. Like I say below, it's baked into the culture, and will probably be always with us - our "original sin."
Here's an interesting conundrum for you. How does that make me a leftist? Think about what the right and left >really< are before you come to any conclusion.
I wish this site had better navigation, D. It’s too hard to go back and find your original comment. However I do know that the ideas of right and left go back to the French Revolution. I don’t suppose that helps though.
Not to worry. The thought just crossed my mind while I was reading the posts. We come across that polit-babble so much, we begin to get brainwashed with it, and I'm dedicated to being among "the great unwashed!" LOL! To that end, I thought I'd dirty it up a bit and came across this. Some Wikipedia articles are good enough to support something I say. Others, like this one, I consider a good place to >start<: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_spectrum
Among other things, it confirms what you say about the origin in the French Revolution. Also, this article has a bunch of good links for follow-up, on terminology bandied about but never clearly defined, as well.
It raises my blood pressure just reading this. 😀
mine too
DZK ; It has to be easy to remember whatever we choose to call them! Regressive oppressive 'Right' fits these days! or ROT for Regressive Oppressive Tyrants!
Error in the diagnosis cannot be remedied by vigor in the treatment.
True.
How is anything else suggested here better?
heart...
Nothing “neo” about them. This is a continuation of over 200 years of racism.
I have no objection to that view. It's baked into the culture.
Don't you think they are cons using conservative brand to just get what they and their funders want. My take these self centered rich founders could care less about their neo-Confederates. Yes indeed red states base are white nationalists (and racists). But CNN and the like are not going to use neo-confederates. The Stop Calling Them Conservative is method to counter the con jobs being used by the neo-confederates and most important the entire current Republican Party and their corporation funded news outlets.
Ever heard of the old management principle that says: "Ride the horse the direction it's going?" Whether a con or management strategy is moot. The endgame involves who carries what flag into battle. The bible-thumpers get their version of "sharia" law, the gun-anarchy wankers get to concealed carry without a permit and form vigilance committees, and - of course - the management behind the scenes get a docile labor force of wage-slaves upon whom they'll cash-in on obscene wealth - and dynasty, an incipient royalty to "take back" their place in the world as "defenders of the faith!" They even have some "old time religion" to affirm "it's not man's law, it's their [heathen] god's law!" (A line [almost] verbatim with which J D Vance ends one of the political commercials he's been running on mainstream, broadcast TV, of late.) These "royal families" may or may not observe said alt-sharia law themselves. Why would they? Look to ol' Tweety for the answer to that!
UPON further reflection, you can how see clearly ol' Tweety employed it. He knew what the crowd he intended to "serve" wanted and he gave it to them. His rallies, jingo, and hit Q-spiracies are all things he knew his "target audience" liked, and were on about. Further, he was comfortable leading them to their "neon meat dreams of the octafish." (Don't bother trying to make sense of that. It's Captain Beefheart!) He just tailored his events to provide that entertainment, whipping his followers into a frenzy of "hope" - a word some folks here still don't >get< why I mistrust, and don't understand how cults weaponize it on their followers - then pointed them the direction they had in mind from the outset. He knew >exactly< what he was a'doin'. He knew these people well, if not personally.
How did that come to pass? Let's start with the obvious. He was a casino mogul. He had all the resources at hand to understand his clientele, their hopes, their dreams, their fears, and get them to throw their money down a rathole in the hope of "hitting big," and continues to collect from them without even offering them a dubious game of chance to throw it down a rathole with. To their minds, they're playing the biggest game there is - and that, indeed, may be no illusion. (They just don't realize it's a "heads, they don't win; tails they lose" proposition.) Losing their money - or their souls - is far less important than staying 'in the action" - taking part in something historic, "the likes of which has never been seen before," to use ol' Tweety's trope. Make no mistake, 1/6 was where his followers conjured in their own hearts & minds & deluded fantasies to go, and he took them there, like a twisted Moses into the "Desert of Nihil." He just never really intended to >ever< lead them out of that desert, once they arrived, exclaiming: "I >have< arrived!"
That's what it is! States Rights, Libertarian, and Silent Majority are ways of saying "return to the failed Articles of Confederation" even though Confederates lost our Civil War. Lincoln established that dividing our union would result in a less perfect union and is not constitutional. We should have finished the Civil War conclusively.
I have thought that for a long time. That we never finished the Civil War. We let the south keep all the stuff all the flags and allowed them to erect statues of their heroes. It just continued.
Like I've said elsewhere, the >then< Republicans should've taken the hint at that time about the 10th Amendment and fixed it, while the Confederate states proclaimed themselves a foreign, hostile power. I don't oppose states' rights, per se. I just think more care should have been taken with regard to defining those rights. I'm not prepared - as many do - to consider the founders flawless demigods. The smartest among us err.
I see what you mean. The 10nth amendment as written does not delegate anything not specifically written in the Constitution to Federal Government and that puts all civil (substantive) rights on the table for states to control. The irony is that if Clarence Thomas gets his way about revisiting all substantive rights, his own people will likely loose much of their civil rights in the south. which doesn't make sense unless he has a delusion of being white and doesn't know he and his wife are a interracial couple.
Neo Confederates- another good one.
They are Confederate in the sense that they want to restore White Supremacy and have a minimal Federal Government, but not really in any other sense.
Oh, there's the States' Rights issue - the 10th Amendment - they have always claimed was the cause of secession, while more northerly folks claim it was about slavery. They are >every bit< Confederate. Their claim is a right to secession under the 10th Amendment, along with the right to keep and bear arms to throw down any government they deem tyrannical, that appears nowhere in the Constitution by the slightest implication. Just like the Confederates, they even have some "old time religion" to affirm "it's not man's law, it's their heathen god's law!" Yep! If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and swims like a duck, it's a damn duck!
The State's Rights stuff is not exactly a core belief. That stuff all got tossed when Trump was iin power and they wanted to build 'the wall'.
Say what you want about the actual Confederates, but the believed their own BS.
SCOTUS struck down RvW and affirmed states' rights in every way dear to Confederates. They intend to pull more of that "Dred Scott" bullshit in the future, as well. Just because the rank and file aren't stating in plainly - indeed, they say >nothing< of their true agenda - doesn't mean what they're fighting for isn't consistent with that core belief. Actions speak >far louder< than words, particularly when you pack SCOTUS with like-minded actors and flood the media with antigovernmental propaganda. What's confusing you is what's >supposed< to confuse you. Indeed, the Confederates actually believed their own BS, just like ol' Tweety's supporters and everyone buying into "the big lie" believes their own BS. If you're just talking about just their leadership, there's no reason to think their leadership doesn't believe their own bullshit reasons for promoting the bullshit their followers believe. Besides, the term I suggested is "neo-Confederates" - meaning "new" Confederates. The Confederates didn't live in these modern times. This is a new batch embracing the same kind of ideology - for power and profit, particularly profit, instead of explicit chattel slavery.
I wish I had thought of the term "confederate" when listing more appropriate terms. Add "neo" to the front, & yes, it works very well!
Honestly. What does it take? What flag did you see with >your own eyes< being dragged into The Rotunda by the 1/6 wankers ‽ They've >already< identified >themselves!< What's the point of an academic-sounding, learned-sounding pretense in terminology, when perfectly appropriate common terminology is available, that perfectly describes how >they< identify themselves under the Confederate banner they fly. Here's an old bit of common wisdom for y'all: "When someone >shows< you who they are, >believe them!<"
Most of the attraction is visceral. Bonding among like minded cultists.
There is also a religious aspect. Demagogues like Trump take advantage of a racist collective unconscious that incorporates some radicals who are mainly antisocial with others who are true believers.
That's >exactly< the point of any banner - cohesiveness. Consider the cohesiveness of the congressional Republicans, particularly in the Senate. Compare that with the Democrats, many of whom vote with the Republicans, in a misguided attempt at bipartisan unity - where >none< is possible, in this political reality. In this case, the banner under which that cohesiveness maintained is that of a >foreign, hostile power< - that of the Confederate States of America. They also dragged the US flag in the dirt, with spikes mounted on the flagpoles, while using those flagpoles as pikes.
Perhaps we need a rallying cry for the midterms.
There was Remember the Alamo! & Remember the Maine!
<Remember the Rotunda> would rally the QOP...
So, would <Remember Trump's Riot!> help?
How about “Remember democracy”? I’m being ironic.
Yes, once upon a time we had some semblance of a democracy. Remember?
Yeah, I kinda do.
Almost, sort of, except for the Electoral College, filibuster and Citizens United, for starters. Now a stacked Corporate owned Supreme Court! along with a few other things. But we will try to form a More Perfect Union. Perfection is near unattainable, but improvement would be good. But we have to keep it to improve it.
Yep! That could backfire - big time, in the face of the "big lie."
ROT! Regressive Oppressive Tyrants!
I agree, although it probably wouldn't impress most folks here. It's for those who respond to catchy slogans that echo their sentiments. How 'bout "A Republican under every bed?"
Ugh. The idea of that makes me want to hurl.
Molotov cocktails or bricks?
😀
Love this.
Some do.
Perfect description of today’s Republicans. I will use radical regressives from now on.
Just to remind you of what "Johnny Reb" looks like, Day 7 of the 1/6 hearings set for tomorrow morning, 7/12/22, at 10:00 AM EDT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spJR5Y5_f4c Bull Run is just out Rt 50, about 60 or 70 miles away.
BTW: For the benefit of any neo-Confederate apologists out here, who like to scream and accuse the 1/6 hearings being a politically partisan proceeding, Jamie Raskin himself agrees with you. He cites that >ALL THE WITNESSES ARE REPUBLICANS.<
UPDATE: I just heard the local broadcast news (CBS) announce that contrary to what the link I posted says, the hearing is happening at 1:00 PM tomorrow. (The 10:00 AM hour is probably PDT, I'm thinkin'.)
How about "neo-fascists", it fits!
How about “theocratic fascists”?
Furthermore, theocracy is not the only form of government they embrace. Autocracy, aristocracy, plutocracy, corporatocracy, kleptocracy, mafiocracy, idiocracy & kakistocracy are some others.
It's all tyranny!
What they certainly don't support is democracy.
Or fascist theocrats. However, I make a distinction among fascists according to origin: christofascists, republofascists, russofascists...
They are, but I think the term imprecise. They fly the Confederate flag. Remember that when you see a pick-up on the streets flying it. Those who support them are as complicit as the Union spectators who got shot at by the Confederates at Bull Run. They weren't in the Union army. The spectators supported the Union army and were complicit in the eyes of the Confederates shooting at them.
And the NY Times dutifully ran the articles about the Confederates bayoneting the Union wounded in hospitals in the aftermath of Bull Run in 1861. Be very careful with history, that you are not endorsing propaganda.
Never heard about that! I've never brought it up.
They’re reactionaries.
Excellant point, Mr. Klorese! They DESPERATELY want to take America back to the early 1900s when only white men had rights . . . sorry. Only white RICH men had rights. It's just too bad that those radical regressives forgot one tiny detail: while they were hoarding money and molestling little boys, we AMERICANS were getting educated and furious!
I’d go way further back than that. Feudalism anyone? Next they’ll be throwing people into tubs of water to see if they float.
Paula B. ; let's not give 'em ideas!
🤣
Well sure, that's true too! Why do you think so many are scared to get the vaccine? It's not leeches!
Yes!
I have several Republican friends from college and law school who’ve been going apoplectic over the choices of the leadership of the GOP. They do not believe the replacements on SCOTUS over the years have in any matched the intellectual ability of predecessors.
The media truly has done Americans a disservice and failed miserably to be honest with us.
The antidote for many of those people are benefits. They don't want to kill the goose that laid the golden eggs.
The rabble are slitting their own throats by undermining Social Security, Medicare, etc.
The stated Republican desire to end Social Security and Medicare could be the issue that ensures that Democrats increase their numbers in both the Senate and the House. Unfortunately, that will require a President or candidate for Congress to "stand up and shout", to use that old but useful term. The results of the NY Times/CBS poll, out today, shows Biden with shockingly low approval as he's apparently seen as a do-nothing President at a time when grocery, gas and housing costs are going out the roof.
When the inescapable recession hits, prospects for Biden and Congressional Democrats will look especially bleak - unless Dems from the President on down put on their big-boy pants and start attacking what the Republicans are doing and want to do once they have control of the government.
The alternative is for Democrats to continue to hide from the public, play the wimp card and in the process lose our Democratic Republic, and that's awful to contemplate.
The clever part of all that, is Biden is being tarred as a "do nothing" by the opposition, who are doing nothing but railing about boys in the girls' room - the ones doing the railing's perspective - while encouraging "natural birth control" by their draconian measures. (Although I'm not LGBT, I certainly understand that much about their lifestyle! And for those prepared to be offended, >everyone< has a lifestyle - LGBT or otherwise!) The world got sick with covid - including the legendary supply chain. (An incarnation of JIT delivery, developed in the '80s & '90s, when the Japanese were punishing the competition with it.) It's still recovering from same, and will take years to recover. No politician can do anything to speed it up, and are much more likely to prolong the recovery - by claiming the pandemic has well and truly passed.
I'm not LGBT either but object to your use of "fairies" and "lifestyle choice". People who are gay are human and have basic human rights. And their being gay is really not a lifestyle choice, rather it's appears to be hard-wired into their genetic make-up. They are who they are just as you and I are who we are.
