Skip to main content

Trump: Political Parties vs Political Ideolgies

A number of Conservatives I know have been bragging about how they belong to the Republican part, the part of Lincoln that opposed slavery, while "Liberals" are all "Democrats" (often referred to as Demo-rats) who supported slavery. But this is a bold faced lie.

First, this claim confuses the difference between a political party name, like Democrat, Republican or Whig, with a political ideology, which is often characterized as "Liberal" or "Progressive" and "Conservative." But what must be understood is that a political party name is obviously in no way pegged to a particular political ideology; especially since the political landscape is forever changing. And these days, that landscape is only changing faster and faster. 

So it is comical to hear Conservatives today boast of belong to the party of Lincoln, since the Republicans who opposed slavery in those days were not "Conservatives" who voted for Abraham Lincoln because they wanted to "make America great again" by returning it to the days before progressive abolitionists started to threaten the way things were, and indeed had always been in America.

Rather, the Republican party at that time was, certainly by today's standards, the "progressive party," saw slavery as a problem in more ways than one, and wanted to change America for something better. Republicans who voted for Lincoln, in other words, were Liberals, not Conservatives.

The Democrats at that time, on the other hand, wanted to keep slavery alive and well in the Southern states, and many fought in the federal and state legislatures to expand slavery as America expanded west (killing native Americans as it went).  Many Democrats, like the Presbyterian minister James Henly Thornwell, the Episcopal clergy man from South Carolina Frederich Dalcho,  and even John C. Calhoun, argued that slavery was an institution ordained and supported by God and Christianity.

In short, today's arch Christian Conservative Republicans are yesterdays slave supporting Democrats, and today's Progressive Democrats are the successors of  yesterday's  Republican abolitionists. Indeed, without Progressives, America would still be colonies of the British Crown.

This divide is further illustrated by a map published by the NY Times that shows what TV shows are most popular in different areas of the country.. (The map can be seen here: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/26/upshot/duck-dynasty-vs-modern-family-television-maps.html?WT.mc_id=2016-KWP-AUD_DEV&WT.mc_ev=click&ad-keywords=AUDDEVREMARK&kwp_0=303926)

What's interesting about this map is how shows like Duck Dynasty and Bad Girls Club (a reality show that was described in a NY Times review as "The Jerry Springer show at its rowdiest) are most popular in many of the same states that chose to secede from the Union in 1861, where slavery was legal, while shows like Modern Family is and Big Bang Theory are most popular in the same states and "free territories" where slavery had been outlawed prior to the Civil War.

Such a chart may be simply more evidence that "Conservatism" is a kind of necromancy of the past, one that lives in fear of change, whether that changes comes from abolishing slavery, desegregating schools, civil and equal rights, permitting interracial or same sex marriage, or even considering the establishment of a healthcare system that would actually care about people's health first instead of maximizing profits only.

Indeed, as attempts to first stop and now abolish the ACA illustrate only to well, today's Republicans are not the successors of the party of Lincoln, but of the Third Reich.   

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Christianity is More Unnatural Than Homosexuality

I grew up in a family that is about as homophobic as Phil Robertson and the Westboro Baptists, only they're not quite as boisterous about it; at least not in public anyway. They have also conveniently convinced themselves  that their homophobia is really just their unique Christian ability to "hate the sin, but love the sinner" (even though these very same Christians adamantly refuse to accept that people can "hate Christianity, but love the Christian").  The sexual superiority complex necessarily relied on by such Christians is, of course, blanketed beneath the lambs wool of the Christian humility of serving "God." They interpret their fear of those who are different, in other words, as simply proof of their intimate knowledge and love of God. And the only thing such Christians are more sure about than that their own personal version of "God" exists, is that such a "God" would never want people to be homosexual - no matter how ma

Christianity: An Addiction of Violence Masquerading as Love: Part II

"But God by nature must love Himself supremely, above all else." Fr. Emmet Carter   This is part  two of a look at an article written about the "restorative and medicinal" properties of punishment, as espoused by Fr. Emmett Carter (https://catholicexchange.com/gods-punishment-is-just-restorative-and-medicinal/).  Ideas of this sort in Christianity go back to St. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas - two saints who saw the suffering of Christ as sure fire evidence that God needed humans to suffer to balance the cosmic scales of his love for us. Sure, he could've come up with a better game, or made better humans, but its apparently the suffering he really enjoys seeing. Carter's essay raises countless questions, especially about the true nature of God's blood lust, but lets stick to just four simpler ones. The first question deals with the idea of "free will." According to Christians, God designed us with the ability to freely choose to obey or offend h

Christianity: An Addiction of Violence Masquerading as Love: Part I

If the Holy Bible proves anything at all, it proves that the Christian God has a blood-lust like no other God in history. From Abraham to Jesus to the end times to eternal hell, the Christian God loves suffering even more than, or at least as much as, said God loves Himself. And if everything from the genocides in the Old Testament and God killing everyone on the planet with a flood, to Jesus being tortured and murdered (rather than the devil, who is the guilty one) and the fiery end of the world followed by the never ending fires of hell, are not enough to convince you that Christianity is really an addiction to violence masquerading as "love," just consider the psychotic rantings of a Catholic priest trying to convince his faithful flock that murder and mutilation - which he calls "punishment" -  are proof of just how much his "God" is pure love.  In an article published on https://catholicexchange.com/gods-punishment-is-just-restorative-and-medicinal/,