ADVERTISEMENT

“We Need to Destroy the Republican Party”: A Conservative Luminary Calls for a Clean Start

sglowrider

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Apr 9, 2012
27,475
23,600
113
Tiny Red Dot
20180924_Boot_990.jpg

https://www.motherjones.com/politic...lican-party-max-boot-calls-for-a-clean-start/

In his new book, The Corrosion of Conservatism: Why I Left the Right, Max Boot goes further than the handful of other prominent Republicans who have stood against Donald Trump and reconsiders the conservative movement writ large.

Podcast:
https://art19.com/shows/the-mother-jones-podcast/episodes/e202f9d6-fabc-4212-9e5f-de99b2de59cb
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrBing and iu_a_att
20180924_Boot_990.jpg

https://www.motherjones.com/politic...lican-party-max-boot-calls-for-a-clean-start/

In his new book, The Corrosion of Conservatism: Why I Left the Right, Max Boot goes further than the handful of other prominent Republicans who have stood against Donald Trump and reconsiders the conservative movement writ large.

Podcast:
https://art19.com/shows/the-mother-jones-podcast/episodes/e202f9d6-fabc-4212-9e5f-de99b2de59cb


Max Boot has long channeled my feelings, in more eloquent words. I know I'm one of at least 4 or 5 on this tiny site alone that feel the same way. I know it's self-selective criteria....but most all my friends I went to college with and/or have worked professionally with also fit this mold. I guess this is just the gen x/gen y white college grad male stereotype.



I Would Vote for (a Sane) Donald Trump
As Republicans and Democrats abandon the middle ground, America’s two-party system is due for disruption.

I am socially liberal: I am pro-LGBTQ rights, pro-abortion rights, pro-immigration. I am fiscally conservative: I think we need to reduce the deficit and get entitlement spending under control. I am pro-environment: I think that climate change is a major threat that we need to address. I am pro-free trade: I think we should be concluding new trade treaties rather than pulling out of old ones. I am strong on defense: I think we need to beef up our military to cope with multiple enemies. And I am very much in favor of America acting as a world leader: I believe it is in our own self-interest to promote and defend freedom and free markets as we have been doing in one form or another since at least 1898.

You would think these political views would make me unexceptional. But in fact they have turned me into a political pariah — a man without a party. Neither Democrats nor Republicans are appealing to someone of my center-right outlook.

The problems with the Republican Party are symbolized by, but hardly limited to, Donald Trump. Long before he came along, the GOP had fallen prey to tea party absolutists who pursued a rigid, far-right ideological agenda and refused any entreaties, even from their own party’s leaders, to compromise. In a related development, the party’s conservative base had become increasingly nihilistic — focused on destroying “libtards” and “snowflakes” rather than implementing any positive agenda — under the influence of such pied pipers as Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Tucker Carlson, Dinesh D’Souza, Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Michael Savage, Bill O’Reilly, and Alex Jones. All of them cater to their audience’s worst instincts to score rating points.

Now much of the GOP has been morally compromised by its de facto acceptance of Trump’s unacceptable behavior — from his firing of FBI Director James Comey in order to obstruct the investigation of his Russia links to his reluctance to criticize white supremacists and his pardon of racist former Sheriff Joe Arpaio. It tells you all that you need to know about the diseased state of today’s GOP that when Trump finally made a move toward bipartisan compromise — by trying to forge a deal to prevent the deportation of people who were brought illegally to the United States as children — a significant section of the right went ballistic. Alex Jones suggested that Trump had been drugged, Ann Coulter argued that he should be impeached, and Breitbart dubbed him “Amnesty Don.”

https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/09/20/i-would-vote-for-a-sane-donald-trump/







 
20180924_Boot_990.jpg

https://www.motherjones.com/politic...lican-party-max-boot-calls-for-a-clean-start/

In his new book, The Corrosion of Conservatism: Why I Left the Right, Max Boot goes further than the handful of other prominent Republicans who have stood against Donald Trump and reconsiders the conservative movement writ large.

Podcast:
https://art19.com/shows/the-mother-jones-podcast/episodes/e202f9d6-fabc-4212-9e5f-de99b2de59cb
Thanks for posting this. I do think that our politics has become increasingly tribal and I very much admire Boot's moral and intellectual honesty. The debate Boot would like to return to is essentially a technocratic debate between the center right that believes in more free market economic principles versus the center left that supports some more substantial provision of public goods and modest redistribution. Such a debate does not question who gets to enjoy full citizenship rights and treats immigration as a technocratic question. That was something like the debate between the educated left and right from the period of the Nixon administration through the period of the W Bush administration.