Biden took on an incredible mess created by covid and by Trump, especially with his inability to do much of anything about the disease other than to suggest quack "remedies" and drinking bleach. Biden has labored mightily to correct Trump's disastrous policies. What I fault him for is his being so quiet about everything he's managed to achieve.
He's not a leader at this point in his life. It's beyond time for other Democrats to stand up and attack the neo-Confederates or whatever you want to call them with everything they've got, and the GQP has given Democrats a whole lot of ammunition, enough to win big in November. But I doubt they'll use any of it.
OK. Offense not intended to the LGBT community. Indeed, I'd think the Q part of it would be massively offensive. But then again, I have no dog in that fight.
There must be a dem or an independent capable of standing up and shouting about the millions and billions inflation is producing fine corporations.
I mentioned elsewhere, the Tweety-freex in the streets have no idea what they're bringing down on themselves. I remember when the Republicans portrayed "welfare mothers" as inner-city black women, when the end result was that the ones who got really whacked were the Appalachian, white, single mothers.
Couldn't heart you.
Indeed, I just had to refresh mine just to see my previous response to your "heartless" (LOL!) message, and will likely need to do the same to even see this one!
Not to worry, DS. I got it. I've found the page gets slow to refresh, and the "heart" is the first casualty. Just refresh your browser, and I think you'll see it show up.
They are surely 'silly geese'! ,that rabble!
What's good for the goose is good for the 'gander'
They are clueless about this, sadly.
That is so true. The media thinks the have to be “fair “ and give both sides of an argument equal time without a shred of analysis on either side. The media has failed us.
I agree, we shouldn't tar >all< Republicans with Q-publican bullshit. Like Jamie Raskin says, >all< the 1/6 hearings' witnesses are Republicans. I think we owe them that much. When I say wank-publican or Q-publican, I'm differentiating from honest Republicans - regardless of how I might otherwise disagree with their tenets.
I distinguish them by calling them either (traditional) Republicans or Republofascists.
Truth be told: if your friends continued to vote Republican then it is your friends who have done a disservice to themselves (and, indeed, insofar as they'll turn around and do it again a disservice to all of us - as they have not only effected harm but wasted everyone's time in the process).
I disagree. The issue isn’t voting for a Republican candidate but which Republican candidate one votes for or does not for. I do have friends so repulsed by Trump and his ilk they voted for Hilary and in 2016 and now are registered independents.
The original topic is 'How to handle radical Republicans'; where's the scope for disagreement? (Look at the time spent talking about *their* mistakes & *their* problems!)
(Put another way: would *any* measure of media honesty *ever* result in the unprecedented issues Professor Reich mentioned being addressed of their own? The people who constitute the party choose its leadership and thus its strategy & accompanying rhetoric; did they not pledge fealty to Donald Trump - and even declare their intentions to vote for him again, i.e. regardless of their feelings?)
“ The people who constitute the party choose its leadership and thus its strategy “
Again, I disagree. I am a Democrat. I constitute said party but I wrote in Paul Tsongas in 1992 over Clinton. That is my choice and my comment is simply to point out that not all republicans are MAGA and Q nuts or agree with their party’s choices. Yes, they hold conservative views but to link them to the fore mentioned nuts simply because they maintain their party affiliation is disingenuous.
Votes are public record: if you're not a Trumper, the record reflects that; if you are, you won't change. (Again, you disagree?)
I disagree with the idea that folks cannot or are not capable of change. I do agree there are those that will not for whatever reason but I’m an optimist. Yes, we live in dark and dangerous times but remember we view history with 20/20 goggles.
"Hindsight is 20/20", fair enough... but it was only in looking forward that a Nader voter could see the offense of hanging & dimpled chads ultimately facilitating a full circle of unconstitutionality - no goggles required.
(Kudos to your optimism, infinite patience, & huge margin for error in holding out hope for your friends.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_United_States_presidential_election#Overview
My sister & I were not of voting age (she preferred Gore, then sent $50 to the Brown campaign); my dad liked Tsongas early on but he wasn't a choice by the time California had its primary (which is a facet of party politics that Californians are familiar with - even when Camejo is on the ballot!)...
Pete made two comments: (1) his friends do not care for the choices of Republican leadership (they are "going apoplectic" - rather *are* apoplectic) & (2) "the media" (undefined - presumably including this Substack column) have failed to be honest and thus done a disservice to us wooly sheepen, the many flocks of us that be (as we somehow merit pure, white, unadulterated, unabashed truth - via media, on demand).
RE (1): Think of it another way: if your favorite restaurant no longer serves food you like then either your tastes changed or the restaurant did; the statement is simply that - instead of telling everyone how *thoroughly* shocked you are that everyone's *favorite* restaurant isn't what *we all* thought it was... it is... only true that you have *yourself* to blame if you *choose* to visit. ('Eat your own cooking' and you needn't worry about bellyache!)
RE (2): If the logic of (1) does not obtain then (2) cannot follow from (1); if (2) is a statement of its own, there is no substantiation (or even context) for (2) - and definitely nothing like a refutation of the original posting (which, incidentally, does not mention the media once).
I lay the failure at the door of other institutions than the media. The mainstream media is doing their best to keep up with the firehose of information and bullshit flying around.
Elizabeth, I disagree -- profoundly.
The big story is price fixing and price gouging. Who, what, where, when, why, and how?
DS & EB: The media just wants to increase ad rates for its boner-pill and other BigPharma TV ads... There are too many suppressed big stories to keep track of... It's still like when Trump took advantage of silently doing evil while the media was busy running around like decapitated chickens on other "big" stories...
I believe if you check the 6 Sigma process will find the the proper order of investgation for root cause investigation is What, when, where, how and I beleive more properly to avoid Finger poining and lynching, WHY. Doing otherwise risks making the process personal thereby blocking objectivity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Ws
A reference would be helpful (as Wikipedia confirms the "who, what, where, when, & why" order to be consistent with Aristotle's definition); regardless, we should be careful about what we call "the media" (e.g. NPR/PBS v/s cable news channels)...
So . .You put your trustin Wikipedia for fact checking. Hmmm. Says alot about your "news" sources. My guess is that you are not 6 Sigma Certified in Quality assurance processes. Just sayin.
Though we are not locked in combat to the death on a Klingon moon, a hearty "K'plah!" for your spirit Ms. Rebekha! (However, please note that "sayin' won't make it so" - and that, to be fair, what was written was "A reference would be helpful", i.e. "Please say more for our edification - as others may not have an M.S. in industrial engineering & be similarly curious.")
PS: Check out 'The Cathedral & The Bazaar' by Eric S. Raymond if you're interested in some abstract thinking about just how untrustworthy/trustworthy Wikipedia is (as open-source software developers have long known that the "security through obscurity" is strictly a myth, albeit one perpetuated by many a 'black belt').
Thanks for the reference. Sounds like a good read.
Corporations run the media & the media speak on behalf of corporations.
Bullshit!
... but airborne-
Dear Robert Reich, and you are dear, please stay healthy and strong. We need you. I agree, Stop calling them conservatives, call them what they really are fascists. Spanish, Italian, and German fascists believed in the might of the wealthy corporations and their wealthy supporters. They all employed white thugs to enforce their "right to rule" They fed their sheep some people to hate, but not the actual perpetrators of their discontent (corporate wealth and their greedy minions), that would be too complicated for their sheep to understand. Nooo, they fed them their version of the enemy, Jews, Slavs, persons of color, homosexuals, persons of lower intellect, backed up by their thugs attacking, arresting these people and throwing them into slave labor camps, concentration camps, or murdering them outright. (Today we throw them in private prisons) If we can't see the parallels between the 20's, 30's and 40's, and now, we're either blind or disinterested. There are a few Conservatives in America, Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger, maybe Lisa Murkowski and Mitt Romney. I have no problem with conservatism when it is real, I envy their fiscal restraint, but I have been a progressive since I was 21 in Canada, and this leopard isn't changing her spots after 68 years. We absolutely have to call a slug, a slug., and not a would be snail. The trumpsters are fascists, they have always been fascists, and always will be. I don't know how to impress this on the so-called "mainstream media" whose main interest seems to be selling more air time or more papers. I do contribute monthly to Inequality Media, but since I don't twitter, snapshot, etc. I just hope it is having the desired effect. I write to my local Newspaper, but never get published, since I don't fit in with their concept of 'concerned citizen'. I email my Congressman and both Senators (and do get responses) but not actions. I wish I were 30 again with the stamina and body to go to the streets and protest, but "if wishes were horses...."
Thank you Robert Reich for helping us (and I hope Voters) understand how the manipulation of our government especially economy is not Conservatism but Fascism. Fay Reid, your comment is important: “The trumpsters are fascists, they have always been fascists, and always will be. I don't know how to impress this on the so-called "mainstream media" The Fascist/Repub playbook is moving rapidly to destroy our Democracy.. TFG was supported, perhaps a puppet, and with and without him, a democratic economic system that affects everyone is collapsing except for the corporate world. Look back at History and see how governments fall into the hands of Fascists who dismantle the economic safety nets, with lies and deception through Corporate welfare and power. Reagan worked to dismantle the New Deal and it’s been a battle since then to maintain and continue or expand these laws and regulations for all but the wealthy. The question: is it possible with current politics to reverse this destruction?
Irenie ; Good question! Widespread education is needed! Inequality Media has enlisted tech savvy young people to get the word out about what is going on with the Radical Regressives of tRumpworld. I give whenever I can to their Civics Action. they are working on sites like Snapchat and Tik Tok ; places I rarely go, like Twitter...(all I can think of is 'twit'. I'm old!)
Check out https://www.votecommongood.com/
Religious Protestant Democrats who neutralize evangelist demagogues.
Yes, that's exactly what happened.
Fay Reid ; .."beggars would ride". I also give to Inequality Media Civics. Not monthly, but I end up giving more than if I gave a fixed amount on a monthly basis. It just turns out that way somehow. I like your observations, as usual.
Reading a book like capitalism and freedom he seems reasonable. Live, you get a much better sense of how smug and evil he is.
Blood on his hands in Chile.
I can’t get past this:
An underground railroad is being devised for women, in 2022.
Ponder that.
We need to pass the Equal Rights Amendment. But, as usual, we need to secure voting rights first, apparently. These two items are related, when more than half the country representing all the races/ethnicities in our nation do not have equal rights, and voting itself is not secure. Federal elections should be secured at the very least, since there is so much legal 'mischief' going on.
Election security seems to have gone so far down hill that maybe we need U.N. election monitoring.
There’s a turnabout for you.
I hope it is very successful, & helps reverse these awful decisions.
Agree. I have noticed news commentators using the term radical Republicans more frequently, so that is good. Maybe we can reinforce that behavior via e-mails to networks.
Because Trump has no ability to understand anyone’s motives other than his own ( new term : simplistic sociopath) he and his flying monkeys
project their own motives and desires onto others.
Their nearly constant use of projection needs to be pointed out when describing their radical, destructive, unpatriotic agenda.
I also think it should be discussed in print and on air that Clarence Thomas clearly had an addiction to pornography, an addiction that those of his hearing committee stupidly ignored despite Anita Hill’s brave testimony. When he was Hill’s boss, Thomas was very interested in watching women having sex with animals and in making Anita Hill uncomfortable while he controlled the conversation. Now Thomas is finally getting to control American women and watch their misery.
He is destroying the rights of privacy so he, as a representative of the government, can peer into the bedrooms of Americans. He is projecting his
own desires onto the role of government.
I know this topic is gross, but it was ignored in 1991 and now has returned to cause women to suffering, pain and humiliation ….and Thomas gets to watch. ( yuck)
We have a large number of people in power who are clearly not psychologically healthy. Trump, Bannon, Stone, MTG, Boebert, Gohmer… the list is long with many possible diagnoses. They gravitate toward the radical right wing Republicans because wackos are welcomed in the party where destroying society is the goal.
These people should not have responsibility for the lives of others.
Great observations!
The oligarchs/corps buy them seats in our government and the dirty money gives them power!
Words matter. Texas Republicans have suggested "forced relocation" should replace "slavery" in their children's textbooks. The Wannsee Conference gave us "the final solution" while papering over the bothersome fact this solution involved killing people. For centuries now words have been communicated in books which the New Right wants to eliminate because they are an interference to their quest for cultural hegemony.
It is time for us all to stand up for bothersome words, provocative words, words which make us stop and think. Words are the building blocks of civilization and are just as important as the manifold flora and fauna we thoughtlessly extinguish from our planet without any understanding of what we are sacrificing.
I will take the difficult words every day over the gibberish which passes for thoughtful policy from the likes of our former president and his minions.
I agree. They're goddam neo-Confederates.
👏👏👏
Radical Republicans embrace fascism and should be called out by every political leader as traitors to democracy.
Why haven't Hawl;ey and Cruz been called to question? Ron Johnson and Grassley? Were they in a plot to replace Pence on the afternoon of 1/6 to further the coup?
I agree -- The Senate seems to NEVER hold anyone responsible or accountable for criminal activity - pretty disgusting!
all excellent questions!
Dee Long ; I look forward to more revelations by the Jan 6 Committee. It has opened eyes and even changed some minds.
