Gettin' Bolshy With It
Over the past few years, several leftist media outlets have been upbraided for comparing Bush II to Der Fuhrer, most memorably when a moveon.org advertisement competition came up with several often less that professional looking attempts at satire.
But the rise of the neocon Republican movement bears only a passing resemblance to the rise of the Nazis, who started out as a minority party and made use of economic ruin to bring down the much more mainstream ruling party. The Republicans, on the other hand, have had control of Congress for ten years now, and if anything, have been in the position of presiding over a sluggish economy. The Nazis used brutally obstructionist tactics to shut down the government on several occasions, then blamed the President for being feckless.
The neocon Republican movement, on the other hand, is imbued with an annoying self-righteous streak that reminds one of another minority party that managed to take over, somehow.
The Bolsheviks.
A recent Salon article puts the hardcore religious right at 20 percent. Yet somehow, the Republican powers that be seem to answer to this outspoken minority rather than its own larger if more pedestrian moderate base.
But how does a minority group make itself appear to be the majority?
By mischaracterizing the opposition, certainly, but there's something more than that. It's about faith.
How do people like Tom Delay make completely normal and mainstream, often Republican-nominated judges, like those in the Schiavo case, seem as if they are radical extremists?
How do they launch vicious, unAmerican, utterly radical attacks on the checks and balances that are at the heart of our legal system?
What, they want to do away with Senate filibusters? When they already have such a big majority?
They have problems with the very concept of an independent judiciary now? Because they don't cowtow to Congress on all occasions?
And I'm the radical?
Personally, I think they've got a pretty good deal. They've only got 51% of the electorate, and they've got a firm control of the Presidency, both houses of Congress, most federal judges were appointed by Republican presidents, and still its not enough for them?
They are absolutely power mad. They lash out now at anyone who dare speak against them. This is all so against our tradition of government and political speech it's unbelievable.
No one should be independent anymore. Not the judiciary, not the press and not academia. Anyone who disagrees or voices unpopular opinions must be silenced and punished.
Where have I heard all this before? A power-mad, self-righteous minority without a true majority, who uses misinformation and a false sense of morality to weasle its way into power.
Bolsheviks.
How far can they go? How far is too far?
A one-party state?
A national religion?
A media controlled by the government?
Suddenly, these inherently unAmerican things seem possible, and you know who to thank for this unbelievable turn of events.
But the rise of the neocon Republican movement bears only a passing resemblance to the rise of the Nazis, who started out as a minority party and made use of economic ruin to bring down the much more mainstream ruling party. The Republicans, on the other hand, have had control of Congress for ten years now, and if anything, have been in the position of presiding over a sluggish economy. The Nazis used brutally obstructionist tactics to shut down the government on several occasions, then blamed the President for being feckless.
The neocon Republican movement, on the other hand, is imbued with an annoying self-righteous streak that reminds one of another minority party that managed to take over, somehow.
The Bolsheviks.
A recent Salon article puts the hardcore religious right at 20 percent. Yet somehow, the Republican powers that be seem to answer to this outspoken minority rather than its own larger if more pedestrian moderate base.
But how does a minority group make itself appear to be the majority?
By mischaracterizing the opposition, certainly, but there's something more than that. It's about faith.
How do people like Tom Delay make completely normal and mainstream, often Republican-nominated judges, like those in the Schiavo case, seem as if they are radical extremists?
How do they launch vicious, unAmerican, utterly radical attacks on the checks and balances that are at the heart of our legal system?
What, they want to do away with Senate filibusters? When they already have such a big majority?
They have problems with the very concept of an independent judiciary now? Because they don't cowtow to Congress on all occasions?
And I'm the radical?
Personally, I think they've got a pretty good deal. They've only got 51% of the electorate, and they've got a firm control of the Presidency, both houses of Congress, most federal judges were appointed by Republican presidents, and still its not enough for them?
They are absolutely power mad. They lash out now at anyone who dare speak against them. This is all so against our tradition of government and political speech it's unbelievable.
No one should be independent anymore. Not the judiciary, not the press and not academia. Anyone who disagrees or voices unpopular opinions must be silenced and punished.
Where have I heard all this before? A power-mad, self-righteous minority without a true majority, who uses misinformation and a false sense of morality to weasle its way into power.
Bolsheviks.
How far can they go? How far is too far?
A one-party state?
A national religion?
A media controlled by the government?
Suddenly, these inherently unAmerican things seem possible, and you know who to thank for this unbelievable turn of events.
posted by Matthew at 10:51 AM
1 Comments:
From the Salon article-
Here's the troubling thing: That 20 percent is running the country, and they're now pressing for such changes in the way the courts decide cases. While most Americans are apparently indifferent to the long-term implications of the Schiavo case, many religious conservatives see it as having lasting political utility. Its most important outcome, they say, is in highlighting an unsettling flaw in American governance. They call this flaw "judicial tyranny," though most of the rest of us know it by a friendlier name, "checks and balances."
Post a Comment
<< Home