MyDD :: The True Republican Identity

The True Republican Identity

by southerndemnut, Tue Jun 28, 2005 at 11:45:44 PM EST

Good Evening Folks - and a special welcome to Jerry Meek our new state chair of the Democratic party in NC! I have been away for several months traveling and enjoying life and taking a bit of a breather from politics. I have not posted in a long time on MyDD and other forums to which I belong. However I write today after completing an extended conversation with a friend of mine that was recently widowed. She lost her husband after 58 years of marriage, 3 children, 8 grandchildren, 4 houses, 10 cars, etc. Far from wealthy but living very much what was thought of as the 'American Dream.' Part of the WWII generation, she was part of the 'Rosie The Riveter' female war effort while her soon-to-be husband became a decorated war hero. They were part of The Greatest Generation as its often known who provided the bulk of the manpower in WWII and were our leaders and statesmen from the 1940s to the 1980s. Today their numbers are dwindling and all but a few have long since retired from positions of power being supplanted by the Baby Boom generation and beyond. Margaret, the widower, buried her husband, and was faced with the task of living on with a small private pension and an even smaller Social Security check, a result of her husband retiring from the US Postal Service. Like many, if not most, of her generation now, living became a one necessitated routine, fixed (often limited incomes) and the inability to do many of the things that one had been accustomed to doing before.

During that 1 1/2 hour conversation with Margaret, I realized what the difference between a Democrat and Republican really was. Years of political activism and countless political debates could not prepare one for the stark reality. Always being a fairly conservative person, for a Democrat, a white southerner, and one from a fairly rural area, I was a stereotypical southern Democrat. No one paid much attention to why, for most of my life it was the natural course of things. But now as I look back at all the Republicans that I knew over the years, and especially as I see how the Republicans today - with George Bush as President and others like him the reality is really that stark.

The reality, my friends, is that as I look inward, outward, detailed or in general the basic tenant remains. Republicans ultimately believe in a concept of 'survival of the fittest,' 'each man for himself,' and 'winner take all.' The ultimate act of selfishness. For whether you look at how politics is conducted, to individual issues like Social Security, taxation, education, social issues, or whatever else it maybe, in the end it comes to really just one thing. Its not about just the haves and have nots but really the difference is about being selfish, or believing in shared responsibility. In the end, Republicans believe in the philosophy that will allow a certain number of people to do well and leave others behind.

Whether we are talking about Social Security where many people, including myself, believe not only in the need to ensure its solvency, but allowing people to have choice in their lives. Freedom is power, but really what the Republicans want to do is shift the responsibility of getting old from the guaranteed benefit (however meager) to the person. It is nice for a person, who is in their 20s, 30s, or even 40s to be able to invest part of their Social Security in the stock market or whatever else but in the end there is a choice, will you get a check or not? Its not difficult for people to think about that when are young or if they are wealthy and have independent means. But if you are, like my friend Margaret, who even a $50 reduction in her check would mean the world its entirely different. But to the Republicans, most of which do not rely on Social Security as their primary income, too bad so sad.

Sometimes I wish I could explain, or make realize, my Republican brethren and fellow countrymen who believe, and whose every right to believe, in such misguided philosophy. To explain the difference between being a country of 260 million people WE are ONE country of 260 million people, instead of 260 million individual countries living together. For in the end Republicans look at themselves when they make decisions while Democrats look at others when they do the same. Not only do things affect but they affect everyone else.

It maybe nice that we are the wealthiest country on the planet, but there is not excuse for the poverty that many of us live in. It may be nice that we have the top educational institutions in the world, but why so few of us Americans are world literate or can even point where Iraq is on the map. Why going to school is so hard for so many but always for so few. It maybe nice that we have the most advanced medical technology available in the world, but there is no excuse for the shape that the American population is in, whether it be obesity to simply access to quality healthcare in general. It maybe nice that we do so well with some things in so many areas but in the end to the benefit of really only a part of the country. There is no excuse for being as good as we are to have the problems that we do. Again my friends, we have choice, do we think of ourselves or others? If you are a Me, Myself, and I type of person you are a Republican. If you are a we, us, and our type of person you a Democrat. For a Democrat does too believe in all the good things that this country has to offer but it best enjoyed in the company of others instead of being enjoy by just one.

Tags: Ideology (all tags)

Permalink :: 13 Comments :: Post a Comment

This Reminds Me of Something I Read Today By... (none / 0)

me, in fact. In comment right here on Mydd. The relevant portion reads:

We already have our frame. For 70 years, it's been some version of the New Deal, an inclusive vision of American citizenship, promising everyone a share of the American dream. When we focus on it, we win. This is still the case. It's why Bush tried to steal FDR's image in order to destroy his legacay. This frame has been re-articulated many times, and it needs to re-articulated again. It has been expanded to include women and minorities as equal claimaints. The dimensions of the dream have been expanded and redefined. But the message has been fundamentally the same: we are the party of the people, for the people, by the people; they are the party of money.

