Elitism, not liberalism, is the real problem

www.renewamerica.com ^ | March 22nd, 2014 | Chuck Baldwin

[Sheapdog]

You have to hand it to the game-makers in the two major parties: they have done an outstanding job of putting the problems of the world into a convenient left-right paradigm. To the average conservative out there, Republican equals conservative, which equals good – while Democrat equals liberal, which equals bad. And to the average liberal out there, Democrat equals liberal, which equals good – while Republican equals conservative, which equals bad. So, all the party game-makers have to do is paint the other guys as liberal or conservative and all of the sheeple within the two parties will blindly and robotically go to the voting booth and pull the party lever, believing that they have just had a hand in defeating the "bad" guys.

But it's not just the game-makers of the two major parties that participate in this charade; the majority of talking heads on the radio and television talk shows, as well as most newscasters from the network news shows, also participate. The entire political world is seen through the jaded lenses of left and right. Granted, liberal game-makers control the vast majority of the print and television media (with the exception of FOX News), but conservative game-makers dominate the radio talk show circuit.

So, why is it that no matter which political party wins the election (congressional or presidential), nothing changes? Nothing changes with out-of-control deficit spending. Nothing changes with foreign policy. Nothing changes with the Federal Reserve. Nothing changes with federal entitlements. Nothing changes with continuing federal encroachment on personal liberties and State sovereignty. Nothing changes. Liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican, left or right: nothing changes. Nothing!

[doc1019]

This article assumes that there is a difference between elitism and liberalism.

[Sheapdog]

The article goes on to speak of Diane Feinstein’s hypocrisy and surveillance.

[llevrok]

I often think how times have changed.

Growing up in the 50’s and 60’s, Republicans were painted as country club, refined, educated, business owners and out of touch with the “working man”.

Today, we on the right are crude, rednecks. Not as refined nor intellectually bright. Not the progressive thinkers as the Lear Jet liberals of today. In essence - just the opposite of the era in which I grew up.

[TexasFreeper2009]

The biggest problem I see with the parties (besides the need for term limits) is that the Christian vote has been divided.

Those who primarily believe in the social justice part of Christianity to the exclusion of all else are Democrats, while those who oppose abortion and value innocent human life above all else are Republicans (except in the case of capital punishment and war). If ever one of the two parties is able to consolidate those two wings of Christianity ... watch out.

The other issue is spending. We have been having a debate in this country for my entire life on the best way to grow the economy. Liberals have pushed for more government spending facilitated through higher taxation, Republican have argued for smaller government and lower taxation. Both sides believe they are right, and think if only their way is followed the government and the economy will flourish. But the fact is, liberals are wrong, and in being wrong they are their own worst enemy, because if they would only adopt the financial policies conservative Republicans know will work.. they would have far more money to pay for the programs they love so much.

God help the Republican party if the Democrats ever flip to pro-life and adopt conservative financial policies. (I know it's not likely to happen)

But honestly... it wasn't that long ago that I would have thought a black president wasn't a possibility in my lifetime, that sodomy would be accepted as normal, and that pot would be legalized and promoted as medicine.

Change can sometimes happen fairly quickly, and if the poll numbers continue to slip on abortion... don't be shocked if one day the Democrats suddenly flip.

[SpaceBar]

Actually from a strict definition perspective, it’s true. Case in point; I had a heated argument with a long time friend of mine who I had always identified as “liberal”. As the disagreement progressed, I realized that said friend wasn’t a liberal in the strict sense, but used liberalism to shore up his own “righteousness”. I might not be explaining it precisely, but an elitist acts liberal to show others how “generous” they are, even on your dime.

[doc1019]

Thanks for your perspective... things to ponder.

[ansel12]

The Christian vote depends on the denomination.

Evangelicals are about a 75-79% republican vote, some denominations vote democrat.

[Ben Ficklin]

"Growing up in the 50's and 60's, Republicans were painted as country club, refined, educated, business owners and out of touch with the "working man"

Historically, the GOP was the elitist party and the democrats were the populist party.

That began to change in the 50s-60s when the Cultural Elitists left the GOP to take over the dem party, leaving the Economic Elitists in the GOP. The Cultural Elitists rode to power on the backs of the boomers and took control of the dem party at the 1968 dem convention in Chicago.

This led to a dis-satisfaction amongst the Cultural Populists in the dem party so the GOP used Nixon's Southern Strategy to bring the populist silent majority into the GOP.

So the modern republican party is a coalition between Economic Elitists and Cultural Populists while the modern democrat party is a coalition between Cultural Elitists and Economic Populists

These events were the greatest political shift in America since the Civil War and the problem is that both coalitions are slowly breaking down. For the dems, the boomers are aging and will soon exit the stage and for the GOP, the populist wave has swept the party leading to conflicts between the rightwing populists and the GOPe.

Bork defined these Cultural Elitists aka intellectual elitists aka Cultural Marxists as those who make their living off of words and language: Educators, Entertainers, Lawyers, Bureaucrats, etc

Economic Elitists are Wall Street, Main Street, Corporate America, Transnationals, etc

Economic Populists are unions and blue collar workers, environmentalists, welfare recipients, the entitled, etc

The Cultural Populists are southern culture, prairie culture, rural culture, gun culture, moral culture, etc

[PapaBear3625]

Actually from a strict definition perspective, it’s true. Case in point; I had a heated argument with a long time friend of mine who I had always identified as “liberal”. As the disagreement progressed, I realized that said friend wasn’t a liberal in the strict sense, but used liberalism to shore up his own “righteousness”. I might not be explaining it precisely, but an elitist acts liberal to show others how “generous” they are, even on your dime.

Thomas Sowell wrote a wonderful book on that subject: The Vision of the Anointed: Self-Congratulation as a Basis for Social Policy, which follows his earlier book on the topic A Conflict of Visions.

[PapaBear3625]

Bork defined these Cultural Elitists aka intellectual elitists aka Cultural Marxists as those who make their living off of words and language: Educators, Entertainers, Lawyers, Bureaucrats, etc

They can also be thought of as "The Articulate Class", people who gain status by being articulate enough to construct plausible arguments that support what they want to do, while not necessarily actually being able to produce real results.