The country seems to have lost the art of peaceable dissent. It’s not really gone, but it’s been driven underground. We are also in the midst of a political spasm that will shape the future. Whoever is able to bring the art of peaceable dissent to the surface in a constructive manner will shape the landscape of the near political future.
Both sides suffer from a want of peaceable dissent. Whether it’s tea party members calling Rubio a RINO, or Empower Texas calling Texas Alliance for Life nominally prolife, conservatives are equally guilty as liberals. We seem to forget that those who agree with us 80{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of the time are our friends. However, since we do agree 80{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of the time that’s enough about our faults. The same point can be made with hats and snowflakes.
In the recent past, the lack of peaceable dissent was mainly confined to Black Lives Matter and associated groups. Now, the plague of vileness and violence has become pseudo mainstream. Whether it’s the vulgar hats or snowflakes melting down and rioting at Berkley the art of peaceable dissent has been abandoned by some on the left.
The questions are why, and how can conservatives use the lack of peaceable dissent to shape the landscape? The why is answered with the processional caterpillar. A processional caterpillar will march behind the leader without fail. Experiments have shown how unfailingly the pack follows the leader. The hat wearers, rioting students, et al, are simply following their leaders in academia and Hollywood. Academia and Hollywood are inflamed, and have abandoned the are of persuasion in favor of will imposition. Their students and minions are gladly following their lead like processional caterpillars. So how do we win?
We win the political spasm with baby steps. Michael Novak died this week. While he has many great sayings, one of the best is one of his most simple. He was talking about how Reagan won debates with what now is the same forces that are driving the current spasm. He indicated that Reagan won by explaining the baby steps of the argument. Rather than engage in the academic principles he brought the argument back to the basics and explained them clearly where everyone could understand. That blueprint was shown effective with President Trumps victory. Regardless of what anyone thinks of Trump it’s clear he lowered the grade level of political discourse. The simpler message resonated, and combined with democrat missteps lead to victory. Following the Reagan and Trump blueprint draws the conservative democrats to our side, and keeps the new Trump Republicans on our side.
Keeping the message simple moves the needle in our direction, and causes the lead caterpillar to continue the vulgar, violent dissent. Eventually, their actions reach a critical mass where both the classical liberals become disgusted and the silent majority rise up. Then the political landscape shifts. The classical liberal may not ever vote with us, but they will reach a point where they condemn and try to squash the caterpillars. The silent majority becomes disgusted enough with the caterpillars they drift to common sense and reasonable arguments.
The opportunity to shape the landscape in our direction is before us. The next election affords an opportunity to place the Senate firmly in our control. Will we be wise and temperate enough to seize the opportunity?
What is a classic liberal? What would the hypothetical classic liberal believe that is very different from the Red side?
Good morning, thanks for the question.
A classic liberal is one who adheres to classical liberalism in the post industrial revolution setting.
Here’s a link describing classic liberal.
https://mises.org/library/what-classical-liberalism
While they sound conservative in origin they oppose war and post industrial revolution have taken liberal social stances (example: support abortion rights) without going so far as to believe religion must accept the stances (example: supports Hobby Lobby).
I read it and it does not sound too bad, the elder Paul subscribed to that, thus the term Libertarian?
“Classical liberalism” is the term used to designate the ideology advocating private property, an unhampered market economy, the rule of law, constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion and of the press, and international peace based on free trade.
It would be preferable if you (or your political opponents) would win by 1. Telling the truth, and 2. provide a government that is most beneficial for individual freedom and happiness. Lying to obtain political power is antithetical to that end.
Republican overreach will kill your hopes for 2018.
If you do anything other than leave the Affordable Care Act in place and take steps to ensure more insurance company participation in underserved areas, you will never hold meaningful power again.
To entertain, even for a minute, that “access to healthcare” will be accepted by the electorate in lieu of “actual healthcare” is delusional.
To believe that anyone will be enthusiastic about block grants to states for Medicaid is also delusional.
