Author Topic: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future  (Read 2973 times)

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Ship of fools

Nov 13th 2008
From The Economist print edition


Political parties die from the head down


JOHN STUART MILL once dismissed the British Conservative Party as the stupid party. Today the Conservative Party is run by Oxford-educated high-fliers who have been busy reinventing conservatism for a new era. As Lexington sees it, the title of the “stupid party” now belongs to the Tories’ transatlantic cousins, the Republicans.

There are any number of reasons for the Republican Party’s defeat on November 4th. But high on the list is the fact that the party lost the battle for brains. Barack Obama won college graduates by two points, a group that George Bush won by six points four years ago. He won voters with postgraduate degrees by 18 points. And he won voters with a household income of more than $200,000—many of whom will get thumped by his tax increases—by six points. John McCain did best among uneducated voters in Appalachia and the South.

The Republicans lost the battle of ideas even more comprehensively than they lost the battle for educated votes, marching into the election armed with nothing more than slogans. Energy? Just drill, baby, drill. Global warming? Crack a joke about Ozone Al. Immigration? Send the bums home. Torture and Guantánamo? Wear a T-shirt saying you would rather be water-boarding. Ha ha. During the primary debates, three out of ten Republican candidates admitted that they did not believe in evolution.

The Republican Party’s divorce from the intelligentsia has been a while in the making. The born-again Mr Bush preferred listening to his “heart” rather than his “head”. He also filled the government with incompetent toadies like Michael “heck-of-a-job” Brown, who bungled the response to Hurricane Katrina. Mr McCain, once the chattering classes’ favourite Republican, refused to grapple with the intricacies of the financial meltdown, preferring instead to look for cartoonish villains. And in a desperate attempt to serve boob bait to Bubba, he appointed Sarah Palin to his ticket, a woman who took five years to get a degree in journalism, and who was apparently unaware of some of the most rudimentary facts about international politics.

Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future. The party’s electoral success from 1980 onwards was driven by its ability to link brains with brawn. The conservative intelligentsia not only helped to craft a message that resonated with working-class Democrats, a message that emphasised entrepreneurialism, law and order, and American pride. It also provided the party with a sweeping policy agenda. The party’s loss of brains leaves it rudderless, without a compelling agenda.

This is happening at a time when the American population is becoming more educated. More than a quarter of Americans now have university degrees. Twenty per cent of households earn more than $100,000 a year, up from 16% in 1996. Mark Penn, a Democratic pollster, notes that 69% call themselves “professionals”. McKinsey, a management consultancy, argues that the number of jobs requiring “tacit” intellectual skills has increased three times as fast as employment in general. The Republican Party’s current “redneck strategy” will leave it appealing to a shrinking and backward-looking portion of the electorate.

Why is this happening? One reason is that conservative brawn has lost patience with brains of all kinds, conservative or liberal. Many conservatives—particularly lower-income ones—are consumed with elemental fury about everything from immigration to liberal do-gooders. They take their opinions from talk-radio hosts such as Rush Limbaugh and the deeply unsubtle Sean Hannity. And they regard Mrs Palin’s apparent ignorance not as a problem but as a badge of honour.

Another reason is the degeneracy of the conservative intelligentsia itself, a modern-day version of the 1970s liberals it arose to do battle with: trapped in an ideological cocoon, defined by its outer fringes, ruled by dynasties and incapable of adjusting to a changed world. The movement has little to say about today’s pressing problems, such as global warming and the debacle in Iraq, and expends too much of its energy on xenophobia, homophobia and opposing stem-cell research.

Conservative intellectuals are also engaged in their own version of what Julian Benda dubbed la trahison des clercs, the treason of the learned. They have fallen into constructing cartoon images of “real Americans”, with their “volkish” wisdom and charming habit of dropping their “g”s. Mrs Palin was invented as a national political force by Beltway journalists from the Weekly Standard and the National Review who met her when they were on luxury cruises around Alaska, and then noisily championed her cause.

Time for reflection

How likely is it that the Republican Party will come to its senses? There are glimmers of hope. Business conservatives worry that the party has lost the business vote. Moderates complain that the Republicans are becoming the party of “white-trash pride”. Anonymous McCain aides complain that Mrs Palin was a campaign-destroying “whack job”. One of the most encouraging signs is the support for giving the chairmanship of the Republican Party to John Sununu, a sensible and clever man who has the added advantage of coming from the north-east (he lost his New Hampshire Senate seat on November 4th).