"Can we get real? There is nothing conservative about these so-called “conservatives.” They don’t want to preserve or protect our governing institutions — the core idea of conservatism extending from Edmund Burke to William F. Buckley and Barry Goldwater. They are radicals, intent on wrecking these institutions to impose their ideology on everyone else."
If you are right on this, this is important. This is also what distinguished conservatives from fascists in the 1930s in Germany.
Destructive radicals.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism
While tfg (idiota I call him) is a danger to all things, mcconnell is singularly the worst piece of garbage humanoid ever allowed into the halls of congress. Why he is not being tried for treason boggles my mind. Pure scum of this earth! The "conservatives" seek to conserve nothing, other than their wealth and power, planet and people be damned. Same people that nailed Christ to a cross. Same people that want planetary pollution and destruction to be unregulated, same people who want women to relinquish their rights as fully human beings, not just incubators.
I'm so disgusted by "right wingers" that my words just can't say, so SCUM OF THE EARTH will have to do.
And the truly awful thing is that they are twisting their beloved Christianity from love thy neighbor to “the end justifies the means”. I thought Jesus called out the haters and the hypocrites and loved the people others reviled. 2000 years of twisted Christians is enough, stop making poor Jesus spin in his grave!!!!
Ps, I am an atheist.
Yes, 'mcconnell is singularly the worst piece of garbage humanoid ever allowed into the halls of congress. Why he is not being tried for treason boggles my mind. Pure scum of this earth!
all true!
👏👏👏
Professor, Because your calls for action in your penultimate paragraph largely require simple majorities in the House and Senate, if not yesterday, then tomorrow, we must be laser-focused on holding the House and picking up at least 2 Senate seats. Which brings me to messaging and my belief that Democrats have an extraordinary narrative if only they would deliver it.
Setting aside what Biden and the Party already have accomplished, in my view, the public repeatedly must hear what they would have delivered but for 2 Senate votes (Manchin and Sinema, not to mention every House and Senate Republican). Imagine the impact, for example, were everyday people nationwide asked, “Who do you want here—somebody who doesn’t want to cut the price of insulin or those who do?” “Somebody who doesn’t want to expand the child tax credit or those who do?” “Doesn’t want to provide affordable, quality childcare and universal Pre-K or those who do?” “Doesn’t want to make investments in housing, in elder care, and in climate or those who do?” These provisions and more have passed in the Democratically controlled House. We’re just waiting on 2 more Senate votes.
As a final point, I would note that I don’t simply want the President to support Senate filibuster reform to codify Roe. I want him aggressively to press for a Senate rule change to protect this half-century Court order that later was reaffirmed.
Field Team 6 has a database of unregistered voters who trend Democratic.
Help register more democrats. Contact Mervis Reissig
merv4peace@gmail.com
https://www.fieldteam6.org/
Daniel, I’m aware, but grateful you keep posting to encourage more subscribers to engage.
Yes, the current Republicans are certainly not conservative. And, as you've noted before, the current use of "moderate" and "centrist" makes no sense.
If they can't tell that Trump is a demagogue, they can't tell their ass from first base.
So true.
I think they know that. They just don’t care.
They have rationalized so much for so long they don't know or care what they do with their undeserved unearned power!
It goes deeper than conservative. Let’s take back the phrase Right Wing because we truly are correct. Vote for a 2/3 democratic senate majority so we can impeach some judges and recover our rightful use of right.
And amend the Constitution.
The political spectrum is more accurately depicted by not a line, but a circle, actually a figure 8. As they got to either extreme, they get more authoritarian. Both Fascists & Communists are generally authoritarian, even totalitarian. So really, they should be linked somewhere opposite from moderate democratic.
But there is also another loop or ring going the opposite way from authoritarianism. The opposite of total control is no control at all. There is a libertarian form of both the left & right that contrasts with authoritarianism. There are also elements of both left & right-wing extremism that are chaotic, & when it goes to the extreme you have anarchy, which as at the farthest point from totalitarianism.
Moderate democrats are right at the center of this 8, but democrats of both the left & right are near the middle, not far from the dividing line between the 2 circles of the 8.
Many years ago, back when our public school taught civics, we learned that citizens have a responsibility, and an opportunity to participate in our democracy. They can let their elected know their view on an issue, or upcoming vote. Citizens can get involved at various levels of government or run for office. Fast forward….I asked my grandchildren if they had civics classes in school. Well not much, if any.
It has evolved, quickly in fact, that Our citizenry are not knowledgeable about governmental or electoral processes. For that matter, as we’ve seen, neither do our elected officials! Which doesn’t matter since Citizens United. Now big business and special interests "hire" candidates to run and do their bidding.
Hear Here!!! I'm Just another Boomer who DID study civics and history.
We need just as you suggested a Democracy movement to protect our government and freedom. I hope you will initiate and lead us. Now that gets me excited
Totally agree. And terms like "trickle down" should be called what they really are, guzzle up!
Please stop, my sides are hurting !!!! Sub 'Tinkled On'' Politics.
Radical Regressives! It's good to have a handle on terminology that is casually tossed around in the media. Conservative no longer (for some time now) describes what the other side of the aisle is doing.
To be provocative: Both sides of the isle are getting marbles from the same bag (Citizens United.) To purchase power you need to exert control of all sides of the equation, " It's Just Good Business" Pun Intended.
I choose the candidates who do not accept PAC money or corporate donations or obscenely wealthy individuals. If there were 'good' sources that consider the common good I would be more likely to participate in supporting a recipient of 'clean ' money. Information must be mined.
I Like your viewpoint.
ken taylor ; but what if it's all B.S.? And the candidate is a construct?
"There are lies, damn lies and statistics."
I was not thinking opinion, but the polls themselves. I don't trust them peroid. Unless it's Quinnipiac or known established poll. Even that I would not use as my main source of information.
Rebekha Simms ; Yes, it's an old game and has everyone bought up. Now even the Courts!
Dear Mr. Reich: The Republican members of the current Supreme Court should register as a GOP PAC. They purposely lied to gain the votes needed for confirmation, and now we find out they are being 'wined and dined' on a regular basis in a blatant attempt to further 'conservative' goals. I'm not certain what legal options are tenable at this point, but they have lost all credibility. Ellis Johnson M.D.
'Time was, we feared antidemocratic takeovers from the far left. We were horrified to see Cuba, just ninety miles from OUR shores, fall to Fidel Castro. Many Cubans fled to the USA then and quite a few settled in Florida. And a few of those became wealthy sugar cane growers and they are now far right Republicans.
Today it's far right coming at us from inside our own nation, determined to give us an extreme makeover. Their vision for a remodeled nation doesn't tolerate anyone who has different ideas.
But the thing that kept us from falling into a totalitarian state of either a hard-left or hard-right persuasion is our willingness, however grudgingly given, to tolerate those with whom we do not agree.
Tolerance is still alive among us, though not at the top. Our leaders behave like the partners in a bad marriage that is about to break up. But to a great extent they are just acting. What they really want is unfettered power, the kind that does not tolerate dissent, and the wealth and carnal delights that come with it. It is just an act. don't fall for it.
Indeed!!
Add... eliminate the Electoral. EVERY vote needs to count.
How about calling them CONS...eratives. Because all they do is lie and try to Con their followers to believe in there quasi-religious retorict.
LOL over and over.
Absolutely right on Robert, or as we say Down Under, "spot on".
To wrecklessly, or worse, deliberately undermine the legitimacy of the very institution intended to conserve good order is a bloody travesty. It can not be other than a clear and present danger to an almost 250 year-old republic, marvelously established with its better angels set on certain self-evident principles of good government.
The ungodly radicalisation of the U.S. Supreme Court and its recent jerk towards trumpism is really an extremely untimely international emergency. It's opening gambit, the invasion of established norms of the safety and wellbeing of women, amounts to creeping talibanism.
The United Nations Secretary General is boldly pleading for a united response to the climate emergency, even as the Security Council is torpedoed by putinism.
The ship of States' hull is open to rising seas of authoritarianism and planetary overshoot . We are all in this together.
It's all hands to the pump now.
From Wellington to Washington, from Novosibirsk to New York.
from Hamburg to Hiroshima,
we must surely organizie across our differences holding our placards with dignity as standards of a just peace on a livable planet.
Well said Alistair. We are 'no doubt' all in this together.
Robert, you knocked it out of the park once again: "They are radicals, intent on wrecking these institutions to impose their ideology on everyone else."
If a new term is needed to identify such ideology and its backers, I suggest "Neofeudalists".
The intent seems to be to restore an untouchable, unaccountable aristocracy who own and control everything, served by a peasantry kept forever ignorant, confused, fearful, distracted, and struggling -- unable to mount any significant opposition. And, further kept under control by the "palace guard" (a militarized police, utilizing occasional public executions (fatal traffic stops for minorities) to illustrate what might happen if anyone gets out of line.
It certainly feels that way to me but it’s so very difficult to categorize it in a word or two. Whether it’s neofeudalist as you suggest or radical or regressive as others have suggested, these are the words that speak to my feelings as to what the Republican Party leaders have become: callous, insidiously savage and brutal, disingenuous and predatory, disillusionment spreading ideologues, disdaining degenerate lowlife assassins. Maybe I’ll feel better after tomorrow’s Jan 6 hearings.
I have named their collective group the CRistofascist Authoritarian Party -- or CRAP, for short. I call them CRAP, or Crappers. All they are doing is crapping on the common good, our nation, our democracy.
You are proof that the left cant meme. Congratulations 🎉
Thanks for the compliment, Crapper.
Come on Robert, call a spade a spade.
Conservatives are illiberal by definition:
- Liberalism claims that rights are inherent, conservatives claim that they are inherited, privilege of birth.
- Liberalism claims that all are equal under the law, conservatives consider treatment under the law as a function of social rank.
People need to stop coddling conservatives, they are what they are, the enemy of our liberal society. Read about how conservatives reacted to liberal ideas and you'll see that there is no defense for them.
HEAR HERE!!! Very well and Succintly put. I Like it!
Standing ovation on this one! I’ve long said there’s nothing conservative about these traitors who are hell-bent on destroying democracy. (HUGE credit to the late great fraud-in-chief, Rush Limbaugh who pointed the finger at the true conservatives, who are left-leaners concerned with helping society—especially those less-fortunate, and calling us “liberals.”) And it works for their off-the-chart right-wing base, giving them justification for their evil shallow selfish ways…”THEY are the RIGHTeous”—HA/BARF. No…we can’t laugh because they have come far enough in their fraudulent agenda to shed their sheep-masks and reveal their wolf-natures that are covering the grim reality of their true fascist selves.
And of course—democracy doesnt work for those who want it all, complete with legalized slavery and free reign over the slaves. And we have arrived at the point where our democracy is replaced by MINORITY RULE.
You are so right, Robert—we need to bust the preposterous filibuster and all the other roadblocks to “one person/one vote” (electoral college, gerrymandering, & I think we may be served better to make all things related to voting, uniform, nationwide?)
Unprecedented times call for unprecedented measures and Biden needs to take the gloves off and do everything he possibly can to get things back to Good.
I am an old radical - interested in the root of problems. I wish you had chosen ‘extremists’ or ‘fascists’ as the label. I am for straight ticket - top to bottom Democratic Party (national, state, local offices ALL) voting to stop the fascists.
I wish I knew what a senate filibuster was before we in AZ elected Sinema. I wish I knew she was against eliminating the senate filibuster. Dems in AZ are sick to our stomachs. She is a joke with her idiotic wigs and no vote on minimum wage. She is an embarrassment.
Good point. Maybe deeper vetting of candidates is in order.
The predicate to everything else is to win the midterms, expand the Democratic base.
Help register more democrats. Contact Mervis Reissig
merv4peace@gmail.com
https://www.fieldteam6.org/
Could there be sustained <Occupy SCOTUS> encampments through November, or at least in DC and all states with upcoming senate primaries {MD [close to DC], AZ, WI, VT [an opportunity for Bernie to shine], MI [opportunity for Tlaib], WY, AK, FL, NY [AOC opportunity],...}?
Whose Bodies? OUR Bodies!
Whose EPA? OUR EPA!
Whose Assault Rifle Bans? OUR Bans!
Whose Church & State Separation? OUR Church & State Separation!
Whose Constitution? OUR Constitution!
Whose Campaign Finance Rules? OUR Campaign Finance Rules!
Whose Voting Rights Act, Votes & Poll Access? OUR Voting Rights Act, Votes & Poll Access!
Remember Trump's Riot!
Remember RBG!
For whom was a SCOTUS seat stolen? For Gorsuch a SCOTUS seat was stolen!
Whose charismatic Christian cult, People of Praise? Amy Coney Barrett's Christian cult!
Who's reaching to 17th Century Witch-Burners and Marital-Rapists for his "Originalism" opinions? Alito's reaching to Marital-Rapists!
Who's Bu(tt)Fu'ing America? I-Like-Beer Kavanaugh is Bu(tt)Fu'ing America!
Whose Pubic Hairs in Anita's Glass? Clarence Thomas's Pubic Hairs!
Whew!!! Indeed!!!
