10/14/20
I have just read an article on fivethirtyeight.com by Lee Drutman about the political divide in our country today. It was well thought out, if from a left leaning viewpoint. He makes some very good points about the historical nature of this gulf and the fact that some behaviors are similar on both sides. In the second paragraph he states that “extreme partisan animosity is a prelude to democratic collapse” he couldn’t be more right. I have a contextual problem with the conclusion, but the substance leaves additional room for explanation as to how we got here. He frames these subjects as just politics. Here is where I have a problem with the way he presents these issues that clearly make the Democrats look more benign. He writes that in the 70s and 80s there was a decline in the local media. What he neglects to tell you, it is at this time, the national media became increasingly partisan in the way they promoted Democrat talking points. This is true particularly on the issue of race. Their inability to remember or actually to report history on such crucial votes as The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 which would not have passed without heavy Republican support is telling. The fact that Republicans voted in much higher percentage of their caucus than did Democrats is never mentioned. The media’s use of selective recall on issues such as race is indicative of their narrative that Republicans are racists and that Democrats are saviors of people of color. This is a disservice to the American people and blurring of the lines between journalism and the activism that is today’s media. The media’s re-enforcing of this narrative in the service of the Democrat party is patently obvious.
Then there is what the political scientists call conflict extension. This is basically the nationalization of issues around partisan stances on questions such as cultural, and identity-based politics but Mr. Drutman leaves out the left’s favorite grievance-based politics which is at the heart of most of their messaging. In discussing population density in cities and exurbs, the cities are multicultural, and the exurbs are white thus the population density problems become racial. As always, the discussion turns to race where Republicans seldom have the temerity to challenge the media for fear of being labeled racist. When Democrats do not have a valid argument to support their position, they invariably will use the race card. It’s an automatic fallback position for them, because it shuts down all discourse. The media for its’ part is complicit in the extreme partisan animosity that grip our country. Political parties on both sides say and do what is good for them, but when the media takes a side and foments the hatred that leads to this chasm, our nations in now that’s a problem. It’s more than the two parties and/or the nationalization of issues that have caused the lack of communication in this country. It’s the partisan media that encourages this toxic behavior that has gripped our society. When both sides see the other as evil not just an adversary, we have gone well beyond normal dialogue. Politics in this country has become much the same as the foreign policies of China, Russia, or Iran a zero-sum game. If one party or the other gains total control of the government, we will have a problem.
In conclusion Mr. Drutman writes’ that there are two possible ways for this to end. The first being – the unwinding of democracy by a party that supports anti-democratic and authoritarian leadership to hold power. This he then said is what the democrats have explicitly raised in recent months. What he fails to speak about is the Democrats schemes to unwind democracy by packing the Supreme Court, which by a ratio of 2-1 the American people are against. How about term limits for Supreme Court Justices? Changing the rules of the Senate to do away with the filibuster, adding states, which I might add haven’t even voted for statehood to give themselves a majority in the Senate. All these structural changes they’re talking about would bring about essentially one-party rule. None of which they’re willing to run on in this election. They said they’ll tell us after they’re elected. Don’t the people have a right to know now? Hmmmm what are they concealing? I believe they’re trying to circumvent the system. The second possible end is the collapse or realignment of the two-party system. Both these scenarios are very possible, and I don’t disagree with Mr. Drutman’s basic premise that extreme partisan animosity is a prelude to democratic collapse. His two conclusions although accurate lack an objective look at both parties involved. It’s just the presentation from a Democrat point of view that I have an issue with. It is the Democrats proposals to accomplish their objects that will bring about the second possible end. The collapse of the two-party system. Given what occurred after the 2016 election with the demonstrations and some rioting from the Democrats (with no condemnation from the media or the Democrats) anything could happen no matter which side wins in this cycle. I am quite sure that if the Republicans lose and demonstrate it will be portrayed as anti-democratic even fascist. Conversely if the Democrats lose and demonstrate it will be described as exercising their constitutional rights. This scenario has played out time and again so don’t be surprised. It’s the mainstream media that is anti-democratic for promoting one party rule. America wake up! As always, I find this – Troubling!!