The old deal was made behind closed doors by private money, the New Deal is/was made in public by the people and their elected representatives. There's a reason we're called the Democratic Party (and the Republicans continually try to mislabel us the "Democrat Party"). When that reason is clear to one and all, we win.

by Paul Rosenberg on Wed Jun 29, 2005 at 12:00:55 AM EST

NPD... (none / 0)

or fascism.. or ???

by ultraworld on Wed Jun 29, 2005 at 03:17:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

A Bit of Wine (none / 0)

Absolutely Paul and I am sorry if I didn't reference your article I simply wrote what I thought. I had been away from the political scen for many months and just now am getting back into full swing.

To me, the simplest story I can tell to illustrate the point that I, you, and many make is this:

Imagine sitting at a table of 10 people. Everyone is thirsty and you holding a nice bottle of very wine. A Republican would pour themselves a nice big glass and think to themselves how nice it is to be enjoying this wine (as other watched whether oblivious or aware). A Democrat would pour EVERYONE a glass and say come enjoy this wine with me.

It is interesting that such simple and powerful childhood lessons are forgetten and ignored in life. For in the story above both the Democrat and the Republican gets to drink good wine, the difference being that as a Republican only one gets to drink while as a Democrat do all.

by southerndemnut on Wed Jun 29, 2005 at 12:13:10 AM EST

Oh, Don't Apologize! (none / 0)

It was just part of a comment in response to someone else's diary. I just wanted to add a somewhat fancified "Amen!"

by Paul Rosenberg on Wed Jun 29, 2005 at 12:24:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Survival of the "fittest"? (none / 0)

I think you are unwittingly propagating a myth here. The Republican Party leadership support a survival of the most well connected, not the survival of the fittest. They have a long history of God awful incompetence in just about every policy arena ("fitness" for a job is clearly not a criteria), they are a bottomless pit for corruption (contracts, spending and taxes cuts based on someone's wealth and connectedness to the Party rather than to the "fittest" or most deserving).

I could go on and on...but they simply do not stand for survival of the "fittest". That's completely, categorically incorrect.

by eriposte on Wed Jun 29, 2005 at 12:40:55 AM EST

Re: Survival of the "fittest"? (none / 0)

Without a doubt the Republikan Party is the party of krony kapitalism and kleptocracy. They always have been and always will be. Please note that they even started out that way - went from the anti-slavery party to the Keystone Krooks in only ten years (1856 to 1866), about the same time frame it took them to turn to the Dark Side this time. Given that history, one would have to say that it's in their genes. Time to sanitize the body politic of their corruption.

by VizierVic on Wed Jun 29, 2005 at 12:54:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Survival of the "fittest"? (none / 0)

I see what you are saying, but i think that what southerndemnut was trying to get at was a philosophical difference. The Republican philosophy of selfishness is what leads them to be corrupt and incompetant. Their connections are the outcome of a life of greed and egoism. Fitness (as far as i have seen in nature) is not neccesarily about who is the best qualified (as per your job example) but sometimes about who is the most aggressive or ruthless. They see what they want, and they will lie/cheat/steal to get it. And all because they dont care about anyone but themselves.

I have to admit that i struggle with this idea. When i really sit down and think about why i feel so strongly about the republican party and what it stands for, i try to justify their purpose. I try to put myself in the shoes of some rich white guy and imagine what he is thinking. How could he not care about the poor? How could he not want a clean environment for himself and his children? How could he not want everyone to be happy and healthy?...And the answer i always come to is that they dont care...They just dont give a shit about anything but themselves in the here and now, and fuck everyone else.

That is the difference between me, a Democrat, and so many republicans...

by phemfrog on Wed Jun 29, 2005 at 10:07:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Survival of the "fittest"? (none / 0)

It's like Betamax vs VHS or Apple vs Microsoft.

At the time, Beta and Apple were superior products, however, with the licensing of the technology, MS and VHS (By JVC, I think) were able to win the market and relegate the other standards to professional or prosumer users. The inferior product won... or in the words of Dark Helmet, "Evil will always triumph because good is dumb!"

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!

by yitbos96bb on Wed Jun 29, 2005 at 12:17:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Survival of the "fittest"? (none / 0)

Read Atlas Shrugged... It is the philosophical bible of the GOP.

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!

by yitbos96bb on Wed Jun 29, 2005 at 12:08:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Survival of the "fittest"? (none / 0)

Actually, you sort of prove they do. In the GOP mindset, the fittest is the richest... the most connected. These are advantages in their survival. Just as someone is born smarter than others, in this case, some are just born richer or more well connected than others.

You definition of fittest is obviously not the same as the GOPs.

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!

by yitbos96bb on Wed Jun 29, 2005 at 12:13:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Good Framing (none / 0)

Your post mirrors my own framing of the differences in philosophies. Many of these distinctions were also cleverly outlined in Garrison Keillor's book Homegrown Democrat.

by Joe on Wed Jun 29, 2005 at 01:01:17 AM EST