• About
  • Archive
  • Privacy & Policy
  • Contact
Dana Blankenhorn
  • Home
  • About Dana
  • Posts
  • Contact Dana
  • Archive
  • A-clue.com
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About Dana
  • Posts
  • Contact Dana
  • Archive
  • A-clue.com
No Result
View All Result
Dana Blankenhorn
No Result
View All Result
Home Current Affairs

Tossing the Ballast

by Dana Blankenhorn
October 12, 2007
in Current Affairs, futurism, history, political philosophy, politics, The 1967 Game
6
0
SHARES
2
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Ron_paul
When a political thesis, a set of myths and values which has lasted for a generation, starts to collapse, when the balloon starts to come to Earth, it is always fun to see who or what the failing side kicks out as ballast.

The last time this happened, 40 years ago, Democrats tossed out the Cold War. While Vietnam and the Cold War were separate in fact, Republicans had been making Cold War Absolutism the center of their appeal for 20 years, and seized the connection for power’s sake. People ask what those last 23,000 casualties died for in Vietnam. They died so Republicans could maintain power. They died for a Thesis of Conflict which has held from that day to this.

But now that Thesis of Conflict, inherited from Richard Nixon, is falling apart under George W. Bush. So who will the Republicans toss out of their balloon?

The mainstream wants to throw out the so-called Religious Right, the Values Voters, the Culture Warriors. They want to do this with a nudge or a wink, but the leaders of that movement are not fooled. While doing this, Rudy Giuliani — and more important his supporters — are linking themselves even-tighter to the other key legs of the Republican Majority triangle — the Military Right and the Business Right. Both groups are engaging in increasingly-extreme rhetoric, which the mainstream is embracing. Dissing religious extremists is seen as a price of victory, even though kicking anyone out of a coalition which can only count on 51% of the vote when they’re all together is suicide.

There is one notable exception. Ron Paul (above). Paul has been a practicing whackjob for over 30 years but he is willing to throw the neocons out instead of the religious right, and so he has gained traction.  Back when I was playing The 1966 Game I called Tom Tancredo the Eugene McCarthy of 2008.  (I misplayed Reagan as Oprah Winfrey when it was really Al Gore.) Well, I know the right answer now, and it’s Paul.

Ron Paul is the Eugene McCarthy of 1968 because he’s willing to toss out a stand the grassroots want out which the establishment does not want out, namely the Holy War of Terror.

It’s funny that the neocons, whose move to the Republicans gave them power for a generation, are now the grassroots’ favorite to toss aside, but there you go — politics is always funny, grassroots politics is even funnier, and, well, payback’s a bitch.

Eagleton_mcgovern_web
Fred Thompson looked attractive this spring only because he, alone
among the possible candidates, was unwilling to toss anyone overboard.
(Think Humphrey in 1968, only with a sourer disposition.) He echoes all
the rhetoric of the Religious Right, the Business Right and the
Military Right. He even says his lines well, when he has good lines in
front of him. Unfortunately the early parts of any Presidential
campaign contain a lot of improv work, which he can’t carry off.

What will prove even more interesting than the present race is what
happens when they all drown. Right now all polls show the Republican
Party, as a whole, is drowning, is dieing, is committing political
suicide. The Democratic candidates for President are, in fact, no more
impressive than such candidates have ever been, but they look like
giants next to the Republicans because their rhetoric resonates with
people now. People agree with them, and are only trying to decide how
much — a little (Clinton), a lot (Edwards) or just pretend (Obama).

Something, identified by press and public as the Republican Party,
is going to emerge from the wreckage in 2009. It will be a minority
party throughout the country, except perhaps in the Deep South, where
large black minorities lock whites in an unthinking Republican embrace.
It will be a collection of tribes, each blaming the others for their
collective failure, each believing the party must now become "more like
themselves" to succeed.

It’s that search for the Republican McGovern I’m most looking forward to.

Tags: 2008 electionEugene McCarthyFred ThompsonGeorge McGovernHillary ClintonHubert HumphreyInternet ThesisNixon ThesisRon Paul
Previous Post

This Week’s Clue: Staying the Course

Next Post

The Real Price of Autocracy

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn began his career as a financial journalist in 1978, began covering technology in 1982, and the Internet in 1985. He started one of the first Internet daily newsletters, the Interactive Age Daily, in 1994. He recently retired from InvestorPlace and lives in Atlanta, GA, preparing for his next great adventure. He's a graduate of Rice University (1977) and Northwestern's Medill School of Journalism (MSJ 1978). He's a native of Massapequa, NY.