But the odds in favour of an imminent renaissance look long. Many conservatives continue to think they lost because they were not conservative or populist enough—Mr McCain, after all, was an amnesty-loving green who refused to make an issue out of Mr Obama’s associations with Jeremiah Wright. Richard Weaver, one of the founders of modern conservatism, once wrote a book entitled “Ideas have Consequences”; unfortunately, too many Republicans are still refusing to acknowledge that idiocy has consequences, too.
http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=12599247

I think this article is dead on.

There are people on this board that say, with a straight face, "I hope Palin runs in 2012..."

That kind of earnest ignorance would fit in satire...not real life.

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #1 on: November 24, 2008, 07:39:48 AM »
I always said that..Republicans turned from the "cool,business savy,shrwed, supersmart, suit wearin, cigar smoking, all business ,real logical bosses to the "bible thumpin, walmart shoppin, illogical, uneducated trailer park living hill billies"...its very sad

y19mike77

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 251
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #2 on: November 24, 2008, 07:54:19 AM »
Republicans lost because Bush left a bad taste in conservatives mouths.
We had a horrible liberal republican candidate.
The wacko left in the media who gave Obama 82% positive new coverage.

If you think the right is done you are wrong.
I am sure you thought the same thing when Carter won.


Uneducated hillbilles lol.

Democrat party is full of slobs who want free handouts, and ghetto gang banging pigs.


Hedgehog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19466
  • It Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin.
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #3 on: November 24, 2008, 09:42:47 AM »
Decker, TBH, it looks like you're plagiarising a post I made about the anti-intellectual movement within the GOP a couple of weeks ago?
As empty as paradise

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #4 on: November 24, 2008, 10:00:09 AM »
Republicans lost because Bush left a bad taste in conservatives mouths.
We had a horrible liberal republican candidate.
The wacko left in the media who gave Obama 82% positive new coverage.

If you think the right is done you are wrong.
I am sure you thought the same thing when Carter won.


Uneducated hillbilles lol.

Democrat party is full of slobs who want free handouts, and ghetto gang banging pigs.


I WASNT BORN WHEN CARTER WON...

Brixtonbulldog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4884
  • TAKE YO FUCKING JACKET WIT YA
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #5 on: November 24, 2008, 10:07:32 AM »
I think democrats having favor amongst successful business types to middle class families who work hard to working class bible thumpers shows that we are the party for most Americans.  Democrats are largely blacks voting on race issues alone, elitists with anti-american socialist agendas, or people who really don't know dick about political philosophies but vote for guys like Obama after buying into all the hype the media throws at em 24/7. 

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #6 on: November 24, 2008, 10:36:51 AM »
Decker, TBH, it looks like you're plagiarising a post I made about the anti-intellectual movement within the GOP a couple of weeks ago?

I cited my source.  The story is dated 11/13 so it could be a repeat.

Benny B

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 12407
  • Ron = 'Princess L' & many other gimmicks - FACT!
!

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39449
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #8 on: November 24, 2008, 04:12:34 PM »
Do I fit into your inane portrait of GOP voters considering the fact that I have a post graduate degree and have two businesses????

Both parties have their fair share of morons. 

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #9 on: November 24, 2008, 04:23:00 PM »
Mccain/Palin's main focus on the campaign trail was fear and anger.

THey should have been about solutions to the problems facing people - unemployment, 401k blues, etc.  Only a hardcore few gave a shit about Palin stumping against Bill Ayers. They could have won if they had been campaigning with ROmney as pre-announced Secretary of Treasury and the all-new "Romney Plan" as a solution.

Instead, they dumped solutions and, as this thread title explains, intellectualism, and ran with fear and anger.

Hopefully the repubs will present a smart candidate with solutions in 2012 so no matter who wins the election, we all win.

Brixtonbulldog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4884
  • TAKE YO FUCKING JACKET WIT YA
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #10 on: November 24, 2008, 05:40:27 PM »
Mccain/Palin's main focus on the campaign trail was fear and anger.

THey should have been about solutions to the problems facing people - unemployment, 401k blues, etc.  Only a hardcore few gave a shit about Palin stumping against Bill Ayers. They could have won if they had been campaigning with ROmney as pre-announced Secretary of Treasury and the all-new "Romney Plan" as a solution.

