Just about every four years, we hear about how this election is going to be a transformational election and how the direction of the country is going to be permanently changed and how our children and grand-children will be affected by what we decide now. In reality, transformational elections are rare and this election doesn't look like it's going to change much no matter who is elected.
History shows that America is a one-party state. What I mean by this is that one party tends to dominate and the other party tends to be a "me too" party. In the early nineteenth century, the Democratic Party established itself as the majority party in the era of Andrew Jackson. That lasted about forty years until the Civil War, when the Republican Party under Abraham Lincoln seized majority status. The GOP dominated American politics from 1865 until 1932, when Franklin Roosevelt inaugurated an era of Democratic hegemony. For most of the twentieth century, from the thirties until 1980, the Democrats controlled the government. Reagan's election in 1980 began our current epoch of Republican and conservative domination.
How do we know that this has been a conservative era? Not just by the number of Republicans who have occupied the White house. We also know by looking at the behavior of Democrats who have managed to get elected. Today Bill Clinton goes around boasting, "We won the Cold War." "We fixed welfare." "We signed the free trade agreements." "We put the lid on spending." Remarkably all Clinton's accomplishments are conservative accomplishments. At least one of them, welfare reform, was signed reluctantly because of GOP pressure. None would have been possible without conservative support. Clinton's liberal ideas, such as gays in the military and national health care, went down in flames. In sum, Clinton was dragged by the conservative tide and basically governed as a moderate Republican.
Is the conservative era now finished? Many of the pundits say it is, but I see no sign of it from the actions of the three presidential candidates. McCain of course has largely pleged to "stay the course." His independence is genuine but it does not constitute a departure from Reagan principles. Mostly McCain is a temperamental departure from Bush. Interestingly Hillary seems to have tempered her erstwhile radicalism. As a senator she has generally occupied the right flank of the Democratic party, voting for example to authorize the use of force in Iraq. Even in the campaign Hillary has sounded cautious notes, warning of the danger of negotiating with Iran, promising a staged rather than precipitous withdrawal from Iraq, an so on.
That leaves Obama, who sounds transformational in his rhetoric. But where is the actual change that Obama is proposing? Basically Obama's argument is that he is different because he grew up in many different places, has a black father and a white mother, and because his grandmother lives in an African village. Obama claims to be different because of his name and his background. So is Obama going to radically overhaul the tax system? No. Is he going to change America's longtime alliance with Israel or our special friendship with Great Britain? No. Does he have any new ideas for reshaping race relations in this country? If so he has kept them entirely to himself. Even Obama's tiresome repetition of the need to change the way Washington does business is unaccompanied by any concrete strategies for changing the modus operandi in the nation's capital.
One of these days we will have a transformational election, as we did in 1932 or 1980. But so far this doesn't look like one at all. The long shadow of Reagan still hangs over American politics, shaping the way the presidential candidates see themselves and the world.
Reader Comments ( Page 4 of 27)
46. T. Brough,
Did you really disagree? You hit the nail on the head- the money that 'was' ours did indeed go somewhere. 12 billion a week is being poured into Iraq and Afghanistan, SOMEONE is pocketing it. The point is, what are we going to do about it?
Robert at 1:34PM on May 14th 2008
47. John Galt,
Dammit, I'm married! Not fair! Who knew? Now what are we going to do? Is my wife one of them? Who are they? Do they have a MySpace page? Aaaaaargh!
Robert at 1:37PM on May 14th 2008
48. No Obama
C'mon bend over and take it like a man, you know you want it, you slut.
Yeah, yeah, oohh that's it baby just like that.
Now squeez your, oh yeah that's the stuff!!!
rabidmccain at 1:46PM on May 14th 2008
49. Dear John Galt,
THAT was more interesting? I mean, Ana's cute and all, and I have offered to buy her shoes, but-
I think you are trying to deliberately obfuscate the issue. Are you part of the Status Quo? One of the entrenched soldiers of which I earlier spoke?
A Dinesh toady? Sorry, inflammatory! Going to go take a shower, eat B'fast, and come back. Maybe you'll write something cogent by then. Oops! Sorry! Inflammatory again! Dammit!
Robert at 1:46PM on May 14th 2008
50. 37. Dear GHB,
I thought you were going to work on the EGO thing? Anything constructive to contribute?
