American Political Parties: The Switch
Has anyone noticed how the loose definitions we gave our political parties have, in some ways, reversed over the last couple decades? The conservative party, the party once known for isolationism, reduction in spending (military included), and just maintaining (conserving) a tight ship at home is now the party in favor of allowing business to outsource jobs (deregulation of business), reshaping the world (wants to wage war on unfriendly nations), and meddle in the private lives of its citizenry (patriot act, defense of marriage act).
By contrast, the party we think of as progressive is now appealing as desperately as possible to the blue collar American populace and trying to "keep jobs at home," and reduce military spending and pull our military out from many corners of the world. The progressives are now fighting for more isolation and crack down on job outsourcing and foreign bank accounts.
Something else to note interestingly about the sort of dichotomy of political parties in America... the democrats are the party of the people, and are typically voted for by the lower and middle classes (larger percentage of the population). BUT - they BILL themselves as the intellectual party, the party of thinkers and intelligencia. Our current president is particularly noteworthy as one of the first technologically knowledgeable leaders, author of books BEFORE becoming president, and analytical incrementalist styled presidency.
The Republicans are statistically more popular by the upper-middle and upper class population and PhDs stastically vote Republican over Democrat. Yet, they bill THEMSELVES as the every-man blue collar average joe party that acts on impulse, goes with the gut, and is the party of actors instead of analyzers. The silver-spoon Harvard and Yale GOP mascot of the first decade of this millennium put on the best simple-man steers and stirrups show we've ever seen.
The way they mass market and the reality of their constituencies is backwards, and part of their core definitions from the old days are backwards too. Maybe one day we'll get this sorted out, but not today.
Has anyone noticed how the loose definitions we gave our political parties have, in some ways, reversed over the last couple decades? The conservative party, the party once known for isolationism, reduction in spending (military included), and just maintaining (conserving) a tight ship at home is now the party in favor of allowing business to outsource jobs (deregulation of business), reshaping the world (wants to wage war on unfriendly nations), and meddle in the private lives of its citizenry (patriot act, defense of marriage act).
By contrast, the party we think of as progressive is now appealing as desperately as possible to the blue collar American populace and trying to "keep jobs at home," and reduce military spending and pull our military out from many corners of the world. The progressives are now fighting for more isolation and crack down on job outsourcing and foreign bank accounts.
Something else to note interestingly about the sort of dichotomy of political parties in America... the democrats are the party of the people, and are typically voted for by the lower and middle classes (larger percentage of the population). BUT - they BILL themselves as the intellectual party, the party of thinkers and intelligencia. Our current president is particularly noteworthy as one of the first technologically knowledgeable leaders, author of books BEFORE becoming president, and analytical incrementalist styled presidency.
The Republicans are statistically more popular by the upper-middle and upper class population and PhDs stastically vote Republican over Democrat. Yet, they bill THEMSELVES as the every-man blue collar average joe party that acts on impulse, goes with the gut, and is the party of actors instead of analyzers. The silver-spoon Harvard and Yale GOP mascot of the first decade of this millennium put on the best simple-man steers and stirrups show we've ever seen.
The way they mass market and the reality of their constituencies is backwards, and part of their core definitions from the old days are backwards too. Maybe one day we'll get this sorted out, but not today.