Instead, they dumped solutions and, as this thread title explains, intellectualism, and ran with fear and anger.

Hopefully the repubs will present a smart candidate with solutions in 2012 so no matter who wins the election, we all win.

Obongo running on the anger over the last eight years and the fear of the next four just like it doesn't qualify?

You're really starting to show your bias, 240. 

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24455
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #11 on: November 24, 2008, 10:15:58 PM »
Pretty good article! I think it breaks it down quite clearly. If Republicans know what's good for them, they will use it as a blueprint for re-inventing themselves, ....but as we've seen for a while... Republicans seldom know what's good for them.
w

Dan-O

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9729
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #12 on: November 24, 2008, 10:29:00 PM »
Snore.

All this "intellectualism" blather means nothing in and of itself.  More often than not, the people who are most apt to throw the word into conversation, are not the "intellectuals" they suppose themselves to be.  All the "intellectualism" in the world doesn't mean squat unless it's built on a framework of wisdom, principles, morals (yes there is still such a thing), self-discipline and good sense.  I'm not at all "anti-intellectual" but it's not the be-all-and-end-all.  There is something higher to strive for than mere "intellectualism," that's what I'm saying.  So I don't really give a shit if someone fancies themself to be an intellectual and I don't give a shit where someone got their education.  it means next to nothing.  And labeling the Republican party as "anti-intellectual" is nothing more than stupid liberal spin.  Basically the word (in a political context) has been reduced to a propaganda device and I for one am sick of hearing about it.  So there.

Hedgehog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19466
  • It Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin.
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #13 on: November 25, 2008, 12:06:35 AM »
Obongo running on the anger over the last eight years and the fear of the next four just like it doesn't qualify? 
Just curious, why do you call Obama 'Obongo'?
As empty as paradise

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Anti-Intellectualism And The Republican Party
« Reply #14 on: November 25, 2008, 05:46:01 AM »
::)
Posted on October 3, 2008
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=238944.msg3358776;topicseen#msg3358776
What the hell are you rollilng your eyes at?  I looked at your link and I didn't find the article I posted. 

drkaje

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 18188
  • Quiet, Err. I'm transmitting rage.
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #15 on: November 25, 2008, 05:53:45 AM »
Snore.

All this "intellectualism" blather means nothing in and of itself.  More often than not, the people who are most apt to throw the word into conversation, are not the "intellectuals" they suppose themselves to be.  All the "intellectualism" in the world doesn't mean squat unless it's built on a framework of wisdom, principles, morals (yes there is still such a thing), self-discipline and good sense.  I'm not at all "anti-intellectual" but it's not the be-all-and-end-all.  There is something higher to strive for than mere "intellectualism," that's what I'm saying.  So I don't really give a shit if someone fancies themself to be an intellectual and I don't give a shit where someone got their education.  it means next to nothing.  And labeling the Republican party as "anti-intellectual" is nothing more than stupid liberal spin.  Basically the word (in a political context) has been reduced to a propaganda device and I for one am sick of hearing about it.  So there.

You mean calling oneself an intellectual doesn't make you smart?!

Lies!!!! All Lies!! :)

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #16 on: November 25, 2008, 05:57:52 AM »
Snore.

All this "intellectualism" blather means nothing in and of itself.  More often than not, the people who are most apt to throw the word into conversation, are not the "intellectuals" they suppose themselves to be.  All the "intellectualism" in the world doesn't mean squat unless it's built on a framework of wisdom, principles, morals (yes there is still such a thing), self-discipline and good sense.  I'm not at all "anti-intellectual" but it's not the be-all-and-end-all.  There is something higher to strive for than mere "intellectualism," that's what I'm saying.  So I don't really give a shit if someone fancies themself to be an intellectual and I don't give a shit where someone got their education.  it means next to nothing.  And labeling the Republican party as "anti-intellectual" is nothing more than stupid liberal spin.  Basically the word (in a political context) has been reduced to a propaganda device and I for one am sick of hearing about it.  So there.
intellectualism and education go hand in glove.  Don't they?  Aren't the republicans all about teaching creationism as a viable alternative to science?  Don't republicans want to dismantle the Dept. of Ed.?

More earning and less learning...the Republican credo.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39449
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #17 on: November 25, 2008, 06:54:20 AM »
intellectualism and education go hand in glove.  Don't they?  Aren't the republicans all about teaching creationism as a viable alternative to science?  Don't republicans want to dismantle the Dept. of Ed.?