Robert at 12:57PM on May 14th 2008
-----------------------------
Yes. I am here to tell you that you're not the blog monitor. I'll work on my ego, and you work on yours.
Godless Heathen Brian at 1:47PM on May 14th 2008
51. Hey rabidmccain!
No beating up on the intellectually unarmed! You pick better fights with someone more your size!
Robert at 1:49PM on May 14th 2008
52. Unless you meant that as a neutral 'how do you do....." in which case I should have answered "fine!"....
Hard to tell. But hi, anyhow.
Godless Heathen Brian at 1:49PM on May 14th 2008
53. Dear GHB,
YOU'RE the one who talked about working on the ego thing. As to the blog monitor thing- ???? I'm just sayin'... My ego? I says what I says, not trying to bring anyone over to the altar of ME. Read my posts, you'll see.
Sayonara,
Robert
Robert at 1:51PM on May 14th 2008
54. It is true that Reagan ushered in an era of conservatism that is still being played out. Yes, I think we are overall perhaps a center right country. Yet - there is no question, that since 1980, we have become more liberal - or tolerant, if you prefer - of gay people, marriages between folks of different races and nationalities, and equality between the sexes. All of these were still 'controversial' in 1980, at least among most parts of the country. While the GOP has made successful strides in the abortion battle (although no elected Republican calls for a complete ban of it - interesting) they continue to lose on the issue of gay rights.
David S. at 2:11PM on May 14th 2008
55. History shows that whenever liberals are in the minority, they plead that they are oppressed and that conservatives should tolerate the liberal viewpoint. Once the liberals are allowed in, they keep promoting their liberal viewpoint until they have a majority, then they ban and outlaw the conservative viewpoints.
For example, the effort to teach evolution in the public schools, and the expansion of out of control sexual "freedom" at the expense of the silencing of religious viewpoints.
In recent years, the Republicans held the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the Presidency, the trifecta, but enough Republican traitors in Congress kept conservative values from being implemented. Does anybody think this will be the case if Barack Hussein Obama or Hillary win the White House in November?
If the Democrats get the trifecta, I predict a swift silencing of many conservative viewpoints, by force of new laws, such as the strict enforcement of the homosexual agenda upon the American people, homosexual marriage, homosexuals in the military, hiring quotas for homosexuals (ENDA), forcing religious organizations to accept the full homosexual agenda despite that it is condemned by Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, the teaching and preaching of out of control sexual values, and the outlawing of any dissenting opinions.
Can we really say that this election will not be transformative?
Rev 3:16 at 2:22PM on May 14th 2008
56. “Hey rabidmccain!
No beating up on the intellectually unarmed! You pick better fights with someone more your size!”
I’d say NO OBAMA is intellectually unarmed and unlegged.
But screw that anyway let him go back to his spider hole tail ‘twixt legs, licking his wounds.
rabidmccain at 2:25PM on May 14th 2008
57. Rev 3:16
Somebody should change the password to your PC.
not-pboyfloyd at 2:26PM on May 14th 2008
58. Rev 6.66 - "such as the strict enforcement of the homosexual agenda upon the American people,"
What the fuck is a homosexual agenda? Your kind always spouts that, but what, exactly is the agenda?
"homosexual marriage,"
OK, I can see that as one of the sole agenda items for homosexuals. They want the same benefites that heteros have, access to pensions and other benes their partners worked for, ability to make life decisions for a partner who is in the hospital, etc. etc.
"homosexuals in the military,"
THEY ALREADY ARE IN THE MILITARY!! (They just have to keep quiet...)
"hiring quotas for homosexuals (ENDA),"
Ummm...now you're stretching it...
"forcing religious organizations to accept the full homosexual agenda"
Again, WHAT AGENDA? By far, the longest and most disturbing agenda I always see is that of the religious zealots.
brandon at 2:31PM on May 14th 2008
59. What happened?
Did everyone go on 'tilt' wondering how the topic, "A Transformational Election?" suddenly became, "Christians hate gays!"?
not-pboyfloyd at 3:03PM on May 14th 2008
60. Pfft! Of course, the 'good' Rev. 3.16 is DD sockpuppet No. 234,677!
not-pboyfloyd at 3:05PM on May 14th 2008