But there was always another debate going on that was never technocratic. It is a debate over who should actually enjoy rights to full citizenship. Race and gender are core issues here. This debate is not about economic efficiency versus welfare...it is a debate about status. The white "nationalists" and the evangelical movement were in conflict with the civil rights movement for minorities, women and gays and lesbians. The white nationalists and evangelicals were highly invested in preserving racial and gender superiority. While the civil rights movement was active they have been aligned with technocratic conservatives in preferring private power to public power--which really meant preserving racial and gender superiority.

But the technocratic right and the cultural right were never really in harmony. The cultural right is not actually committed to small government...they are committed to domination. As a matter of fact they are profoundly anti-democratic/authoritarian movements.* This is the split that Trump has exposed on the right. I think the technocratic right thought it could hold the cultural right in check. It imagined it was the larger part of the equation. That has been shown to be a profound mistake. What has been exposed is that the technocratic right was mostly an intellectual veneer on a party that was by and large driven by the cultural right. They are being shown the door now.

*By the way, this is not the case with the cultural left. The cultural left in the United States is quite committed to leveraging government power to try to guarantee essentially universal and equal protection of the law. This has been strongly the case with both the civil rights movement AND the feminist movement. These movements are the true antithesis of the cultural right. Where the cultural right demands ethnic and gender domination the cultural left seeks to interpose the law to thwart that domination. This is what makes the battles for the Supreme Court so enormously consequential for the two sides.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: sglowrider
Thanks for posting this. I do think that our politics has become increasingly tribal and I very much admire Boot's moral and intellectual honesty. The debate Boot would like to return to is essentially a technocratic debate between the center right that believes in more free market economic principles balanced on the right versus some substantial provision of public goods and modest redistribution on the left. Such a debate does not question who gets to enjoy full citizenship rights and treats immigration as a technocratic question. That was something like the debate between the educated left and right from the period of the Nixon administration through the period of the W Bush administration.

But there was always another debate going on that was never technocratic. It is a debate over who should actually enjoy rights to full citizenship. Race and gender are core issues here. This debate is not about economic efficiency versus welfare...it is a debate about status. The white "nationalists" and the evangelical movement were in conflict with the civil rights movement for minorities, women and gays and lesbians. The white nationalists and evangelicals were highly invested in preserving racial and gender superiority. While the civil rights movement was active they have been aligned with technocratic conservatives is preferring private power to public power--which really meant preserving racial and gender superiority.

But the technocratic right and the cultural right were never really in harmony. The cultural right is not actually committed to small government...they are committed to domination. As a matter of fact they are profoundly anti-democratic/authoritarian movements.* This is the split that Trump has exposed on the right. I think the technocratic right thought it could hold the cultural right in check. It imagined it was the larger part of the equation. That has been shown to be a profound mistake. What has been exposed is that the technocratic right was mostly an intellectual veneer on a party that was by and large driven by the cultural right. They are being shown the door now.

*By the way, this is not the case with the cultural left. The cultural left in the United States is quite committed to leveraging government power to try to guarantee essentially universal and equal protection of the law. This has been strongly the case with both the civil rights movement AND the feminist movement. These movements are the true antithesis of the cultural right. Where the cultural right demands ethnic and gender domination the cultural left seeks to interpose the law to thwart that domination. This is what makes the battles for the Supreme Court so enormously consequential for the two sides. T

May not be my politics. But I wanted to give a slipstream for some -- who have been lost for words as to what has happened to some of the ideals that they had stood for as part of their personal identity but is now a mirage if there at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iu_a_att
May not be my politics. But I wanted to give a slipstream for some -- who have been lost for words as to what has happened to some of the ideals that they had stood for as part of their personal identity but is now a mirage if there at all.
We would be better off if the debates we were having were actually the idealized technocratic debates that many educated conservatives and liberals thought we were having. Boot wishes we could return to that world but now realizes this is not possible without the effective defeat of the cultural right. By the way, since the cultural left is by and large a reaction to the cultural right and an attempt to hold it in check I think the whole identity politics deal would simmer down too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sglowrider
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT