Good exposition, and sound analysis and perspective; my compliments.
Pols usually are not as bright as we hope they should be. But given the right plan of attack they will get behind it.
Who should make that plan of attack and what does it look like?
Your perspective is one of high awareness and substance with glistening aspects of solution material in hints of states rights. But how to plan an attack or counterattack around themes of states rights? And do it in a way that those who are not of such high awareness as you and others in the conservative movement can get behind it. How to get the lesser aware behind it?
There are several approaches:
1. Populist - Ronald Reagan was able to woo the lesser aware with force of personality. The downside of this approach is that it is not lasting.
2. Honey Pot - this approach offers something to the voter in return for their participation. This approach is used quite successfully by the Left. This would lead to the same result we see today and would not make the lesser aware any more aware than they are today.
3. Independence - What could be offered here for example would be a land program, vocational training program, increased grant subsidies for such training especially in concert with a land program. The idea would be to provide a pathway towards independence with resource support and importantly the instillation or gradual establishment of the values of conservative traditions. One might entertain the thought of calling such a program “A Life of Dignity” and would avoid the ‘40 acres and a mule’ outcome by presold contracts of products or services, all administered at a state level. There is evidence of the workability and success of such an approach as this.
4. Existing Small Business Pitch - small businesses care primarily about one thing only, more customers in their stores and facilities. Getting them onboard is best accomplished with economic arguments and commitments to lower taxes and less regulations. This is the tried and true approach of the GOP but it doesn’t always form the broader coalition needed to win elections unless the urbanite dependent class sits home on election night in a funk as to why liberals didn’t deliver. This goes in cycles. The cycle is best broken with approach 3 above. But even when the cycle hits just right, this approach does not always result in a more enlightened aware voter. Many existing small businesses can be practically minded for themselves but Utopian for others. For example, a shopkeeper can understand all the conservative business values but still remark they would wish everyone would have healthcare as long as they were not obliged to pay for it.
Now surely there will be those that will criticize any ‘plan’ or ‘approach’ but the facts are that America has grown a large dependent class that votes on the left side of the political spectrum. To have any chance at restoring conservatism and states rights, there has to be a plan of attack put forward to provide an alternative to government dependency. Kicking people off the dole won’t do it. They will merely vote themselves back into it.
A ‘fundamental transformation’ as Obama expressed should be countered with the more correct ‘fundamental market awareness’ where people of the dependent class become part of the market and are trained and supported to take their place in it.
I’m not an economist or statistician, so I cannot accurately guage what would be needed to sever this toxic relationship between the federal government to the citizen through retirement and benefit programs (particularly the ones that are set to go bankrupt in a matter of decades).
I want to hear a candidate who is honest about these problems, who knows they will get hammered by the media and the Democrats for it, but will present the hard truth people need to hear.
1) These programs, however they have benefit you, were created with malevolent purposes in mind.
2) The government broke its promise, and did not lock-box these funds. They stole your money in a way that would be criminal in the private sector.
3) They intend to pay for these programs as far as they can by burying the nation in debt.
4) These programs will go bankrupt. Anyone under the age of 50 is paying money against their will into something they will gain no benefit from in the future.
I really think point #4 is a way of getting through to people. No candidate in either 2012 or 2008 made this point forcefully enough. The majority of American citizens will never see a dime of their payments to the government.
We need a bold vision that we move to totally phase these programs out before 2050, and a Republican president will set up the roadmap and begin the process. But make clear those who paid into the system will be reimbursed while payments from younger citizens are ended . How to pay for this? By any means necessary. I’d begin by ending all military presence in Europe, selling all assets thereof. Closing down all the usual departments mentioned (EPA, DOE, NOAA, GSA, IRS, etc) and selling off all assets.Ending foreign aid to 99% of current receiving nations. End funding of the UN and relate operations.
This would be done in conjunction with the states, to make sure each is ready to take on responsibilities they once held. It will be much easier dealing with the problems in say, Kansas, than it will in California due to the smaller population.
I’m looking for a candidate who will take the approach of being ready to make the tough decisions to shrink the government and prevent insolvency. While I disagreed with Ron Paul on many issues, he was the only candidate except for perhaps Herman Cain who seemed serious about how deep in trouble America was, and that bold action was needed.
With regard to the small business approach, the problem here is that the candidates all tout small business, but people hear this as big business because they are usually in bed with the Chamber of Crony Capitalism. It would help to have a candidate tout the virtues of local and state industries while correctly scolding the large corporations who have become arms of the state with lobbyists, special interests, etc. There can be little defense of the bailouts like there was in 2012. Detroit is gone. A candidate must be ready to criticize both the government and big business abuse of government privilege.