The Justices are out to destroy our Democracy our Constitution & our Freedom. They are putting themselves in charge of our Country. They are out of control & have absolutely no ethics. They don't care about the unborn all they care about is controlling women. They are so out of control that their hatred towards Gay Rights & Gay mariages is in the balance. Thomas has said that getting rid of gay marriages, womens right to vote is not in our Constitution. They want to come into our bedrooms & make it against the law to have relations with our parterns & make it against the law to onlty have relations to protuce a child. WTH!?!? It wouldn't surprise me if they took it back to owning slaves again! They want to make it against the law interracial marriages even. We have got to put presssure on to expand the Supreme Court. We also need to put pressure on Congress to make the Justices have term limits, minimum 8 yrs & no longer. The Court has to be balanced & it is not. Coney Barrett is involved in a cult, Kavanagh lied too Congress under oath along with the other Justice. Thomas helped his wife Ginnie to overturn our election. These two have to be investigated. These Justices are not above the law but they think they are. These Alt Right Conservative Justices have to be pressured to resign. They're showing that they want to control & run the Country. They are Putin puppets. Their thinking exactly like NAZIS. Our only hope is to VOTE & VOTE BLUE. No matter how hard ythey are trying to stop women & Blacks from Voting we have to push on. We can not allow these NAZI Justices to tell us what we can & can not do. We also can bot all the Nazi Evangelists to tell us want we can do. If the REPTARDS win we are doomed as a country. They will DESTROY OUR DEMOCRACY OUR CONSTITUTION & OUR FREEDOM. We will be controled by PUTIN ASSETS.
Please . . DON'T hold back!!! By all means don't be the good person who remains silent while tyranny assends!!!
Thomas should leave immediately. He's as corrupt as they come. The 3 The Clown appointed can leave. The Rightwingers are destroying this country. The supreme Court has way too much power. I've always said it should not be a lifetime appointment, 8 yrs then out.
The alternate party has degenerated from the KKK to the RRR.
Radical Regressive Republicans
Robert, it is truly unlikely that incumbent political leadership will undertake the measures suggested. You and I (and a few others on this site) have lived long enough to witness the pendulum of power swing. Over the long run, the ship of state rights itself. I can only wonder how historians will comment one day. We are living it and want things done…now. Sadly, government seldom responds…now. This does not mean our voices should not be heard. I have along the journey become convinced that a people get the government they deserve. Nevertheless we need to be prepared for the long struggle but keeping our course on track because events or issues will emerge to distract that focus and direction.
We should stop calling them Christians too.
Seditionist Hateful Ignorant Thugs Party. SHIT Party makes the perfect acronym. 😄
They are fascists, call them fascists.
"It is time for the justices to reread Justice Robert Jackson's famous dissent in Terminiello v. City of Chicago. In admittedly very different circumstances, he wrote words that need to be heeded today: "There is danger that, if the court does not temper its doctrinaire logic with a little practical wisdom, it will convert the constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact."fr.Michael Sean Winters,NCR,well written and I agree!
Neo-confederates is apt. Fascist is also.
Right on Robert!
(Al-Qaedicans) Let's label this ultra-conservative, religious inspired movement for what it really is. A movement that is forcing changes to laws bases on fundamentalist religious beliefs. An anti-female, homophobic and anti-democratic group striving to create a monotheistic puritanical Christian society where civil liberties are sacrificed in order to force a fundamentalist perspective on society. Al-Qaeda Republicans
I couldn't agree more!!! Republicans are masters at branding and they have taken "conservative" and "patriotic" and "defense" as labels for themselves when they do NOT deserve them!
For years I have been screaming that Democrats need to brand Republicans as "Radical Republicans" - heck, you've even got alliteration!
The two words shall henceforth ALWAYS be used together!
Maybe we can even make it alaw!
Keep talking and writing, Dr. Reich! I wish there were more like you.
As an English teacher, I instruct students on the structure of story. I begin by explaining that structure is like the human skeleton that keeps humans and animals held together and the framing that keeps buildings from falling down.
In the US today, our structures are not holding up. They are being whittled away by Republican politicians who don't seem to care about democracy, don't understand governing, and clearly don't care. It would be helpful to be rid of the Electoral College, clean up voting rights, and do something about those who abuse freedom of speech. Starting with Fox Propaganda.
(Al-Qaedicans)
Let's label this ultra-conservative, religious inspired movement for what it really is. A movement that is forcing changes to laws bases on fundamentalist religious beliefs. An anti-female, homophobic and anti-democratic group striving to create a monotheistic puritanical Christian society where civil liberties are sacrificed in order to force a fundamentalist perspective on society.
Al-Qaeda Republicans
Be careful what you wish for. Enlarging the Supreme Court could be a catastrophic error in judgment. As with Merrick Garland, Mitch McConnell will surely obstruct confirmation of any SCOTUS nominees until the GOP reclaims the White House.
Extrordinarily well put, Robert. But let us not forget that politics as usual has become a self serving business practice being appleid to governance throughout out Washongton et al. Corruption is as corruptiuon does on both side of the isle.
Absolutely 100%. I have long believed that the media, run by the plutocratic/ruling class are stealing/destroying the country but are untouchable. This country IS, RIGHT THIS MOMENT, substantially authoritarian. NOW. We live in minority rule. Maybe Biden became president, and maybe the Democrats THINK they have 3 branches of government but they have left in place a cabal of Trump loyalists in our "administrative state agencies". They can't govern because they can't agree on ANYTHING and they are top heavy with leaders septuagenarians and octogenarians who are utterly useless because THEY are captured by the big money of politics. So...where is this country going....THIS IS WHERE IT IS GOING WITH NO ONE TO STOP IT. Yet.
This current Supreme Court is taking America backwards and making America look stupid in the eyes of the Western World. How long before women loose more control. There were a majority of women that wonted the vote but still there were some who sided with the men to prevent it.
Recent story on CBS Morning Show told of a women hurting to the airport in Texas to pick up her son. She was in the two passenger only lane and was stopped by the police. When the officer told her she was getting a ticket because there needed to be two people in the car she pointed to her very much pregnant belly and told him that there were two people in the car. The office said that did not count as a second person. Well REALLY, Texas, which is it then? One law says it is a person and another say it is not.
The Doctor patient relationship will never be changed by a law.Twenty six states say no to any abortion,Twenty four say yes.Lest we forget the abortion pill effective, safe,and private.
Well said, RR. We need to use the RR you propose
https://www.nonviolenceny.org/post/introduction-to-the-work-and-ideas-of-george-lakoff
"In an interview, when asked why Conservatives are particularly good at framing, Lakoff’s simple response was: “Because they've put billions of dollars into it. Over the last 30 years their think tanks have made a heavy investment in ideas and in language”."
How about "hate crusaders"? Since the 1990s, beginning with radicals like Newt Gingrich and his chief propagandist Rush Limbaugh, the hate crusaders have been focused on provoking anger -- rage against an amorphous enemy they call "the left." The hate crusaders have been very successful. They have made millions of dollars selling hate, and they have convinced millions of Americans to hate their neighbors.
Let’s acknowledge what they are conserving. Items 1-10; wealth of the wealthy.
In support of this prime directive they also conserve: Income inequality, Racism, Freedom to destroy the environment, America’s leadership in gun violence, a Racist police state, and perhaps most importantly, the right of poor people to die without medical care, food or housing.
The most frightening and perhaps least conservative characteristic of the current right is an astounding ability to vilify anyone opposing their agenda. A fervor is created the bypasses all rational thought.
A well-funded group of radical regressives has taken over the once conservative Republican Party. First step is to recognize this.
Hear! Hear! I've never understood what self-named conservatives want to conserve.
I've often said "The only thing a" Conservative" conserves is his own pocket book while picking yours"!
When Barack Obama moved into the Oval Office in 2009 is when Republicans began to fight fire with fire. Obama team and their style brought to the USA Trump. “To know who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” When playing a game one can't change the rules because you don't like who is winning. Learn to play the game better. Exactly how Biden won. Zuckerbucks did not change the rules. They figured out how to play the game better.
I think that calling these republicans radical is just too kind. They are Fascists intent upon destroying the Constitution and imposing an autocratic fascist state.
Thanks, Robert! It's about time we stopped calling the extreme right "conservatives". What of our nation's founding Constitution and democratic norms are they carefully conserving—other than their own self-interests? They do not hesitate to call even the most moderate, centrist Democrats "extreme leftists"! It's about time we fought back with the truth!
This is all so true but then I see the Democrats in their usual circular firing squad instead of acting on what you have laid out. They are their own worst enemy.
Totally agree. "Conservative" carries with it a connotation of respectability, competence, and concern about good government that the individuals you mentioned, along with most Republican officeholders, don't possess.
I would call them extremists, or maybe radical extremists.
Thank You. Exactly what needs to be done… ☮️🌹
Radical they are but still on the conservative and republican side. They are all three but radical does name them better. Also obstructive and obnoxious. Not a good word in the list.
How about calling them CONS...eratives. Because all they do is lie and try to Con their followers to believe in there quasi-religious retorict.
Liz C can run against Trump unless he finally gets arrested before the nominations.
I think just "Regressives" works fine.
Yes, Professor, but HOW do we do all the things that you (and I) say need to be done? Please don't say "vote in November". We need these things done NOW!
All legal and political safeguards are duly sprung out of the way for this country to barrel toward full-fledged fascism. An interesting phenomenon to witness from a psychological standpoint, but one that will bring tremendous suffering to the country along with terrible consequences for the world. In the meantime, we have in the White House a useless coward who thinks that it would be too "polarizing" to show some leadership and forcefully bring us back to more democracy.
From now on I know what to call them: Double R's, or RR's, as opposed to another of their enemies the "rinos" who are the real conservatives I knew 40 years ago. As far as I'm concerned let the RR's split the party, and we, the progressives, must help as many people registered to vote as possible.
Help register more democrats. Contact Mervis Reissig
merv4peace@gmail.com
https://www.fieldteam6.org/
"They are radicals, intent on wrecking these institutions to impose their ideology on everyone else."
Comparing Europe to the US, one of the outstanding features of the US is the influence of libertarian philosophy on how we tackle here political and economic problems (tax is theft, the night-watchman state, private property and free markets are always the solution, etc). While this starts out from the laudable aim to create a society free from coercion, pushing libertarian ideals too far leads to exactly the opposite of what was originally intended (and we could debate why it is that this happens).
Ironically, then, libertarianism and socialism are two sides of the same coin, both pushing opposite ideas too far. I believe that we could learn sth from Aristotelian ethics which sees virtue in the balance between two opposites.
These are fascists. Cultists. They hear the call to a racist collective subconscious.
Take no prisoners.
Well said Mr. Reich!
This is clear and thank you for helping me along with the old problem of 'what' is a conservative in modern America. Thank you again!
As usual, Reich is right. I just wish he'd run for POTUS.
hear hear Robert,conservative has a ring of sound reasoning a wasted description on these repugnants
repuglicans
Tell it, Brother Robert!
Thanks for writing what I have been saying for some years. What's "conservative" about a radical con job? If more people were exposed to the concept of conning the electorate to get them to vote for fascists, we might stand a chance of staying what passes for "free." Instead of being gradually herded into camps.........
There is--as far as I know--no mention whatsoever of political parties anywhere in the United States Constitution. I believe this was because the framers of the document were slightly (!) suspicious that political parties might be divisive and a source of corruption and concentration of power that would be counter-productive to the new nation. They were also well-aware of the damage done by partisans in Europe and were trying to avoid what they regarded as mistakes. However, the idea of political parties took hold rather quickly and since around 1800 we have had to deal with parties. The fears of the framers have been realized to the point where those without specific party affiliation generally get nowhere in the American political apparatus. However we have come to the point where American politicians will no longer attempt to follow the will of the majority of voters but will dutifully line up behind the party leader and let him call all the shots and take the positions and try to pass the policies and programs the party leader dictates (or alternately simply refuse to pass policies and programs that the majority of voters want but a single head of a party has decided threatens the well-being and prosperity (and status quo) of the party. (This extends, of course, to decisions involving who sits on the Supreme Courts and this has given us a SCOTUS in one political and social camp, an electorate in another.) This is about as far from democracy and participant government as you can get. Very few voters believe they have an influence and role in government because they do not have an influence and role in government. It may interest you to know that the President of Ukraine, Volodyrmyr Zelenskyy, is an independent, a leader with no affiliation in any party and, it seems to me, that Ukraine is doing far better in terms of democracy than such old staid (stale) democracies-on-paper as the UK and the USA. (Ukrainians are paying a heavy price for their determination to be free but the price is because of external forces, not because of a failure of democracy.) I believe the members of both parties (but especially the Republicans) have failed to understand that those elected to public office are chosen to represent the will of all the people and that includes situations where the majority of voters are of a different party than the representative. We have come far away from the principles of the US Constitution and we no longer seem to be guided by ideas of fairness, justice, compassion, empathy, and an abiding faith in our communities and ourselves. I do not know whether we will recover. It may be that we are lost forever and will replicate the authoritarian leader/oligarchy of our generally European progenitors.
