Political Fallacies: Ideas vs Teams

A recent study confirmed what I have been observing over the last dozen years or so.  In the USA, politics is no longer a battle of ideas but a competition between teams.

Of course, it has always been so to some extent.  Politics is the science of forming coalitions to further personal goals.  This is why we have a Congress to pass laws instead of an enlightened king or executive: only by forming coalitions can we ensure that the top priorities of the maximum number are achieved. This is also why we have political parties:  to allow people to come together and form an alliance that achieves goals that not everyone wants but that everyone in the party can live with.

But while parties and coalitions drive votes, it has been ideas that have driven the parties.  From the beginning of the nation, political parties worked to ensure their top priorities were based on more than personal preferences and piques.  Federalism and Anti-Federalism were defining issues because the first generation had severe disagreements over whether centralization or decentralization were better for the freedom of the individual and the good of the nation.  (We are still fighting that battle in the Gun Control debate, among others.)  Kennedy to Reagan defended Democracy over Communism not only as a practical matter but also in the arena of ideas as they fought in the Cold War.  As recently as President Bill Clinton, the debates over Health Care Reform were over the idea of a government-run universal system and a privately-run independent system.  Which was really better for the consumer, the nation, and the world?

Something different has followed the rise of social media.  We no longer are talking about big ideas.  The formation of echo chambers where we only speak with those who agree with us have eliminated the need to defend a position.  Instead, we defend our "friends" against all attackers, right or wrong.  Our political parties have turned into teams.  And like the Yankees or the Red Sox, it no longer matters who has the best players, best managers, best philosophy, or best mascot.  We support our team simply because it is OUR team.

What is the problem with this?  There are several, which you have probably noticed in the politics of the last 8 years or so:

1. If you support a Team instead of a Philosophy, you find yourself loving or hating people based on their allegiance instead of their character.
2. If you support a Team instead of an Idea, you find yourself supporting and defending things that you don't actually believe.
3. If you support a Team instead of an Ethical System, you see no problem in hating someone simply because they support the other team.

My challenge to you:  STOP SUPPORTING YOUR TEAM, RIGHT OR WRONG, AND GET BACK TO LOOKING AT THE IDEAS YOU VALUE.  You may be surprised to find out who you've been helping or hurting while you were busy playing the political game.

Are we ready for another 1 Party Government?

Back in the days of George H. W. Bush and Clinton, I can remember thinking "If only Congress and the President were from the same political party. So much more would get done!" Unfortunately, I was right. Both under President George W. Bush and President Barack Obama, we have seen the presidency and the Congressional majority from the same party. And the results were the same - massive overreaching, no attempt at compromise, and ultimately a painful correction afterwards. Not to mention a clear incentive towards corruption, without any watchdogs around. My opinion has shifted and I believe a divided government - president from one party, congress from another (or split between parties) is the way to provide the best product from a republic like our own.

But some are already speculating that 2012 may see a Republican sweep with a super-majority in the Senate. Count me among those who would see that as a bad thing. Conservatives AND Liberals, Democrats AND Republicans need the loyal opposition to keep them honest and level-headed.

Will Republicans be a "minor party" in Colorado?

Sometimes a bad candidate is just a bad candidate. But sometimes, it can be deadly to the future of a political party. Colorado may be teaching a hard and costly lesson.

But if Maes fails to get 10 percent of the vote on election day, his legacy won't be the U.N. bike plot warning or the tall tale of working undercover as a cop in Kansas. It will be leaving Republicans with minor party status in Colorado until 2014.

After weeks of declines in the polls, the TPM Poll Average now shows Maes coming in at 9.3%.

As The Denver Post reported back in September, minor party status means that Republicans wouldn't appear at the top of the ballot with the Democrats in 2012 and 2014. Instead, they'll be listed down with the Libertarian, Green Party and other third-party candidates.

On the upside, it would be a golden opportunity for the Constitution Party whose candidate, Tom Tancredo, could give then Major Party status.

A Humble Proposal

Okay, Barack Obama is now president-elect. We are looking at a Democrat-dominated House and Senate. The age of Republican dominance is officially ended. But let's not look on this as an entirely negative development. Every revolution eventually becomes the entrenched bureaucracy - and thus requires a revolution of its own to correct its flaws. The beauty of he American system is that these "revolutions" can occur thru elections and an orderly transition of power.

