I say (because I believe it) that the republican party is the party of fear, hate & greed. It's hard to get a republican to agree with that even on a piecemeal basis. But while the individual members/supporters don't feel that they or the majority of their fellows have fear, hate & greed in their hearts - a brief look review at the the advertising and campaign literature of the right (from both the republican party and it's fifth-column affiliates) shows a consistent and overwhelming tendency to pander to issues of fear, hate & greed. And, these campaign tactics work. So, despite personal denials, it is clear that the majority of the right wing is open to and responds positively to these appeals.
I work with a fellow (let's call him Sean), a charming glib gentleman of Irish ancestry. It is rare for Sean to say a bad thing about anyone, and he is always spreading good cheer. Sean and his wife have done well in life. Both of them work, but neither needs to. Clearly they enjoy living well, but not ostentatiously given their circumstances. They know (unlike many well-to-do Americans) that they are well off. They hope to leave something for their children and grandchildren, but aren't inclined to think that its better to pass on more rather than less. Both could have retired years ago, but they like to work and continue to do so. Rather than continue to collect two salaries, they contribute Sean's salary to their church. In short, they are pleasant successful people with a tendency towards generosity.
What could be wrong with this? Certainly nothing on the surface, until one starts a discussion on politics. Bring up any liberal points and you'll be rewarded with a critical discussion of every fault that Edward Kennedy ever had. No matter what, the discussion circles around to Edward Kennedy, one way or another. Sean will point out that he grew up as a Democrat but abandoned that to become a republican, and that Edward Kennedy is part of the reason why.
You see, Sean grew up on Boston. And the period of his political conversion was during his time in High School. He didn't live in Back Bay, but he attended a Catholic high school not far from there. And, this was a time when the Back Bay Irish grew incensed by Kennedy's refusal to fight busing and desegregation of schools. I'm sure my friend would deny that this was behind his switch. He would even point to the African American's he's know and been friends with.
Today, it may be argued that in large part busing failed to achieve its goals. Look at the South where a separate network of private religious schools developed and siphoned off the white students - after which white voters were stingy at funding public schools. Look at the North where white flight rapidly converted urban areas a neighborhood at a time from essentially white to essentially black. And so, segregation was largely maintained by a population that was fearful of change.
Back to Sean, he grew up in an atmosphere where hatred of Kennedy grew. He didn't need to know or understand why. He just knew the man was on the other team from that of he and his friends. Sean's brother continued to live in Boston until this year when he retired to Florida. Sean notes his brother's continued dislike for/hatred of Kennedy as sufficient reason for Sean to continue believing in his existing point of view without critical self-examination. No amount of facts or logic will change that, and so long as Kennedy is a liberal, liberals are on the wrong team.
How does a smart, caring, capable individual become receptive to right wing fear mongering? Why now? Why here? Why are facts and logic so hard to reach?
Sean and I haven't spoken much about race relations. But I think I know something about where he stands. Sean would say that we're all equal and that people shouldn't suffer discrimination on the basis of race. He might or might not add that that freedom from discrimination should be a right for white men too, but if asked he would agree with that point of view. He would also suggest that essentially America is changed from the days of his youth. That the African American youth of today need to seize their destiny (a sentiment that a number of African American leaders agree with). But, he would also suggest that there is too much emphasis on past wrongs, and that discrimination is not a problem for African American's today. Finally, he would point out that we can't fix everything.We haven't spoken in depth about Ireland either. But, I've heard enough from him to know that he still holds the British (as a whole, not individuals) accountable for all the ills visited on the Emerald Isle anytime since it was first occupied by England. And, he is sympathetic to plight and interests of the Catholics of Northern Ireland. Why is this important? Well, despite the behavior of a portion of the Protestant population in Northern Ireland, one can argue that the condition of Northern Ireland Catholics is no worse than, and is in many ways much better than, that of African Americans in their respective societies.
Again, facts and logic have no bearing. England wronged the Irish and should be punished. Any Protestant in Ireland is obviously a descendent of England. And regardless of generations and hundreds of years within Ireland, these Protestants have no place there. Sean likes to tell the story of the Irish American couple who return to Ireland to research their roots. He has a Protestant name and when they go to the local parishes and town halls, they quickly learn to use her (Catholic) maiden name, otherwise they're simply told that there wouldn't be any information found "here" about anyone British. While Sean sympathizes with his friend's plight, he's also proud of how the true Irish stick together against the invader. Sort of like the Back Bay Irish against Edward Kennedy and the liberals.
I can't help but wonder just how much of our current reactionary political bent has its foundations in the efforts of the 50', 60's & 70's to make our country more inclusive and more true to the ideals upon which it was founded so long ago. One must remember, the founders of our nation believed in education, logic & facts - sort of a continuation of the enlightment. Moreover, the study of Philosophy was prized, unlike today where it is mostly regarded as the trivial pursuit of ivory tower liberals and is often dispised. So, today, when right wing hate mongering leaders point to our Judeo-Christen roots, and use this to recraft the intentions and ideals of our founding fathers, we can respond with a positive and powerful message to the contrary. However, I fear that this will not be enough. There is more exploration to come as we try to untangle the question of how the plurality of interest groups that we've enjoyed in the country for 200 years is suddenly been rejected for tight-fisted control by a small leadership group?