A few days ago, a friend of mine sent me a news video and commentary by one Tom Walker (aka Jonathan Pie) concerning the recent resignation of Boris Johnson as Prime Minister of the UK. (Boris is a Brit version of Donald Trump so it was hard to know whether Mr Pie was describing Boris or Donald.I had forgotten that the Brits do not mince words when it comes to political commentary and Mr. Pie was certainly no exception in his piece, "Bye, bye Boris!" What struck me was how bold and daring and truthful Mr. Pie was and how prissy and timid our own political commenters have been, the way our folks pussy-footed around as though Donald Trump was in any way normal or worthy of our respect--which he is not. If the GOP had done their duty and due diligence as representatives of the citizens (and voters) of the nation, if the press and public media had been more forthcoming, ifeveryone had been so well informed as to what Trump was up to, we would have missed out on the last seven years of misery, dissension, and unnecessary hardship. We would have been able to point to progress on all fronts. Our combination of poorly informed citizens; representatives in it for themselves; a bought Supreme Court; a powerful oligarchy; and an ignorant bumkin posing as the President have brought us to our current deplorable state. If you find the Brits a bit to bold and daring, you might check out Jordan Klepper's interviews with Trump supporters who reflect the abysmal state of the uninformed, uneducated, unconcerned school-leavers (to sound British) who will soon inflict their brand of leadership on the rest of us. It's going to take years to recover from our tacit surrender from citizenship, responsibility, and, well, adulthood.
The ONLY thing wrong with this piece is that it isn't required reading for EVERY literate citizen in the country! And required listening for the rest!
Well finally. I've been arguing that the cons are not conservative, but radical. Finally someone else agrees. Now dont let up. Keep the pressure on by spreading the word questioning their "conservative" claims. The cons have taken over most lawmaking. To our great regret. Don;t let them wiggle away like th worms that they are from the damage they are doing o the nation.
If all these suggestions were to take place, it would solve a lot of the problems, but please, how is that to be done? I can only imagine it would take a revolution and a new constitution.
GOP = Gang Of Predators
aka Greedy Old Perverts
They're greedy, but like Jonny Reb -- who was emphatically *not* R but who is somehow a direct ancestor -- they don't get any of the loot; they're old, and demented, or just act like it; and they spend what's left of their time reanimating the inquisition and laying egregious invasive laws on regular citizens in their bedrooms and private lives, right up in their skivvies, while of course screeching that 'the gummint better keep out of *my* business' . . . b.rad . . . ps good one
Exactly . Conserving what ? Their corporately lined three piece suit silk pockets ? How about we conserve a tad bit of noblesk on the international stage ? How about we as a government, nation and people return to the lofty, yet still unataned goals on which our nation was idealically based . How about we leave our anger, hatred, sexism, xenophobia, fear, judgements, greed, gluttony and lust behind us . ALL FOR ONE AND ONE FOR ALL !
RIGHT.........
We are fast approaching a time when no individual candidate for public office, no candidate for public service, no political party will do, that is, we will essentially be ungovernable. How on earth did that happen? you may wonder. Well, the Republican Party and its predilection for such as Donald Trump gave us a strong push in that direction. They gave us a presidential candidate, then a president, whose main concern was not serving the needs and concerns of the country but self-service. We stirred in a big batch of self-service on our own and then we decided to go to a kind of either/or decision making process with no effort to understand the other side of any issue and no respect for those holding opposing views. Everything became a sort of "you're either with me or agin' me and woe to you if you're agin' me." THere was no middle ground and so everyone moved to the poles: pro-choice or anti-abortion in all instances; strict gun control or shoot-'em=up wild west; attack anyone different or blindly accept deviant behavior and lawlessness.; all kinds of perks for those in favor and deprivation for those struggling to get by. Much of this polarization of Americans can be traced back to alliances between racists and those who really long to return to some sort of idyllic paradise (that never really was) and Trump has played to this sort of odd and eager longing for past better days. But both parties and our elected representatives of both parties need to look at challenges with clear eyes and with the intent of finding agreement and policies that will help the people they were elected to serve. (All the people) If the Republicans are unable to do this, perhaps we should bid the GOP adieu and create a party more interested in moving forward than regracing their way back to a time that never really existed.
.... and could the so called, liberal media like NYT and OPB Newshour, stop equally incorrectly calling Manchin and Sinema - of all things - "moderates"!
....putting Trump in jail or at least convicting him of some of massive list of crimes he has committed would go a long way towards extinguishing this nonsense--why can't the Dems get it done instead of dancing on the head of the pin.
I forgot the obvious- they hate the truth and they hate women
How about calling them what they are: Fascists. The Republicans hate democracy, hate democratic process, hate non whites, hate regulating corporations, hate the EPA, LOVE Guns (for white people). Why are people reluctant to call them what they are?
I recently saw a youtube video of a biting critique by one Tom Walker, an English actor and political commentator going by the pseudonym of Jonathan Pie and offering his take on the recent resignation of Boris Johnson as Prime Minister of the UK. What was striking was not Pie's remarks concerning Johnson's utter failure as an executive and his depravity as an ordinary human being but the fact that he barred no-holes, he allowed viewers to see his own outrage and anger at what came down to Johnson's betrayal of his oath of office and his duty to the citizens of the United Kingdom. Pie had no qualms about laying the blame for the past 3-1/2 years where it belonged: at the hands of the Tory (Conservative Party). (After all, Pie told us, the Conservatives all knew what Johnson was like before they chose him to lead the party and the nation; Johnson was not a deep dark secret or dark horse, he was out there for all to see.) In like fashion, the Republican Party knew full well what they would be getting if they chose Trump as their candidate and lead-man but they went for him whole-hog and insisted on shielding him from his own malfeasance, defending him, denigrating anyone decent who had the temerity to question or criticize him. And so here we are. We may as well be standing in front of the Houses of Parliament in London. It would have decent and loyal to our republic to stand up for truth and honesty and decency in government but that is not what we got from the Republicans and that is not what we're getting now. Instead, we get to watch the Committee Hearings and see the final two honest, decent, patriotic (in the best sense) Republicans in the entire nation (Cheney and Kimzinger) participate in the tattered remains of what used to be a democracy.
The US is _still_ a democracy, despite that perhaps one half of its only two permitted political parties, not the one currently in power, is openly calling for and indulging in sedition against the lawful institutions of the country. Thus, we are in an ENDANGERED democracy, with one party looking to overthrow the system of government to one of their own unchecked rule and the other party blocked from meaningful response by a handful of gerontocratic sell=outs at the top of its hierarchy who eschew any risks to their corporate fealty machine. A _Weimer_ democracy, in other words. It's not too late to act, but action is what is needed, not more words and handwringing.
they like hiding behind the name conservative it sounds like its the right thing to do and yet they have become the most radical of the two parties whipping out basic human rights little by little .
I agree with Robert Reich that radical Republicans are not Conservatives and should not be called as such. Edmond Burke was suppotive of institutions not authoritarianism. The father of modern conservativism might respond to them by saying "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." I would say it will take a bold face of Democracy to restore our rights in this Republic!
Abolition of the filibuster with regard to court appointments is the wrong way to keep radicals off the bench. The filibuster should be restored to court appointments in order to institutionalize a degree of sanity. Abolish the filibuster for everything else!
Thank you for framing and naming this.
Agree! Agree! Agree! Agree! Robert, I agree on all counts! Please keep up your great work in calling it like it is. I am not optimistic that truth, justice, and good old commonsense will prevail in America. It all seems a bit hopeless. But I haven't given up hope (because you told me not to) and I am comforted (if only a bit) by your essays.
There is one group that particularly thrives in times of chaos, the psychopathic types that like to use violence as a strategy. Nations and businesses thrive during orderly times. If you want to control those, you need change and can get that by causing chaos. The perhaps most evil character in Game of Thrones, Peter Baelish, called Littlefinger, expressed it well this way: "Chaos isn’t a pit. Chaos is a ladder". Repubs want to use that ladder to climb to power.
There is one group that particularly thrives in times of chaos, the psychopathic types that like to use violence as a strategy. Nations and businesses thrive during orderly times. If you want to control those, you need change and can get that by causing chaos. The perhaps most evil character in Game of Thrones, Peter Baelish, called Littlefinger, expressed it well this way: "Chaos isn’t a pit. Chaos is a ladder". Repubs want to use that ladder to climb to power.
"These are conservative measures." Absolutely. If one is legitimately conservative, the concept of checks and balances amongst the branches of American Federal government is absolutely intrinsic. NO institution should be able, by its own unilateral action, to abolish sweeping and established prerogatives and central pieces to the Constitution such as the separation of Church and state, included in the founding document for very good and still valid reasons. Yet the execrable majority on the current Court has effectively just gutted the separation of Church and state for example, by forcing State governments to fund private religious institutions _against their will and own charters_.
That said, I resist calling the five, and the larger part of the current Republican Party 'radicals,' a term generally reserved for the left of the political spectrum (which is where I can be found). Call them what they are: fascists. I'm dead serious. It's time to take the gloves off, call the extreme majority dictatorial nativists opposed to the very basics of American governance and societal tradition, and to act against them in the spirt of the extreme threat which they pose. The Gang of Five on the Court are deeply un-American in the most basic sense: they have no respect for law and institutional structure, and are prepared to use any lie whatsoever to justify their extreme seizure of power. They have blatantly misrepresented the basic facts of dispute in several rulings this term, such as the prayer ruling; NO respect for the law whatsoever in their process. The legislating from the bench of the Court we are seeing now is absolutely breathtaking in the sheer unlawfulness of its sweep. The Court is frankly usurping Congress on entire categories of measures, such as gun 'rights' (there are none, in the Constitution or statue), elevation of corporation status to near godlike standard with powers at the same time denied to women and minorities by equally sweeping measures.
We have been in a Constitutional crisis for 22 years since the Supreme Court, with no such power granted to them by the Constitution, simply appointed a US President of their liking, and the country let them get away with it. I have to say that, personally, I welcome the present moment of danger because the extraordinary unlawful and fascistic seizure of power by extremists on the Court is now finally a defining issue before us. It is the American public and the very large majority of us deeply attached to American institutions and their values who have to seize the day. Myself, I'd welcome a 'Glorious Revolution.' though this immediate struggle can be won at the ballot box---unless the Court simply strikes down results it doesn't like by invented reasons, something by no means out of the question in the present climate. James II Stuart, King of England, had the statutory authority to force all of his countrymen to accept his personal preference for the Catholic faith, but had not the support of the vast majority of the English who wished AND WOULD TOLERATE NO SUCH THING.
Well, we don't have to tolerate an extremist Court. Oust the those extremists, completely reshape the size, tenures and prerogatives of the Court, impose a rigorous standard of ethics which would if in place have forced the impeachment and removal of Thomas (the worst Justice in the history of the court by now) and Scalia at the very least, and now certainly Kavanaugh and Gorsuch: yes, absolutely yes. And get on with other absolutely essential reforms like we're at it, like the 'rotten borough' problem of tiny conservative states clinging to totally undeserved legislative prowess in Congress, the obscenity of the Electoral College amongst other things, the grotesquerie of gerrymandering and voter suppression essentially authorized by the extremists on current Court, the extreme imbalances resulting from the private financing of electoral campaigns, and more I could mention. If we're going to have to go over the top to save our basic institutions---and we are nanometers from that extremity let's be clear---let us not stop a quarter way to a lasting reconfiguration of rights, power, and institutions made by, for, and of us ALL in keeping with the centuries old values of the American people, with which the Gang of Five are wiping their collective behinds and waving the results in our faces just right now.
I will add that I thoroughly detest the mislabel of 'moderates' for sold out obstructionists always right of center in the political spectrum. And lest anyone forget, the leadership of the American Revolution were the ACTUAL radicals of their day, in that the liberalism which they embodied was so far to the left of accepted political discourse in their era that few were even on their side of a putative left-right divide. All that is a screed for another day, however.
The term "conservative" to describe modern Republicans bugs me, too, since they are anything but. More appropriate terms are regressive, reactionary, authoritarian, corporatist, fascist, barbarist, seditionist, treasonous, terrorist, depending on which individuals we're referring to.
Theocratic Republicans.
Let's call them what they really are: "Theocratic" Republicans. Their goal for the past 40 years has been and continues to be to replace our 200+ year experiment in self-government with a Theocracy.
Thank you. When I took civics in high school in Detroit (1962), we learned about radicals, liberals, conservatives and reactionaries. I think it may be over-simplified, but the definitions fit. I wish civics was required in high school. Sigh.
The analysis is good; the solution is terrible. If we could expand the court, by the time it came time to fill the new seats there would be a Republican majority in Congress meaning more of the same radical right-wing justices.
Dr. Reich. You are so correct about what has happened to the "supreme" court with the last several picks and I agree TERM LIMITS are a MUST and expanding the number of justices (but ONLY because it will be MORE difficult for those with power to "buy off" five or six of them). Radical may even be a soft term for these republicans, extremists seems more appropriate. I keep asking WHO or WHAT is doing this to OUR democracy. Someone or an entity is PAYING for these campaigns and creating or overtaking MEDIA to brainwash the uneducated masses with their propaganda. Who and what is motivating them? They WANT something when they have accomplished their goals of taking over the majorities in our government. Furthermore, why have the democrats sat silently on the sidelines for so many years and let this crap happen? No one is capable of standing up to McConnell?? The dems seem impotent when they should be FIGHTING hard. The old democrat leadership would NOT let Sinema or Manchin to hijack the agenda. They would be threatened with having their corruption exposed and other hard arm-twisting tactics. Manchin and his Epipen price gouging under his daughter, while his wife is pushing the Epipen into public schools, though I just KNOW Joe Manchin had no idea about any of that. Have MOST of the Democratic representatives decided that the campaign cash is much more important to them than actually doing something FOR the American people? No endless talking on the Senate floor to filibuster? Now you just signal it. WHY have both sides made this so easy? Would Roe v. Wade EVER have been overturned if the Congress PASSED a law establishing this RIGHT when they had majorities?? Again, it appears to be weakness, or collusion. Yesterday I read that Chuck Todd (someone on the supposed democrat side - msnbc) said the U.S.A. was not ready to prosecute trump and said it would be a mistake to do so. What?? The BIGGEST MISTAKE would be NOT to prosecute him!! That sends a message to ALL Americans that LAWS ARE THERE TO BE BROKEN!! Reminds me of Obama's administration NOT prosecuting Wall Street for their part in the Great Recession. Instead, while millions of people lost their jobs and homes, Wall Street received HUGE BONUSES because they were "too big to fail!" In a capitalist system, you FAIL. PERIOD. No wonder our country and democracy is failing. NOTHING WILL IMPROVR UNLESS WE HOLD PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ILLEGAL BEHAVIOR!! Even if they are found "not guilty" at least they can say they tried. NOT trying at all makes you complicit in the bad behavior.