Next Post
Tin Lizzie Days Ahead?

The Real Price of Autocracy

Comments 6

  1. Alexia says:
    18 years ago

    He’s not McCarthy. He’s Goldwater.
    “whackjob?” Do you think that caliing people cliched, tired names is a great way to get people to take you seriously as a writer?

    Reply
  2. Alexia says:
    18 years ago

    He’s not McCarthy. He’s Goldwater.
    “whackjob?” Do you think that caliing people cliched, tired names is a great way to get people to take you seriously as a writer?

    Reply
  3. Kurt Horner says:
    18 years ago

    Interesting, I was thinking Paul = Wallace. But then, there doesn’t appear to be an equivalent to Wallace as yet (and there may not be one). Perhaps the Wallace and McCarthy roles are being mixed in this cycle?
    After all, Wallace and McCarthy both represented the same phenomenon — a general shift away from the Democratic Party. There are some differences though. McCarthy’s social positions were in tune with what would remain of the Democratic Party, while Wallace’s were in tune with what would become the new GOP. McCarthy was trying to stop the cycle, Wallace was a prelude to the shift. McCarthy hinted towards McGovern, Wallace hinted at McGovern’s crushing defeat.
    Paul is both McCarthy and Wallace and yet neither as well. Perhaps an analogy to the New Deal or Civil War is more appropriate with Paul as Norman Thomas or Stephen Douglas.

    Reply
  4. Kurt Horner says:
    18 years ago

    Interesting, I was thinking Paul = Wallace. But then, there doesn’t appear to be an equivalent to Wallace as yet (and there may not be one). Perhaps the Wallace and McCarthy roles are being mixed in this cycle?
    After all, Wallace and McCarthy both represented the same phenomenon — a general shift away from the Democratic Party. There are some differences though. McCarthy’s social positions were in tune with what would remain of the Democratic Party, while Wallace’s were in tune with what would become the new GOP. McCarthy was trying to stop the cycle, Wallace was a prelude to the shift. McCarthy hinted towards McGovern, Wallace hinted at McGovern’s crushing defeat.
    Paul is both McCarthy and Wallace and yet neither as well. Perhaps an analogy to the New Deal or Civil War is more appropriate with Paul as Norman Thomas or Stephen Douglas.

    Reply
  5. Dana says:
    18 years ago

    You never know who will get hot, but at the end of a cycle it’s often the case that someone with no chance of general election victory gets hot for the party in power.
    Reporters accustomed to the existing political thesis will mistake this bad news for good news, as Alexia does. You can’t be Goldwater if your side has been dominant for 40 years.

    Reply
  6. Dana says:
    18 years ago

    You never know who will get hot, but at the end of a cycle it’s often the case that someone with no chance of general election victory gets hot for the party in power.
    Reporters accustomed to the existing political thesis will mistake this bad news for good news, as Alexia does. You can’t be Goldwater if your side has been dominant for 40 years.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Post

AI is a Tool

AI is a Tool

May 22, 2025
The E-Transport Minority

Twilight of the Bike-y Bike

May 21, 2025
The Ultimate Scam

The Ultimate Scam

May 20, 2025
Game Changer

Game Changer

May 19, 2025
Subscribe to our mailing list to receives daily updates direct to your inbox!


Archives

Categories

Recent Comments

  • Dana Blankenhorn on The Death of Video
  • danablank on The Problem of the Moment (Is Not the Problem of the Moment)
  • cipit88 on The Problem of the Moment (Is Not the Problem of the Moment)
  • danablank on What I Learned on my European Vacation
  • danablank on Boomer Roomers

I'm Dana Blankenhorn. I have covered the Internet as a reporter since 1983. I've been a professional business reporter since 1978, and a writer all my life.

  • Italian Trulli

Browse by Category

Newsletter


Powered by FeedBlitz
  • About
  • Archive
  • Privacy & Policy
  • Contact

© 2023 Dana Blankenhorn - All Rights Reserved

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About Dana
  • Posts
  • Contact Dana
  • Archive
  • A-clue.com

© 2023 Dana Blankenhorn - All Rights Reserved