What is it in your ethos that believes in a market test and market solution for the lifesaving healthcare that the people of the United States deserve? What use is a tax credit to someone whose finances are perilous? They or their loved ones are as subject to the vagaries of illness as much as wealthier citizens.
Proceed at your (electoral) peril..
Jeanene – that’s certainly the position the left has taken for the near future. However, it appears rooted in wishful thinking rather than sound strategy for 2018. Any rollback of Obamacare will not go into effect until after the 2018 election. This was clearly pronounced by the GOP when they noted it will take years to unwind Obamacare. The democrats proceeded at their electoral peril in passing Obamacare, and the GOP learned the lessons that followed,
I’m not sure of your definition of “rollback” but multiple articles in the last two days have exposed the crucial relationship of the extinction of the ACA taxes that support the subsidies to any chance of passing Paul Ryan’s tax reform plan. Republicans can’t move on the tax plan because the “pay for” is impossible with the ACA taxes still on the books. The timing of these two interrelated actions means either Paul Ryan’s plan is DOA or the effective “repeal” of the ACA (the subsidy support) has to happen NOW, not after 2018. I’ve put the links below, if you want to read them…and Mr Boehner’s comments today explain it from a different, but equally accurate, point of view.
“Republicans’ dream of tax reform is in big trouble” The Washington Post : https://wpo.st/b8Wd2
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/02/paul-ryans-dream-of-tax-cuts-for-rich-will-not-be-denied.html
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/23/14696472/town-hall-protests
Given that Obamacare would appear to be the proximate cause of the Republican surge that captured the House in 2010 and has continued since then, I believe that you’re a bit overheated there Ms. Slamen. The fact is that Obamacare has hurt as many people as it’s helped. It’s a huge, unworkable monstrosity. And, Insurance companies keep bailing out on a regular basis.
As for the “lifesaving healthcare that the people of the United States deserve”? I guess I must have missed that part of the Constitution. Please explain why you feel justified in taking money from one person to pay for another persons doctor bill.
Greg and Fat Albert:
I couldn’t agree with both of you more. Everyone I know, to a person, has been hurt by ObamaCare, including one guy I know via an internet forum who formerly had a heavily subsidized plan from the state of Texas that covered otherwise uninsurable folks with costly, chronic conditions. Personally, I have seen my high deductible “in case something really goes bad” policy go from very reasonably priced to as expensive as a good plan that would actually pay for my routine medical care. Now I spend the money I would have spent on regular care on higher insurance premiums. instead.
You guys are drinking the Kool-Aid in big gulps. If you’d turn off Fox News and get your information from any other media you’d find the the “facts” and anecdotes you continually cite about how bad “Obamacare” is failing are desperately overblown. There are 30 million citizens who have gained coverage under the ACA and they are _not_ all Democrats. Trump’s base (as well as the others) will be hurt badly if the ACA is not replaced with equal or better coverage/costs — and y’all don’t have a clue how to do that nor the commitment to your fellow citizens to try.
If these town halls should have shown you anything it’s that the ACA is NOT unpopular; People are scared and they’ll vote Republicans out if there is not a seamless transition to something _better and cheaper_. Better get to work.
Jeanean – Be civil to everyone here. Talking about not having a clue and drinking Kool-Aid isn’t going to help advance any point you make. Disagree without being disagreeable. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
You’re right. Please accept my apology.
Day one, it now seems that people will be stuck paying those mandates for at least two years and probably longer. Why can’t the “Conservatives” keep their promises? The Wall day one and Mexico will pay, another broken promise. NAFTA another broken promise. Lower the Federal Debt another broken promise. Infrastructure at least one trillion, another broken promise. Build up the military another broken promise.
Increase Border Patrol by 5,000 that is interesting they can’t even fill the positions allocated already. The “Conservatives” are serving scrap and people are buying it.
Manuel, your ability to be a successful troll is severely inhibited by your inability to objectively look at what is happening around you. Cheers.