I think my comments may have disappeared. You stole my point. These people wish to return to the first 15 minutes of Gone With the Wind when They knew their place working at Tara and when Bob's ancestors were living in the style Streisand's Yental.
George Orwell. said in in his writings. To have totalitarianism destroy the language.
The Queen of Hearts in Alice in Wonderland, "Words mean what I wish them to mean>"
You stole my talking points. I think these people wish to return to the first 15 minutes of Gone With the Wind, when they knew their place working on Tara and when Bob's ancestors lives like the characters if Streisand's Yentel.
George Orwell had its right. When you wish totalitarianism destroy not the means of production but the means of communication. Back to the Queen of Hearts, "Words mean what I wish them to mean"
Attention Noah Websters descendents at the Springfield Office of the Merrian Webster Dictionary!
These justices call themselves "originalists" but have ignored the founding fathers' comments on strict separation of church and state. These people want a theocracy governed by the rich and the corporations. Just NO!
Professor -- Thanks! Been hoping you would pound the table with this insight for some time . . . I want to conserve human rights, I want to conserve voting rights, I want to conserve social security, I want to conserve medicare -- it just goes on. I'm very conservative -- as a progressive liberal!
Literal nazis and klan members -- plus know-nothings -- are not 'conservative.' As you say. But that's all I can detect in what is left of the R party. Republican? Which one is Lincoln? It's just the descendants, literally and by creed, of the dregs of the old southern slave and jim crow party.
Next, 'right-wing' etc. A bird needs a left wing and right wing to balance itself in flight, and to navigate one dominates, a little, at the right time. But no balance is provided by the cabal that refers to itself as 'right wing,' it exists and operates to destabilize.
This is part of the names and terms game that corrupt conspiracies play -- induce the mainstream to use righteous terms to describe the corrupt and traitorous. 'Right to Work' law? No. 'Patriot Act?' No.
Next, 'theory.' Theory is a sacred word in our secular republic. Lies are not theories! We make obeisance to corruption and corrosive gangs when we call a lie, an idiotic fantasy, a deliberate undermining collusion, a 'theory.'
best luck to US -- b.rad
Robert Riech is a liar. Robert is a Marxist. Robert is always dividing Americans with this horseshit. He wants to enlarge the Supreme Court, limit the term of justices, all because he can't have his way. He wants the filibuster abolished to pass laws to fit his Marxist ideas. Robert tells us want we SHOULD do. But think about it for a minute. In a democracy, not everything is going to go the way you want it. It is why we vote. Robert wants this country to be a one-party rule. Which is fine, until they tell you how to live or what you're going to do for the rest of your life. Marxism is communism, where government control is part of your everyday life by the use of the propaganda, the type you're reading from Mr. Reich right now. Don't be fooled. Be aware folks. Robert is not the person you think he is.
You write like a John Bircher. How did Bircherites crawl back into the Republican tent after WF Buckley called such loonies out for political hygiene preservation?
Sorry, Robert simply says what COULD be achieved by a more conscious approach overall.
And maybe, just maybe there are brighter minds that can step back and see the issues of human nature more clearly?
Worth a try, maybe better than the experiment thus far, we have so much to learn if we are prepared to admit that we know diddly squat right now.
Might be worth a read from another learned man https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/return-wholeness-what-we-need-now-deepak-chopra-md-official-
Agree once again with your astute perspectives, however IMHO, again goes much deeper than just Biden and the current Democrats, who BTW are avoiding many of the larger issues due to inherent conflicts of interest.
Another snapshot of challenges facing America and as Jeffrey Sachs says 'were in a mess' https://johnmenadue.com/jeffrey-sachs-speaks-the-situation-in-the-world-after-covid-19-and-the-war-in-ukraine/
Jeffrey Sachs video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SequPvRFn0
The Republican Party has spent an enormous amount of time and effort into Coining the praise conservative at least 60 years. I would guess it started before Barry Goldwater, driving that simple idea into people's heads along with the banking money making investors corrupt and straight. Whipping away the veil of delusion in this case is not easy. If only it could be cut away in one clean swift effort within two or three months but I don't think so.
The Republican Party has spent an enormous amount of time and effort into Coining the praise conservative at least 60 years. I would guess it started before Barry Goldwater, driving that simple idea into people's heads along with the banking money making investors corrupt and straight. Whipping away the veil of delusion in this case is not easy. If only it could be cut away in one clean swift effort within two or three months but I don't think so.
The Republican Party has spent an enormous amount of time and effort into Coining the praise conservative at least 60 years. I would guess it started before Barry Goldwater, driving that simple idea into people's heads along with the banking money making investors corrupt and straight. Whipping away the veil of delusion in this case is not easy. If only it could be cut away in one clean swift effort within two or three months but I don't think so.
Indeed!
For the last few years I have been using the term "regressives" to label most Rs, certainly most R politicians. Not only does it contrast logically with "progressive", it also captures the essence of the modern party much better than does "conservative", which, as you suggest, hardly seems accurate.
“They continue to assert without any basis in fact that the 2020 election was stolen.”
It’s astounding to me how, even in an article saying we should call things what they are (they are not “conservative“) that a liberal will still wimp out and mince their words. Even when riled up, those on the left demonstrate a constant reluctance and hesitation to be blunt and direct. To use plain, direct English and call people on their shit.
“assert without any basis in fact“?
For gods’ sake, just say “they LIE”
What should we call them?
If I ama PROgressive, doesn't that make Regressives?
I wish I could get A WILD IDEA into play for what could really change how widely separated we are. Any trial or fraud conviction won't put off Trump’s followers, where we will stay divided even if we get our pounds of flesh, but, instead, how about an intervention? Get Trump to show up on some fabrication and get the Republicans who've been testifying against him to sit in a circle with him and read him chapter and verse. For what the country needs, offer him total immunity from all prosecutions to admit he lost and whatever he’d say about that – omg, a Trumpian mea culpa would be something to behold. But he is speaking for the good of the country, to unite us. He might love being that kinky hero.
By the time I wake you and see what you've posted not long after midnight my time, there are hundreds of responses and I don't think you are reading them anymore so no way to get to you. Of course, I'm doing it again here where there already are 291 responses. Being so popular, perhaps you could have a focus on what would be valuable for anyone who has too busy a life to keep up in with all the conversation you generate. How about getting your staff to collect answers to what people would do if they ran the country? Have a link you maintain for that collection that we all could benefit from??? Is anyone reading this who has any way to get to Robert?
Thank you Professor Reich! For a long time now I have wanted to wretch when the cheerful newscasters have described Republicans. tRumpers included. as “conservative”. The republicans project their radicalism when they refer to the “radical left.”
I really think if democracy is to continue in this land, that both Independents and Democrats have got to open their mouths and shout that these people are not even remotely conservative but are radical seeking a fascist authoritarian government.
Why I wonder did not Biden pull in Bernie Sanders to his administration ? Bernie is anything but young, but his message penetrated generational barriers.
Why the hell is Bernie’s voice not sought?
I don’t think people don’t like the policies of this administration it’s the president himself that is losing popularity , whic is a bit of a wander off topic.
I love the ideas put forward by Professor Reich.
Biden is nothing more then a bought and paid for puppet (asleep at the wheel) as are the rest of these War Criminals! Anytime you want more money for killing and bombing in a place you have no right to be in, both Criminal Parties are right there with the money! Everyone needs to wake up and see these Criminals for what they are! Criminals!
Yep. A while back I started saying conservatives aren’t conservative. In the least. They don’t deserve that label. It isn’t true.
Thank you Professor,for once again pointing out, restating, and reinforcing what is. and/or should be obvious to all Americans who indeed support the need to take conservative measures to conserve and protect our governing institutions.
Sincerely, Ed Cherlin
In old political science radicals were on the left of the spectrum. Reactionaries were on the right...are these justices radical reactionaires?
Of course, Trump Republicans are not conservatives. They are Fascists!
Totally agree with you Robert Reich. There is nothing conservative about them or their agenda. I can't post what I call them because it's very obscene.
Even during the Trump presidency the Republicans tried hard to paralyze the federal government. Their aim, as Bannon made clear, is to restore the Confederacy--nation-wide!
Liz Cheney is better than Rubio
Kasich is better than tRump
Bernie is better than Hillary
Dem is better than Repub
...
Don't act in fear of tRump by endorsing Liz
Sorry for an unrelated post, but maybe someone will get a chuckle about the implications for the PA elections: After the news about Trump staining the lunchroom walls with ketchup...
John Kerry's ketchup company name will have a less visible presence in Western PA:
https://finance.yahoo.com/video/pittsburgh-steelers-heinz-field-renamed-160815316.html
Today’s conservatives are NOT radicals. Radical/radicalism has liberal connotations. Today’s conservatives are REACTIONARY…
How to handle radical Repugs? VOTE BLUE IN 22! If the filibuster is to come to an end and abortion rights restored we all need to work to elect more Democrats. It should not be too hard given the issues at stake---like democracy, women's reproductive rights, guns, and gun massacres.
Why install more puppets who will do the same thing as they always have? These are criminals and they have shown themselves for what they are! Take all your democrats and do the right thing vote 3rd party! If you can muster up enough to put a Democrat in office why not save our country and combine all of your Voter base to the 3rd party and together GET THESE CRIMINALS OUT OF OFFICE! The repubs will fall by the wayside!
You go right ahead and waste your vote on Third party candidates. Just don't vote for any GOP fascists please! I know that most Democrats have the interests of the people at heart no matter what you think.
Really? You like war, torture and the destruction of the planet? Every single politician in Washington is a millionaire or more even if they weren't beforehand. I'm poor and they sure have my interest at heart, right below what beach front property they will be staying at instead of doing their job in Washington!
They are enemies of the republic and the people.
Republicans are no longer a viable political party... they are rogues on a path against democracy, bent on destruction, fear, and take over for the purposes of the rich and corporate. They have, as a group, leaving no opportunity or tolerence for anything like individuality, conscicence, morality, ethics, integtity, patiotism, liberty and justice for all... and forget government of, by, and for the people... Really bad that the people with the worst ideas.... somehow have the best plans to spread their disease. Dems need some great minds who know how to rejuvinate real pariotism and love of our country, over any party, and over false fears.
(Pancha Chandra): America is at a very dangerous political cross-road until Donald Trump is neutralised, his rhetoric could create unrest. Senior Republicans should try & drill some sense into him! He loves to stir the pot & watch the fun! Ethical Republicans should give him an urgent dressing down! Trump cares too hoots! Typical!
Capital C Conservative. Hang it around their necks like the albatros they murdered until it stinks to high heaven. May they all choke on it.
We really need a word.
They may be radical members of the Republican Party, but their values are very nearly the opposite of that. They seem to want an American Aristocracy coupled with White Supremacy. They want to blow up basically all the Institutions and share a contempt of American-style Liberalism with the Woke Brigade.
Yes professor soooo true.
Why did you not include news outlets in your 'them'. CNN is conservative through and through but like the others they brand themselves as moderate/centrist. And indeed everyone I know who calls themselves moderate are covering up calling themselves conservative - especially in the Democrat Party and news outlets. A test I use - are they anti-progressive. My logic is moderate==anti progressive==conservative. And the very best test - do you support Medicare For All. My logic is All==progressive != conservative. Then the very best test is use test cases. The one I find most telling is how CNN in 1 to 2 week period, in sync with Clyburn adds (incluedes interview played over and over) in the SC primaries, when Bernie was ahead of Biden, but Bernie had to withdraw from engaging any more in SC primaries because of the strength of propaganda machine, ie CNN, Peolosi, Clyburn, Biden (Sanders saw through Biden trogon horse antics). Bernie == progressive==Medicare For All = enemy of Obama Care was labeled ( The FIRST line in EVERY introduction of Bernie segment as Breaking News) every 15 minutes 24-7 for at least a week on CNN as Bernie the self proclaimed Socialist==Medicare For All.
I am sure Robert you would agree that todays news outlets are much more of a propaganda machine than their self proclaimed Breaking News. And I am sure you would agree that todays news outlets associations with conservatives ( in form of trogon horse/ subliminal messaging / imaging ) are enormous enablers to the Right Wing lunatics antics and con messaging.
