Posted on 07/14/2020 5:26:19 AM PDT by Sir Napsalot
The dwindling band of NeverTrumpers fondly imagines that Republicans will snap back to the former party of beautiful losers when Trump departs the scene. We’re the people with ideas, they say, and we have ownership rights over Republican thinking. But they’re merely a rag-tag bunch of neocons, libertarian purists, prissy mugwumps, and party apparatchiks who have little in common apart from their detestation of Trump.
On both right and left, American politics has degenerated into a brain-dead battle over personalities, not principles. Which raises the question of where we’ll be when Trump leaves the scene. The Alexandrine poet C.P. Cavafy wrote about what happens when threats just go away. People had been terrified by the thought of a barbarian invasion. Except one day everyone realized that the barbarians wouldn’t show up. “Now what’s going to happen to us without barbarians? Those people were a kind of solution.”
A real solution will come, however, when we recognize that the principles which guided the Trump campaign will remain after Trump, and that they represent a form of progressive conservatism. That might seem an oxymoron. It’s not. Burke would have recognized the need for policies that look forward to posterity while conserving what we’ve learned from our ancestors. So would Disraeli and so, obviously, would T.R. Roosevelt. And that’s how the Trump campaign cracked America’s electoral code in 2016.
...
(Excerpt) Read more at theamericanconservative.com ...
I am not sure I buy into the 'progressive conservatism' term, but I agree that Trump presidency (either one or two terms) showed us there are a LARGE swash conservative base that "so-called leading conservatives" never represent and just want to brow beat to subjugate completely to their 'supirority'.
Bump
What do FReepers think? ... I am not sure I buy into the ‘progressive conservatism’ term,
```
Since the word “progressive” has become shorthand for communist - not much.
Progressive conservatism is an oxymoron for the intent to restor constitutional rights and government control to the people.
I’m trying to wrap my head around what that might look like. I’m thinking “Rockefeller Republican.” Conservative in military and finance, government, but moderate in domestic social issues.
The article doesn’t define “Progressive” here, although it alludes to Teddy Roosevelt. That makes it hard to critique.
Nowadays, “Progressive” is synonymous with “Marxist”. And recently, it’s been sliding from soft and subtle Marxism to full Pol Pot.
Not Rockefeller Republican; Truman Democrat.
Après moi, le déluge
- Louis XV
After Trump, and unless decent Americans find a way to express the importance of freedom and the will to stand up to the pure evil of the globalist left, all I see is absolute devestation. Even that destruction would be better than allowing socialists to take power.
Progressive Conservatism = Neo-Liberalism. At the end of the day the only difference is a handful of social issues they perpetually fight over.
Progressive Conservatism sounds too much like Compassionate Conservatism.
Republicans also tried Progressivism during the William Howard Taft/Teddy Roosevelt era.
That led to Income Tax, Federal Reserve, and direct election of Senators.
Not worth my time to read the whole article.
Get back to first principles, The Constitution.
I read another article yesterday positing; Do we even have the will to survive as “Americans”?
Weak & Effete Boys that couldn’t hold their Grandfathers Sword in battle, Moochers of all stripes demanding “rights”, Corrupt Pols getting inter-generationally wealthy off bilking the public treasury, Crony Caps selling out our industrial base for a few pieces of silver.
What unites “US”?
Chose a side - you won’t be able to sit this one out forever.
a storm is coming
It’s not “progressive conservatism,” it’s a populist conservatism. Current establishment “conservatism” is corporate conservatism, where everything is done for the benefit of the Chamber of Commerce and their ilk.
}:-)4
Not “progressive”, but “populist” - responding to the expressed wants of some large demographic bloc of the voting public.
A large number of folks see the wisdom of the adoption and implementation of the Second Amendment, for example, judging from the HUGE flood of persons interested in acquiring some kind of sidearm, be it rifles, pistols or shotguns. Defense of life and property have become recognized human needs, and if the cops are going to be defunded, when seconds count, cops may not arrive for hours, or days. If ever.
I’m not so sure. Example:
“...American nationalism is liberal nationalism...” ??
Nationalism is fine but in the US the media has permitted and even encouraged the slippery slope that got us where we are. Liberals get an inch and TAKE 9 miles ... while they NEVER give ground in any direction. They live and die on dead center but incessantly demand more and more unreasonable and unworkable concessions for themselves.
The MSM-created ‘nationalism’ puts us and keeps us in a jackpot.
THEIR creation is not unlike the German version where Nazi’s put a racial spin on THEIR ‘nationalism’. It was not a success and sullied the concept of ‘nationalism’ almost totally,
The article is very flawed in this way and on many other points.
It’s Trump’s opponents on the right that support the progressive agenda. Open borders, socialized medicine, etc. You will find the GOP big donors are mostly in agreement with Democrats on policy. I call them progressive corportists. I think I heard Levin use the term and I agree. People like McConnell are not conservatives. They support the transnational corporations who pay them off and are corportists.
While Trump is entertaining my support of him is based off policy. I suspect that is the case with most of his supporters. His “cult” is no larger than any other elected POTUS.
Sounds like “compassionate conservatism” with a new name.
There are already progressive Republicans, Flimsey Grahamnesty would be the best example.
Pretending to be conservative while plotting to give the Democrats a permanent majority with amnesty for illegal aliens.
In the history of the nation the protective tariff system has ever justified itself by restoring confidence, promoting industrial activity and employment, enormously increasing our purchasing power and bringing increased prosperity to all our people.
The tariff protection to our industry works for increased consumption of domestic agricultural products by an employed population instead of one unable to purchase the necessities of life. Without the strict maintenance of the tariff principle our farmers will need always to compete with cheap lands and cheap labor abroad and with lower standards of living.
The enormous value of the protective principle has once more been demonstrated by the emergency tariff act of 1921 and the tariff act of 1922.
We assert our belief in the elastic provision adopted by congress in the tariff act of 1922 providing for a method of readjusting the tariff rates and the classifications in order to meet changing economic conditions when such changed conditions are brought to the attention of the president by complaint or application.
We believe that the power to increase or decrease any rate of duty provided in the tariff furnishes a safeguard on the one hand against excessive taxes and on the other hand against too high customs charges.
The wise provisions of this section of the tariff act afford ample opportunity for tariff duties to be adjusted after a hearing in order that they may cover the actual differences in the cost of production in the United States and the principal competing countries of the world.
We also believe that the application of this provision of the tariff act will contribute to business stability by making unnecessary general disturbances which are usually incident to general tariff revisions.
trending: self-defense is now illegal
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.