More earning and less learning...the Republican credo.

Question:  Why is it that since the inception of the Dept. of Ed, the nations' schools are doing a worse job than they did decades ago?????????????????

Despite spending billions and billions, our education system stinks.

The issue is not money, that is the liberal hack answer to everything. 

The issue are teachers' unions, tenure, discipline, low expectations, to short a school day, summer vacation, refusal to focus on basics, and a failure of parents. 

Brixtonbulldog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4884
  • TAKE YO FUCKING JACKET WIT YA
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #18 on: November 29, 2008, 01:35:47 PM »
Just curious, why do you call Obama 'Obongo'?

He's real "african-american" and his loyalties, history, and associations are extreme, divisive, and questionable.  He's not black like the people in this country that got him elected.  He's a freak who has to tone down his extremism now that he's not just representing kuckoo leftists from Chicago anymore.

Hedgehog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19466
  • It Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin.
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #19 on: November 29, 2008, 01:48:46 PM »
He's real "african-american" and his loyalties, history, and associations are extreme, divisive, and questionable.  He's not black like the people in this country that got him elected.  He's a freak who has to tone down his extremism now that he's not just representing kuckoo leftists from Chicago anymore.

Ok, cool.

After the last few weeks of cabinet picking, economic crisis, rescue plans, et al...

I'm just assuming you voted Republican and I'm a foreigner.

So I'd like your input on something.

How are people who didn't vote for Obama feeling about him being the one who will take over after Bush?

As empty as paradise

Brixtonbulldog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4884
  • TAKE YO FUCKING JACKET WIT YA
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #20 on: November 29, 2008, 02:04:51 PM »
Ok, cool.

After the last few weeks of cabinet picking, economic crisis, rescue plans, et al...

I'm just assuming you voted Republican and I'm a foreigner.

So I'd like your input on something.

How are people who didn't vote for Obama feeling about him being the one who will take over after Bush?



Elected by people who either don't know better or have an uber-marxist agenda, nothing more.  I can't feel good about that. 

We have yet to see what he will ACTUALLY do but it seems conservatives are the only ones actually looking to his voting record as the best predictor of what he will do.  So far he hasn't done much and what he HAS done is pretty scary. 

Voted "present" 130 times.  Voted against the right to defend yourself with a gun in your own home.  Voted to let infants born alive in botched abortions die (that's murder, btw).. Etc.

Mons Venus

  • Guest
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #21 on: November 29, 2008, 03:08:45 PM »
He's real "african-american" and his loyalties, history, and associations are extreme, divisive, and questionable. He's not black like the people in this country that got him elected.  He's a freak who has to tone down his extremism now that he's not just representing kuckoo leftists from Chicago anymore.

 ::)


Deicide

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22921
  • Reapers...
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #22 on: November 30, 2008, 04:38:30 AM »
Ron Paul.

'Nuff said.
I hate the State.

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #23 on: November 30, 2008, 08:09:05 PM »
intellectualism and education go hand in glove.  Don't they?  Aren't the republicans all about teaching creationism as a viable alternative to science?  Don't republicans want to dismantle the Dept. of Ed.?

More earning and less learning...the Republican credo.

I don't know Decker....I could care less about creationism, monkeys' or any of that crap. They're a wing of the party just like all the left wing,  code pink, anti-american worthless treee hugging shitbag commies that control urs.
L

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future
« Reply #24 on: December 04, 2008, 07:24:47 AM »
Question:  Why is it that since the inception of the Dept. of Ed, the nations' schools are doing a worse job than they did decades ago?????????????????

Despite spending billions and billions, our education system stinks.

The issue is not money, that is the liberal hack answer to everything. 

The issue are teachers' unions, tenure, discipline, low expectations, to short a school day, summer vacation, refusal to focus on basics, and a failure of parents. 
Is a state's education of its citizenry the province of the federal gov or the state?

I believe the federal loan program is a resounding success.  How did you pay for your education?

Why do you think that spending on education is 'throwing money' at a problem?  Isn't your statement a non-analytical prejudice?

Do we throw money at crime only to see that we still have crimes committed?  We're we throwing money at the Iraq rebuilding process (trick question b/c the answer here is yes...it's gotta be when 9 billion just vanishes).