And professor, indeed stop saying the current Republican party are conservatives. You do that with letters to each cable news show every time they do it by calling out by name of anchor directly. The caveat as in all con jobs are not available directly with letters or social media comments. So as I see it via my experience the system blocks everyway to implement your - stop calling them conservatives other than to a bar buddie or church pew fellow etc.
It's so frustrating to read these truths and feel that there's nothing I personally can do, and no influence I can exert, other than voting, to reverse this course. McConnell and his ilk have NO interest in what the majority populace wants; all they want is to retain and extend their power and greed. I am so at a loss as to what to do...
Sadly the GOP is no longer the "Grand Old Party" of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, or even Reagan or Bush. They have become more of a cult than a political organization.
It's creeping Fascism (authoritarian repugnicans) attempting to take over our country. It must be stopped at any cost or American freedom will be lost.
You are exactly right. The media is to a great extent to blame for misrepresenting what has/is taking place by the words it uses. I remember when pro-choice became pro-abortion; I complained in letters to editors because it confused the thinking, and tainted the conversation…..and here we are. The same is true in the language about guns, regulations, campaign finance, etc. I fear most mainstream media has been bought off by the same forces backing Trump and the Republicans - hence the reluctance to make your point to the broader public. The Republican Party and Trump are one and the same; they want the same thing: a permanent Republican majority, an autocracy with a strongman in total control and a dismantling of our democratic institutions. The mainstream media isn’t imparting “fake news”………it’s imparting what I call half news; we never get the full story, the information we need to form sound judgements. We’ve been manipulated into division so deep that we’re broken, perhaps beyond repair. What did Lincoln say about “a house divided”…….?
We do need a more accurate term than "conservative." "Radical" indicates a degree of intensity but does not specify content, however. Someone can be a radical leftist or a radical right-winger. "Rightwing" might be an acceptable substitute for "conservative" with some of the mainstream media although "rightwing extremist" might be too clear for their delicate "journalistic" sensibilities.
Robert, while I don’t disagree with your observations, I fault your “solution.” Applying a band aid to an appendectomy is not a cure; similarly, increasing the number of Supreme Court justices from nine to 12, 15, or 21 is, at best, a short-term cure to a long-term disease. The “cure” requires electing state and national representatives who reflect the will of the majority. And that, in turn, requires a knowledgeable, participatory constituency; a constituency not swayed by “false news” spewed by a One Percent obsessed with dictating how the Ninety-Nine Percent live. Sans the “cure,” the baser elected representatives will continue to promote judges willing to enact their bidding regardless of size of the Supreme Court.
As soon as I started reading your post, my thoughts went to these are Radicals! That is what I am calling them from now on! So, the call for all of us, is to get more Democrats elected. It is the only way we are going to stop this. Get involved! If you are afraid to knock on doors, find a friend to go with you. Make calls. Register people to vote. So, if you say you are a Republican and not a Radical, you must suck it up and vote for Democrats. If you say you could never vote for a D, well then you are a Radical. Plain and simple.
While I like and appreciate the ingenuity of "neo-Confederates", I've always liked "radical Republicans" because, to me at least, that's what they are.
Thank you for saying this! I would actually take it a step further. They are not only radical, they are EXTREMIST!!!
As it was presented to me in school, "Radical" was generally associated with something new and. very progressive, way ahead of it's time or too much change for folks in this time to accept.
The Left was associated with "Radical".
They would non-violently break laws that were unjust through Civil Disobedience.
When I was growing up this would have been the Civil Rights movement.
Then in the the center you had the liberals and the conservatives.
Then way to the Right, you had "Reactionaries". As the name suggests,
these folks are reacting to change they don't like, and are doing everything they can to change the clock back.
Up to, and including cheating, lying, and terror.
And yes, murder.
(P.S. there were groups like the Weathermen who used terror tactics as well. You find this behavior on the frindges. The further out you go, the more dangerous they get).
I've been saying this for quite some time. Glad to see someone with clout stating what I consider the obvious. Beyond governance, there is nothing conservative about them either--not the environment nor the well being of the citizenry.
I sometimes wonder why I have the feeling weve been in a long-term war (not the physical ones, but perhaps political/economic, corporate?) we've been distracted from (development, progress, I remember those words) - and years ago we lost.
Now there's a cult of henchmen (the "cleanup crew" - think mafia here - that is clearing the road, preparing the way for the victor(s) to walk in and claim their prize.
Aren't we the America that fought for our freedom from English King Court. Yes, we in turn decimated the people living in this country around 300 years ago, and we seem to like that particularly distorted path, but we have also done good in supporting and relieving other countries who had their own tyrannies and dictatorships.
Where is the leadership that can oppose the cleanup crew, rather than just complain.
It's good to analyze and deconstruct, but only enough to understand. Then, whats next?
I've been meaning to post this for a while. Written a while back by scholar Philip Agre, it accurately dissects the "Conservative" ideology.
"What Is Conservatism and What Is Wrong with It?"
https://pages.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/agre/conservatism.html
http://www.takeoverworld.info/conservatism.htm
Two links to different postings of the same article. The first is in plaintext, the second has some additional links and other articles.
Here's the WaPo article about Agre, where the link above was posted way down in the comments:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/08/12/philip-agre-ai-disappeared/
"He predicted the dark side of the Internet 30 years ago. Why did no one listen?
Philip Agre, a computer scientist turned humanities professor, was prescient about many of the ways technology would impact the world"
💯
Thank you Robert Reich for bringing eloquence, clarity and common sense actions to our current political upheaval. I hope and pray that your outreach is growing stronger.
Many years ago, I read something that sought to define the political spectrum in the United States. Conservatives with their values of financial restraint were seen as the opposite of social program-loving liberals. But those on the far right were labeled reactionaries, just as those on the far left were deemed radicals. I think this nomenclature is still appropriate today. The current Republican Party, rife with those who deny Biden's legitimate election and supporters of the dangerous demagogue and criminal Trump, are indeed reactionaries, not conservatives at all.
Yes, and stop repeating the meme that SCOTUS has taken away the rights guaranteed to us by our Constitution. It is NOT the Supreme Court that is intent on usurping democratic rule. It is REPUBLICANS.
So it's not SCOTUS. It's SCrOTUS. Please start using the proper acronym.
I’m trying to read all the comments and it’s getting tedious. This labeling or mislabeling is getting absurd. Bob is spot on in labeling trumpers as radicals. Our reaction should not be to fight this by going ultra liberal. In this case, we are the conservators of our democracy. I would hope that Bob spawns thousands of political action committees. Political action to take down each radical repugnican and action to tackle each reform action. Action reform, action retake, action reject. The January 6th committee will sway the leaners. The midterms will return us to sanity. I hope! The roots of this toxic tree have to be poisoned to get rid of the the tree.
I find nothing to argue with in today's post. However, these straightforward observations are not being given the weight they deserve by the hallowed "people" of this nation. A poll released today by the NYT shows Biden's approval rating at 33% and more than 75% of the polled sample believes the country is headed in the wrong direction. 64% of Democrats believe Biden should not run for president in 2024, echoing the basic results of this post's straw poll taken Saturday. While the reasons for being on the wrong track could include liberals frustrated with Supreme Court decisions, continued radicalism by Republican legislators and frustration with the filibuster and Manchin/Sinema's actions to curtail progress, the numbers regarding Biden are more indicative of where the people place their blame. So the radicals have no reason to moderate, and in fact will become more brazen in their claims against liberals and Democratic policies. We, as Democrats, have once again become timid and confused, advocating for Biden not to run but unclear how to make that happen in such a way that will create a likelihood that a different Democrat will win in 2024. We simply want to find a hero, someone that will fit our image of a new knight in shining armor, with possibilities I have recently heard including Gavin Newsome, Gretchen Whitmer, J. B. Pritzker, Sherrod Brown, Cory Booker, Pete Buttigieg, Katie Porter and again, Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren. Any of these could win, I suppose, but how do we, as Democrats, transition from saying Biden was the wrong messenger or did this or that wrong on policy to then advocating for policies that are basically the same as what Biden offered? How much more progressive should we be than say, Build Back Better? Or is it just a matter of having a candidate that is younger, bolder, more savvy, more aggressive? How, exactly, do we beat back the radicals while saying we have better policies - uh, yeah, basically those same polices but maybe even more progressive than what the Senate would not accept in 2021 or 2022 and NOW, NOW LOOK, a better messenger, a more sturdy hero, an icon around which we can all thrill? And what will be our message regarding inflation? A windfall profits tax? Define windfall, exactly? Or an overall change to the tax code to tax the wealthy, the platform that Bernie and Elizabeth lost on in 2020?
Progressives cannot again retreat and make it look like we are advancing. We must call out Republicans for all that we can, say that we lacked the majorities in Congress we needed to pass the policies like a permanent child tax credit, paid family leave, subsidies for and standardization of policy regarding child care, a more progressive tax code and yes, changes to support the transition from a carbon-based energy system (quickly). We have to double-down on the fact that Republicans held enough power to keep Democrats from enacting the policies that the American people demand and need. If we retreat into the space of implicitly blaming Biden and trying to say that our policies and our 2020 advocacy of him were, uh, just a tiny mistake, then we will lose by even larger margins and the radicals will wreak the chaos and destruction we fear. If Biden is not to run in 2024, he must be convinced to do so and state as much in a manner that Americans can believe is sincere, and not a push from Democratic operatives. That will be tough to manage, even if he honestly concedes the issue. But if he does not, we have to stay the course and support what he proposed and say that Republicans, along with Manchin and Sinema (yes, call them out directly and without regret) let the American people down. These decisions must happen sooner than later. Will you, Mr. Reich, your former colleague Robert Kuttner and others at The American Prospect as well as other leading liberal thought leaders take the reins in managing this initiative? Or will you feign that you have little influence on the Party now, staying content to opine from afar?
Scott, I would appreciate it if you and others would break your writing into shorter paragraphs.
A very reasonable critique. Thank you Carol.
Thank you! I’ve been saying this for SO long but no one seems to get this! I feel so vindicated now but hell yes. The Republican followers will follow the party simply Because it’s purely an identity thing to them. As long as they believe they share their values, it basically doesn’t even matter what the party does, because in their minds just by definition of being ‘conservative’ it has to beat the alternative of being ‘leftist.’ People have lost all sense of political bearing and we have to point out where the center is and isn’t to remind people, otherwise they lose all sense of ‘dimension’ of the political spectrum. Everything is an oversimplified, false binary to people of ‘us’ ‘conservatives’ and ‘them’ ‘leftists.’ And the center is WAY more far away from the Republican Party than the Democrats, who are basically like Reagan Republicans, unfortunately. The Republicans have conned many Americans into thinking it’s the rest of us moving to the left while they’ve been radically moving to the right. They’ve conned them with the relativity of the whole thing and we have to point out again where the Republican Party used to be compared to now. They are ultra radical reactionaries who make Reagan look communist
The other group of Republican radicals are the libertarians. Their negatives, trickle-down economics, greed is good, rejection of social and interpersonal obligations, rejection of responsibility for harm, etc,
While they are liberal, those negatives align with conservative values and so they have brought us to this current situation as they believe that democracy is an impediment to commerce.
Saul Alinski wrote Rules for Radicals for the takeover of traditional America. Used by Democrats for over 50 years it has been very successful to the point we now have a zombie as POTUS and the media protects him from every criticism. Now, you think what America is today is what America actually is after 50 years of leftist distortion. And those who want to fix the damage caused by the left are now Radicals. You are still using Alinsky who told the left to accuse the right of what you are doing. You are the Radical. And you, given your relationship to HRC, could also be a criminal.
I suggest using the Radical Right to refer to the destructive segment of the Republican party. Traditional Republicans should declare a split from the Radical Right. I know some traditional Republicans have done this already.
Amen!
That’s right.
Well said.
Instead of'right wing', call them "rascal wing"
Seriously! It’s time
Well when it comes to Republicans, I kind of go by that old saying, you can't argue with a crazy person. So that is how I would handle them with one hand to the face with my palm pointed at them. Halt, you have nothing to say that makes any sense.. move on.. the end.
I’ve been saying for quite a while to stop calling them conservative as it gives them an air of legitimacy. Call them radicals, call them fascist, call the right wingers, call them anti-democratic, but whatever you do, do not call them conservative.
I could not agree more! Every time I hear people talking about CONSERVATIVES, it frosts me, because these people are not CONSERVATIVES, they are rabble rousing fascists… and can we remind people that the conservative “small government “ is a pipe dream when the government has to police the people’s wombs, schools, genitalia, and brains to make sure they aren’t thinking or doing things the Republicans don’t approve.
THANK-YOU SO MUCH for this article and for calling out the ridiculous practice in the media of normalizing today's Republican Party! If you still call yourself a Republican in this day and age, what you really are is a seditionist/insurrectionist/anarchist/treasonous traitor!!! You, Robert Reich, have said it like it actually is, and I'm so sick and tired of both them and those who normalize them!!
I don't think the term "radicals" is appropriate. I believe we should call them "entrenched reactionaries".
When they are fascistic call the FASCISTS.
GOPers (see Rick Scott's 12 point plan) label Democrats as "socialists" because they know it's an unpopular word. Well, FASCIST is even more unpopular, and more true.
Thank you! Republicans are increasingly and disturbingly reactionary. They are NOT "conservative"; instead, they are blinded by power-lust. Unfortunately, too many journalists do a dis-service to their profession by trying to "play it safe" for fear of being (unfairly) chastised by irate Republicans.
