It's always confounding to see people, who we believe should know better, who slavishly supporting a cause, person, or organization when it doesn't seem to be in their best interest.
Liberals shook their heads in dismay as throughout the eighties until today a large part of the Democratic base started voting Republican. This group of mostly white men claimed it was for a number of reasons. Be it prayer in school, abortion, patriotism or gun rights, they sent people into political office that continuously voted for legislation that cut programs that benefitted this group. Be it tax legislation that favored people who were comparatively wealthy or a failure to deliver on the social issues they campaigned on, their record didn't help the disenfranchised white voter, and yet they continued to support them.
When President Bill Clinton's affair with a white house intern became the all-encompassing story, conservatives pressed the incident until they thought they had an impeachable offense. When the whole thing blew up in their face, they couldn't believe that liberals could countenance this and continue their support for Clinton. He was a serial adulterer, of this there is little doubt. Charming and politically astute, he was a shining star in the dark days growing of conservatism, he offered the Democrats hope. And yet much of what he might have accomplished was lost in the scandal that prevailed
When we look at the wider gap between the haves and have-nots, it's easy to observe the birth and subsequent growth of Trickle - Down economics, or supply-side theory. This idea gained favor during the Regan administration. It was posited by Milton Friedman of the Chicago School of Economics. The practice never produced anything other than increased wealth for the rich and stagnant wages for the middle class. In spite of this, voters who gaied nothing from this theroy sent it's proponents back into office year after year.
Some commentators say that the "angry white man's" desertion of the democratic party is based on Racism. The fear of our country becoming majority minority and what that might mean is real and prevalent to our society. If nothing proves it, the election of Donald Trump does. His open pandering to the holders of these fears has brought them out of the shadows and into the bright light of public debate.
The problem with this dilemma is apparent when we look at ways to diffuse this baseless panic. How do you dialogue with someone who believes the lies that feed their fears with a level the approaches religiosity? To oppose them is to declare your allegiance to their strongly held beliefs. You become the enemy. I wish I could see an end to this, but I'm not optimistic.
Liberals shook their heads in dismay as throughout the eighties until today a large part of the Democratic base started voting Republican. This group of mostly white men claimed it was for a number of reasons. Be it prayer in school, abortion, patriotism or gun rights, they sent people into political office that continuously voted for legislation that cut programs that benefitted this group. Be it tax legislation that favored people who were comparatively wealthy or a failure to deliver on the social issues they campaigned on, their record didn't help the disenfranchised white voter, and yet they continued to support them.
When President Bill Clinton's affair with a white house intern became the all-encompassing story, conservatives pressed the incident until they thought they had an impeachable offense. When the whole thing blew up in their face, they couldn't believe that liberals could countenance this and continue their support for Clinton. He was a serial adulterer, of this there is little doubt. Charming and politically astute, he was a shining star in the dark days growing of conservatism, he offered the Democrats hope. And yet much of what he might have accomplished was lost in the scandal that prevailed
When we look at the wider gap between the haves and have-nots, it's easy to observe the birth and subsequent growth of Trickle - Down economics, or supply-side theory. This idea gained favor during the Regan administration. It was posited by Milton Friedman of the Chicago School of Economics. The practice never produced anything other than increased wealth for the rich and stagnant wages for the middle class. In spite of this, voters who gaied nothing from this theroy sent it's proponents back into office year after year.
Some commentators say that the "angry white man's" desertion of the democratic party is based on Racism. The fear of our country becoming majority minority and what that might mean is real and prevalent to our society. If nothing proves it, the election of Donald Trump does. His open pandering to the holders of these fears has brought them out of the shadows and into the bright light of public debate.
The problem with this dilemma is apparent when we look at ways to diffuse this baseless panic. How do you dialogue with someone who believes the lies that feed their fears with a level the approaches religiosity? To oppose them is to declare your allegiance to their strongly held beliefs. You become the enemy. I wish I could see an end to this, but I'm not optimistic.
Comments
Post a Comment