On Democrats Losing Their Way
In conjunction with today's fine quote, I would like to very briefly point out how applicable it is. Even today, centuries later, parties are still swallowing their own lies. I'm a Democrat. Always have been, and probably always will be, unless third parties somehow manage to actually get a fair chance at getting on the ballot(which won't happen anytime soon!). Yet the Democrat Party continually embarasses me and every progressive who is worth a grain of salt.
Just as the quote says, parties die because they swallow their own lies. Today, fewer Americans identify with either of the two parties than at any other point in American history. I wish I had a poll to cite right now to back this up, but I don't. Yet I've read it in numerous sources and will dig up the link later.
There's a reason people don't trust political parties: their leaders are, by and large, liars and hypocrites. They care more about scratching each other's backs, getting nice perks, and getting re-elected than serving the people. BOTH PARTIES ARE GUILTY OF THIS! In fact, many foreign parties that I admire, such as the SDP in Germany(The Social Democratic Party), are guilty of this as well. I tend to think that this is an inherent problem with political parties in general, and that is not a peculiarly American problem. It is certainly more severe here than in many other countries, though.
What do you think?
Just as the quote says, parties die because they swallow their own lies. Today, fewer Americans identify with either of the two parties than at any other point in American history. I wish I had a poll to cite right now to back this up, but I don't. Yet I've read it in numerous sources and will dig up the link later.
There's a reason people don't trust political parties: their leaders are, by and large, liars and hypocrites. They care more about scratching each other's backs, getting nice perks, and getting re-elected than serving the people. BOTH PARTIES ARE GUILTY OF THIS! In fact, many foreign parties that I admire, such as the SDP in Germany(The Social Democratic Party), are guilty of this as well. I tend to think that this is an inherent problem with political parties in general, and that is not a peculiarly American problem. It is certainly more severe here than in many other countries, though.
What do you think?
posted by Ben at 4:42 PM
2 Comments:
I'll have to swallow my previous insistence that I shalt not post again, since my eagerness for discussion and debate has gotten the better of me.
I applaud and encourage this thought. The tendency toward government corruption and political self-interest is inherent and cannot be overcome, something that an enormous reservoir of historical experience and theoretical insight has shown over and over again. Originally, the Constitution was conceived as a document that was impeccably clear and air-tight, admitting of no possibility for the development of the sort of enormous, festering institutional structures that characterized the absolutist governments of the late ancien regime. Yet we are now faced with a beast that is many times more gigantic and influential. Obviously, the attempt failed.
On a different note . . .
A few posts ago I pursused an aggressive critique of thoughts that are popular among readers and contributors to this blog. That by itself may have seemed unpleasant or insignificant to some, especially since it is likely unclear what sort of positive solution a paleolibertarian might offer to the awful dilemmas that we were discussing. If anyone is interested, in the next few days (or minutes, depending on my level of motivation) I'll attempt to provide a severely reduced encapsulation of some of the relevant Austro-libertarian ideas at my blog. It may produce nothing in the way of one camp convincing the other, but at least we'll all get some practice in polemic (if anyone decides to read it at all)!
Thanks for the response, Evan. It's a little late, and I'm not really awake and mentally acute enough right now to respond in detail. I'll write a longer response tomorrow.
But I will say this: I am not as opposed to libertarianism as you may think. I will be glad to read your blog post, and I urge my readers to do so as well. I am actually quite sympathetic to libertarian socialistm. I just am not as opposed to the state as you and other paleolibertarians are. That being said, I like people like you a lot more than hacks like Schuberth and Linhart. Not to mention the neo-conservative scum running our country.
Also, I believe George Washington said it best in his 1796 Farewell Address:
"One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts. You can not shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heartburnings which spring from these misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection....Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.
This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but in those of the popular form it is seen in its greatest rankness and is truly their worst enemy....
It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another; foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passion. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose; and there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume."
Post a Comment
<< Home