I couldn't agree more with everything written here. Voting has become somewhat of a catch phrase, however it is the cure for a country that is being radicalized by a party who will do anything, including destroying democracy, to stay in power. If we give President Biden a big majority in both the House and Senate, we give him the power to put a stop to their attempts and strengthen our laws to protect our country from future attacks by radicals. We need to speak up, volunteer and vote in November. Biden can't do it alone.
I couldn't agree more! Brilliant! Let's do it!
Conservatives are the new radicals and regressives.
Meanwhile
Macho Man declares, will rerun .. Not just for the rally riff fun ..
but for Go ahead and indict . .one backed by
MagaMight . .We'll see who gets OutGunned . . .#Likes to watch
THANK YOU!
#yesbut We need to talk. We must vote. Sometimes we need to protest. All fatal distractions if we don’t address the root causes. Humanity needs a Plan B. https://www.boombigideas.com/p/yesbut-we-need-to-talk-we-must-vote
William F. Buckley in his day would call this faction Movement Conservatives. Their movement all right.
Roger Klorese nailed it. We do need to call them "radical regressives". Hammer that term home every time we talk about them and their deeds.
Reactionary republicans and conservative democrats. These guys don't represent us.
I have always been an independent and more recently find myself agreeing with the Right wing progressive democrats
Boy are you confused.
Whilst reference is often made to a Conservative ideology the history of Conservatism shows that there is no hard core doctrine as in marxism, but simply a common wish to preserve stability via the status quo and make only marginal adjustments to favour this continuity.The era of Reaganism/Thatcherism broke with this consensus opening the door to "professional" ideologues who take joy from smashing institutions and fragmenting society to achieve hegemony This borders upon fascism except that it is achieved by ballot with the use of compliant media and voter apathy.Hitler did after all come close to winning power from free elections. Populism is in my view a very weak expression as it suggests that power is being returned to the ordinary folk : it does nothing of the kind,merely reinforcing the power of private monopolies and reducing the rights of employees whilst simultaneously lessening consumer rights through lower standards. An intellectually impaired judiciary that is appointed by a senate with the agenda of its sponsors can only assist this downward spiral.
Archangel -- many of them want a theocracy.
The cultists need government benefits to survive but march to a different tune. Trump and McConnell et al merely demagogue the willing idiots into action.
You are correct Mr. Reich, myself personally, before Trump took over as the Republican Party figurehead I may not have agreed with most conservative views but I could at least hear them out and everything would be relatively cordial. Now, with the extremist views and the amount of abundant idiocy of their newer legislators (Boebert, MTG) they aren’t worth trying to cooperate with. I do wonder what my deceased grandfather would think of modern “conservatism” because he was a conservative in those times you spoke of. My guess is that he’s rolling in his grave.
The paranoid radical right is nothing new in America. What fascinates me is the power it has gained through hijacking of the media, beginning with talk radio decades ago. There was always a substantial minority eager and willing to believe Father Coughlin, Joe McCarthy, the John Birch Society, and so forth. Conspiracy theorists and cultists have always abounded; we saw the outcome in Europe when they were able to seize power. But never before in America were they able to manipulate innate vulnerabilities in the Constitution and master the means to inflict themselves on the laws and governance of the country. I have, however, come to understand how Nazi Germany could have happened. And the right wing is currently spreading like a virus in Europe, Brazil. India, and other places as well.
You’re right it’s not new and the parallels to Nazi Germany are apt. But it is the first time in US history that it has infiltrated into the mainstream and infected a majority of our right wing party instead of just being on the fringes. America has a choice, repeat history by becoming much like Nazi Germany was, or turn back from the Abyss.
Cowards.
I find your comments very interesting, Ken. I have similar proclivities but don’t label myself the same way. Have you written any books?
...if you are a dipshit.
First, WePats, you begin without a stipulation, but rather endorsing an entertainment piece, and imply that some mockumentary conveys value to discussion about the legitimacy of the election. That alone needs its own comment.
Amusing Ourselves to Death is a book by Neil Postman which belongs on every bookshelf. It is discussed in Wikipedia at ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amusing_Ourselves_to_Death ). Amazingly, it was written before the Internet even was a glimmer in the collective idea of DARPA.
"Postman said that the contemporary world was better reflected by Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, whose public was oppressed by their addiction to amusement, rather than by Orwell's work, where they were oppressed by state control." Neil Postman was an educator interested in media, not a politician. He noted the rise of entertainment as a substitute for many things, especially in the political arena.
Triumph of Will is an entertainment piece by Leni Riefenstahl. I have seen this several times, as it is a carefully-constructed movie about a carefully-constructed propaganda event, the Nazi Party conference in 1934. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triumph_of_the_Will ) The Nazis were quite prescient about the use of entertainment as propaganda. I have not seen the Dinesh D'sousa piece, as I doubt that it can compare to Triumph of Will.
Trumpists play upon ressentiment, and assert that there is a malign force that opposes them, not even something that can be seen or heard, but a wispy and evanescent emanation from The Enemy designed to co-opt the strong-minded who know the Right Way. Compared to the Nazi's, who played on ressentiment but did not make it the focus of their operations, the Trumpists have nothing strong to depend on besides the cult of Agent Orange.
Trumpists are Christians only in the worst way, that Nietzsche railed against. They understand nothing of value in Christianity, while promoting the worst about the religion. Trumpists & Bannonists recruit helots to worship the Spartans, to provoke the audience to imagine that they are the rulers while the movie is going on. After the show ends, they dutifully go back to being helots in service of the leaders of this cult. Trump makes a traveling roadshow to go about and confuse the gullible into subservience.
Tell me to watch a movie to become a true believer, and that people who haven't seen this propaganda aren't informed or knowledgeable? Spare me. Make an argument instead.
Instructive and timely reminder. Thanks for your contribution.
What >you< said!
Well done.
I like your "Brave New World" take. Unlike 1984's "Ministry of Truth," it focuses on the entertainment factor. Not that 1984 doesn't include one, it's just not as elaborate - although the "5 minutes hate" is not unlike one of ol' Tweety's rallies. I appreciate your view, here.
A further thought: Here's the irony. No authoritarian government will set it up on a captive population. It will simply coopt what's already in place. "The people" are busy installing all the surveillance-state technology willingly, at their own expense, because that's what they want, without any prompt other than advertisements and fear, exacerbated by all private sector news outlets - and while the technology gets better & better & cheaper & cheaper the more they'll buy it up. THEN they bellyache about privacy! LOL! Like I've said elsewhere in this very discussion, these people >have no idea what they bring on themselves!< They'll just wake up one morning saying: "Oh $hi7!" - if they're conscious enough to realize that's what they've done to themselves.
I read them in succession, but I didn't make the connection. However, 1984 stuck because it was an unapologetic allegory to Stalinism. (But I was no older than 17 at the time.) The connection is crystal clear to me now, Did you ever see that "Star Treck: The Next Generation" in which everyone got hypnotized by an electronic game? Prophetic - I think - in the late '80s, early '90s.
Og goody. . . a perfectly miopc view of disinformation and it's objective of obstruction.
Keep going. What I watch on the boob tube?
Do you see how locked-in your thoughts are? You perseverate about who someone-not me- called Trump a white supremacist, and since that’s your favorite argument, you haul it in and expound on it. Why?
To quote Forest Gump... " Stupid is as stupid does".
Spoken like a true Confederate patriot.
It's not me you should be posting to. I'm right with you. I was speaking to the one who brought that "2000 morons" business up. I know BS when the wank-publicans - or neo-Confederates, as I proposed calling them - try using it as evidence, to be sure!
Agreed!! Just me and my 2 cents DZ.
Understandable. From time to time, I've embarrassed myself as well, brother!
Yes. They became the Southern Democrats who crossed the aisle in the '80s & '90s, at the behest of Jesse Helms and Newt Gingrich - mostly in response to the Civil Rights Era. I'm sure you all count on nobody having paid attention. They've taken over the party that put them down in the first place, and are claiming it was the Democrats - a >real< deceit. Their justices are "correcting" those Civil Rights Era gains right now, and >you< are complicit.
No!! Those were REALLY Republicans!! Reeeeee! 😆
Fascinating example of delusional mentation. Your passionate graphomania reveals the force and energy propelling your belief in Trump's lies. There really is no rational debate possible here, because a religious commitment brooks no questioning. A stiff dose of Haldol might bring you to question your faith in the blatant lies and misrepresentations of the fascist right. Perhaps.
Thank you for your post. You offer perspectives that can be considered and refuted, rather than forcing me to argue with an empty chair. It helps to thoroughly refute something if it is in black and white.
You argue with a call to emotion, and a thoroughly contemptuous attitude towards whomever disagrees with you. This is a bad habit that have crept into political arguments. A lot of fragmentation of American political discussion over the last 40 years or so has been caused by the infusion of contempt. Speaking as a traditionalist, I do not care for it. Arguments are best made upon the foundation of civility and inquiry, rather than provoking emotion. This innovation is appalling, and most certainly not conservative, if one honors the traditions of discussion and debate. Mud-slinging gets us nothing. But the American forum is permeated with shouting, and many people confuse it with actual political discussion.
Engaging in emotional provocation centers debate on what is most emotionally charged, not what is most meaningful. Emotionally-charged issues frequently are not the cardinal elements of importance, and rarely progress during debate. Again, I seem rationalist, but I call to tradition here.
For what passes for debate in America includes the counterplay that there are emotional provocateurs on all sides. So what? If your feelings are hurt by the Big-Endians on the other side of the Small-Endians, I really don't find that I care, sorry. Emotionalism is merely mob philosophy. It does not improve your points in the least. Clean it up and lay out rational points, rather than melodrama. I'll take on the points you raise later.
Christ, it's this jag off again.
I like that he brings out the points that we are talking about. What better way to study the inhabitants of the political zoo than a specimen.
Actually, I agree with you. I just have a funny way of showin' it!
The threw him off You tue and twitter.
Nice flag symbols you close with.
And there is the fact that Republicans were elected to Congress and state offices in battleground states on the very same ballots that lacked a vote for Trump. (Where there was no vote for any presidential candidate, or else a third party candidate, but otherwise a straight Republican ticket voted.) If Democrats stole the presidency, they missed the opportunity to steal seats in Congress at the same time.
Agreed!
Wow. I found a pearl of cogent thought in a field of communist garble.
Finally, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization authored by Alito is the most poorly-written, inartfully constructed, and dangerous opinion ever issued by the Court, and deserves comparison with Dred Scott v. Sandford, and the execrable, racist Korematsu v. United States. Having a massive legal literature and analysis opposing Roe v. Wade, argued and considered for nearly fifty years, Alito ignored all of it in specific, and merely lashed out at the fact that it opposed his own legal wisdom and therefore was - and had always been - wrong. He viewed the issue in Dobbs as a de novo question; he considered the Roe case as being so defective that it did not have any precedential presence, to his way of thinking.
In dissent, Kagan et al. took the time and attention to rooting Roe in precedent. " To hear the majority tell the tale, Roe and Casey are aberrations: They came from nowhere, went nowhere—and so are easy to excise from this Nation’s constitutional law. That is not true."
Alito strikes squarely against the principle of stare decisis, which is an ancient concept in legal traditions certainly as old as Halakah and perhaps even older. When the law is considered and a decision is reached, that decision is explained by reason and reference, and should be left undisturbed, absent egregious mistake. Further modification of the law is built upon these foundations, with further elaboration. This approach is built on the premise that along the path of history, questions are considered and decided, founded upon the law and reason, and not to be disturbed, lest the law become simply an act of power and whim exerted upon others by individuals, even if decided by those with such massive and undeserved self-adulation as Alito. It smacks more of Kim Il-Sung than any democratic understanding of the law.
The Texas Law contains even more toxic legal cyanide, innovating a system of bounty-hunter enforcement of law that is perhaps unheard of in history. Any Court should have struck down this "new tradition" energetically, for it is even more important to crush than anything about Roe. But the Alito Gang did not.
The arguments on the Ninth and Tenth Amendments are well made here and elsewhere. Briefly, rights are inherent and unbounded in citizens unless specific bounds are explicitly stipulated. Powers of Government are limited to what is explicitly stated. Powers are legitimate only by enumeration and their rational consideration; rights are the opposite.
“In Europe, charters of liberty have been granted by power. America has set the example … of charters of power granted by liberty. This revolution in the practice of the world, may, with an honest praise, be pronounced the most triumphant epoch of its history, and the most consoling presage of its happiness.” – James Madison, Essays for the National Gazette, 1792 - Until the Alito Gang comes to town.
Hey Steve. He's taken responding to a response to him by someone else, that I in turn responded to by responding to my response to the guy who was responding to him! LOL! Handle him please. I defer to you in the matter!
I see : Sooo I know you think you understood what you you thought you heard me say but what you don't understand is that what you thought you heard me say isn't wht I meant. Jist another note from the theater of the absurd.
Although it may have a little "who's on first" in'it!
Snortal, snortal, snortal . . .
n'Yuk, n'Yuk, n'Yuk!
Glad you're sharp enough to get the joke! Well done! LOL! ];-)>
Sure. He’s giving it all he’s got.
Can't fault his persistence, to be sure.