The Republicans lost for mostly one reason: Americans no longer understand what it means to be a "Republican" or "Conservative." Conservatives came to power preaching small government, low taxes, a strong defense, and strong commitment to Life. They ost power when their President brought about the largest government in history, stopped talking about Life, and over-extended our defensive forces in two wars. As of now, the only ideal that voters associate with Republicans is "low taxes". How can one trust that one ideal to build a government around?

Let me propose 5 points around which to center a rebuilding of the Republican Party. And yes, I am arguing for keeping the Republican Party as a Conservative Party. The order of these points is NOT by priority, but simply by what order they came to my mind.

1. Taxation drives the economy. High taxes will always slow it, low taxes will always stimulate it.

Please note, this is NOT a one-note "Always lower taxes" mantra. It is a statement about how the system works. This allows the raising of taxes in time of War or crisis, with the understanding that the economy will be slowed. But it also points out that when we can lower taxes, we should because it will create jobs and wealth.

2. Human life is precious. From conception to expiration, life should only be taken after due process of law.

This covers being anti-abortion (though allowing for rape, incest, life-of-mother cases, potentially, given due process and analysis), being careful about application of the Death Penalty, and being careful about sending our soldiers to war without a true casus belli and endorsement by the branches of government.

3. In America, political power is distributed between State and Federal hands and given fundamentally by the People. Each should have their own sphere of influence, and stay out of the spheres of influence of the others.

This means a rollback of so many Federal mandates over non-Federal issues. It reinforces that all Rights lie fundamentally with individuals, and that the Nation has no inherent right to take any right away. It is all by social compact. Let the States run education, morality laws, etc. Let the Federal government run defense, manage interstate business, etc. Let the people live their lives. Stop trying to solve all problems with whatever office your party happens to own at that moment.

4. The primary role of the Federal Government is to provide for a common defense and ensure domestic tranquility.

Maintain a strong army, which does not merely mean a large army. Take care of our soldiers. Do not expend American lives in discretionary wars (i.e. no preemptive wars). Be slow to join battle, but once joined the battle must be fully-funded and supported.

Focus also on rebuilding and strengthening such shops as FEMA and the Treasury Department. These are critical to getting thru crises and for maintaining an even keel for the country.

All other priorities for the Federal government should be secondary to these two. That includes such hot-button issues as Social Security, Health Care, Education, etc.

5. Checks and balances are essentially to the operation of our government. We should look to strengthen these checks, not weaken them, at all times.

Forget the insanity about invoking Executive Privilege to avoid Congressional inquiries and invoking Congressional Privelege to avoid Judicial inquiries, Mr. Vice President. States should be actively checking Federal power. Congress should be actively checking Executive power. The Courts should be actively checking Congressional power. The Press should be actively checking ALL power. The People should be actively checking the Press and its own representatives. We are a nation OF the People, and should never let any one man/woman/office become the be-all, end-all. We should consider such moves as more term limits and not allowing any office-holder to vote on their own compensation as ways to keep these checks and balances working.

There is my list. What do Mod-Bloggers think? Did I go too far? Did I miss anything? How would you rebuild the Republican party?

Ron Paul: "I'll throw my own convention... with blackjack... and delegates..."

Several election cycles back, I was quite enamored of Steve Forbes as a Presidential Candidate. Forbes ran to give visibility to the Flat Tax - an idea whose time has come in my opinion - and ran a tough campaign, picking up two states and a significant percentage of votes. But when Bob Dole was chosen as the nominee, he had the good grace to step back and realize that his time on the stage was done. His ideas continued to be talked about - even in the general election - but he himself knew when to bow out.

Not so Ron Paul. Dr. Paul has decided it is not enough to be given respect by the candidate - despite not having won a single state in the primary - but that he is important enough to warrant his own Convention, which will be held in the same city at the same time as the Republican Convention. He claims to not want to hurt the party, but is eager to keep his face on the evening news.

I respect Dr. Paul's tenacity, but question his methods. If the Republican Party is so antithetical to his ideals, why remain part of it? And if it is truly a party he wishes to remain a part of, why all this grandstanding? Parties exist to form power coalitions. If you're unwilling to join any coalition, do you really want to call yourself part of it?