View Single Post


August 29th, 2012, 02:11
Originally Posted by dteowner View Post
And really, there is some stupid shit in that platform (just like every other party platform in the world) which makes it easy for him to cherrypick reinforcement for his preconceived notions.
True and truer still in a system that somewhat assures no more than two viable parties persisting over multiple elections. If this particular platform document demonstrates anything notably well its that a two party system fought at the national level over relatively slim majorities puts more pressure on enticing single-issue or fringe groups than it does creating a cohesive and consistent platform.

The reason I can see for this perhaps being more obvious in the texas republican platform is that they are the party mostly in opposition at the national level and that texas is a safe enough state for them that they can put some of the stranger enticements in writing without much worry. The party in opposition always has more incentive to cobble its way to/above 50% by enticing groups whose ideology may not be so compatible with their own but who may be agreeable because of either a single issue or because they two disagree more with the party in power.

In the Bush years you saw broadly scenarios where ideas that might seem incompatible or even crazy to the wider membership of the Democratic party were used to entice those in opposition to Bush and Republicans to vote Democratic. I won't argue about whose platforms (official platforms or less formal adoption of rhetoric) have included the craziest incongruities over the years; I'm sure opinions on that run high though.

I would rather suggest that the phenomenon is about the political dynamics of our system moreso than the character of either party. It is an effect of a system which determines that no more than two parties can remain viable in the long run and artificially forces a much more complex and diverse set of ideologies to fall under either category A or B. If the character of the parties has anything to do with it, it would be that survival in our politics favors flexible cynicism over a cohesive, consistent, and well-defined plan/philosophy.
jhwisner is offline




Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,565