What Constitutes a Republican?

[b]Subtitle: Republicans vs. "We Call Ourselves Republicans but We Ain't"At the risk of falling in to a "no true Republican" kind of fallacy, I wanted to put forward why I don't consider the current administration and the majority of the US Congress to be "Republican", in spite of how they bill themselves. I was inspired in part by jar's statement: It might be instructive to examine just what the "core values" of the Republican Party were, and contrast them with what the so-called Republican Party today espouses:1. Old: Individual liberty. If I had to pick one single tenet to showcase, this would be it. Nearly everything else derives from this one point. Government rules by the consent of the governed, and has absolutely no right whatsoever to attempt to dictate individual beliefs, actions, or morals. Government interference in private affairs is anathema. Admittedly, this point has been taken to extremes - from the "states' rights" excuse used by one side in the American Civil War to the unbridled capitalism of the late 19th Century to corporate greed and scandal today. However, the ideal has never been lost: government has a role to play, but only within narrow bounds. Federalism, not anarchy.New: Erosion of civil liberties, most notably through provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act, violation of the right to privacy, attempts to include “faith-based” initiatives in international assistance paid for by taxpayers, the War on Porn, and other numerous invasive actions by the government which go directly against the core belief in individual liberty and responsibility. Nanny-government - the diametric opposite of what the Republican Party once stood for.2. Old: Fiscal responsibility. Deficit spending is a no-no. Never spend more than you take in. Although the erosion of the Republican Party was already well under way, it is interesting to note that one of the first ever balanced budget amendments was passed under a Republican president with a majority Republican congress.New: We are so far in deficit my great-grandchildren will still be paying off the interest.3. Limited foreign entanglement: A conservative approach to foreign policy. The Republican ideal is that a rational assessment be made of the true national interest before committing US forces anywhere. And then use overwhelming force.New: The first failure to adhere to this policy took place under Reagan (Lebanon). It enjoyed a brief resurgence under Bush Sr, then was abandoned entirely under the current administration. Worse yet, Bush Jr. got involved in a second war before finishing the first.For all these reasons, and especially number 1, I concur with jar - these are not the actions of Republicans. They are the actions of neo-fascists.

I agree with your calling the current republican party that of the neo-fascist. I disagree with some of the reasonings that you give. The first point is spot on. The second two, not quite so.Fiscal responsibility doesn't have much to say as to fascism. The new republicans are as bad as the dems when it comes to fiscal responsibility. So the dems are part fascist now?Foreign entaglement doesn't have much to say about fascism, either. Unless you are linking Hitler's drive across europe with his fascism, which I would argue is a false linking. In terms of sole expansionism, which is what his drive was, the US and Russia have done it, as has the Brits and the Spaniards and the French, well before tere was the concept of fascism.I agree it was a really bad move to start a second war before we got afghanistan back on its feet--it still isnt'. And this issue of starting multiple wars without finishing previous ones isn't a fascist characteristic. If you look at Hitler, he hit poland, got austria, turned around and chewed up france, attempted britain, and then went to russia. Each time, those "mini" wars were finished, so that the whole territory was under german control, and every city had soldiers guarding it from the rebellion forces inside. Only Britain and Russia did not fall--the former due to winning the air war, the latter due to a specific winter. Granted, you may have some other evidence (seeing as how you're a military history buff) that proves this wrong, but . . .

---

Want to help give back to the world community? Did you know that your computer can help? Join the newest TeamEvC Climate Modelling to help improve climate predictions for a better tomorrow.

You have described the kind of republican that I would like to see. If it were as you describe, I would often be voting republican.Alas, that grand old party is no more.

---

Compassionate conservatism - bringing you a kinder, gentler torture chamber

I wonder just how many people will catch that phrase?hmm, new acronym for the repubs. The NAF (new age fascist)?

---

Want to help give back to the world community? Did you know that your computer can help? Join the newest TeamEvC Climate Modelling to help improve climate predictions for a better tomorrow.

I believe that anyone who is a registered Republican is a Republican.That out of the way, I think that folk like Ford or Goldwater would be horrified by what the Republican Party has become. It has totally abandoned honor, honesty, concern for the individual, limits to the role of government or the idea that government does mean serving.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Indeed, the "neo-fascist" label refers primarily to point one. The other two are more on the lines of contrast between "new" and "old". I must not have expressed myself as well as I thought.

Ahh, my friend, that is precisely the Grand Old Party I joined as a Young Republican at age 16 - over 30 years ago now. I have to confess to overcoming that devotion during the last Federal election. I, who have voted consistently Republican my entire adult life, voted for John Kerry because I could no longer in good conscience support a party which has so betrayed the ideals I stand for. It's a sad commentary on the state of the political process in the US.

I completely agree. And not only those moderns, but the very founder of the Republican Party - Thomas Jefferson - must be spinning in his grave at what we have become.Edited by Quetzal, : No reason given.

I agreed with your analysis, though I'd also agree fascist might not be accurate.Perhaps an overall term might be neo-monarchical (I'd even be willing to go oligarchical), or neo-dictatorial, or neo-totalitarian.

---

holmes {in temp decloak from lurker mode}
"What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)

Actually, it's the Democrats who can trace the origins of their party to Jefferson. The Republicans were a brand spanking new party in the 1850s.

---

"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one." -- George Bernard Shaw

BOTH democrats and the republicans can trace their origins to jefferson's party, the "democratic repoublicans" (or "republicans" for short). the party split sometime in the early 1800's, i believe over andrew jackson, into democrats and republicans. whigs and federalists disappeared at about this point, iirc.

---

Originally the proto parties were the Federalists and anti-federalists. Jefferson was elected as what was referred to as a Democratic Republican against the Federalists in 1800. By 1816, the Federalists were washed up. When all white males, instead of just white men of property were enfranchised during the Jacksonian era starting around 1824, the Democratic Republican party became the Democratic Party. After Jackson persued some high handed policies reminiscent of an imperial presidency, the Whig Party was created in late 1833 as the main opposition which sought to limit presidential power. The Whig Party, which elected two presidents, gradually dissolved by the 1850s over the slavery/states rights issue. The Republican Party was founded in 1854 and its first President, Lincoln was elected in 1860. Since then its been nothing but Republicans or Democrats in majority. Edited by anglagard, : little more accuracy

it's been a little while since my last american history class, and i could never keep this straight. personally, i wouldn't be suprised if we're heading for another split somewhere down the line.

---