By Edwin Cooney
Have you ever wondered what makes an issue a conservative Republican issue rather than a liberal Democratic issue or vice versa? The answer is very simple.
After nearly a lifetime of fascination with the American political scene, I’m as absolutely sure as I can be that I’ve discovered the key to our national discontent. It consists of a key as simple as the old brass skeleton key. Before I reveal it, here’s a bit of history.
Between Thursday, April 30th 1789, the day George Washington took his first presidential oath, and Saturday, September 14th 1901, the day Theodore Roosevelt took his oath to become America’s 26th President upon the death of President William McKinley, the major differences between American political parties were generally broad in their scope. They consisted of issues such as slavery versus abolition, states’ rights versus federal domain, agriculture versus industry, bankers versus small farmers and small business, and so forth. The consequences resulting from the struggles between these conflicted interests were for the most part beyond anything that immediately affected the lives of most people. Sure, war, specifically civil war, and economic depression resulted in the loss of life for several hundred thousand Americans. However, immediately following these struggles and conflicts, the lives of the vast numbers of Americans weren’t much altered.
Suddenly, almost overnight, there came onto the American scene a a brilliant, energetic, and pugnacious little gentleman named Theodore Roosevelt. In less than eight years, he brought to the American people an expectation that the government was theirs as much as it was J. P. Morgan’s or John D. Rockefeller’s. It was the beginning of the Progressive Era with its program of initiative, referendum and recall. This era gave people at the state level the idea that they could be the masters of their political and social fate which, up until then, was mostly the prerogative of state legislatures and Congress, people who were largely elected with the backing of big bankers, big railroads, big coal and big oil. Within three months after taking office, T.R. was telling Congress that while free enterprise was owed much gratitude for all it had accomplished, it was in many ways practicing policies that were hurtful to the public. Thus, between 1902 and 1909, bills were passed by Congress to purify food and drugs, regulate and in some cases destroy corporate trusts, and preserve the national environment. Eventually, Teddy (a name he despised) Roosevelt would even challenge the idea that the right to own property was our most precious right. For T.R. and many future presidents, human rights rather than property rights should reign supreme.
Thus, the Progressive Era between 1901 and 1917 was the major factor in altering the nature and intensity of public issues and politics. Early 20th Century Progressivism opened the gates to FDR’s New Deal, Harry Truman’s Square Deal, and even to Ronald Reagan’s modern concept of conservatism.
The old idea advanced by Grover Cleveland at his 1893 Inaugural that the people owed loyalty to the government and not the government to the people died with Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson.
As I see it, the key to this era of discontent resides in the political interests of every political party, major and minor, currently seeking the favor of the American people.
Even with the onset of the Progressive Era, the election of a president generally reflected the will of the people, even when it didn’t exactly represent the collective national preference. Hence, today political leaders seek to manipulate rather than to discern our national will thus increasing rather than dissipating our national anxieties. In short, our anxieties are essential to their efforts to keep the electorate small enough and thus sufficiently manipulable to their political and economic ends.
Additionally, I’m convinced that there’s less principle behind the political positions taken, especially by the two major parties, than there is pure political opportunism. Here’s an example:
The anti-abortion movement had its origin in the Democratic Party in 1976 as Ellen McCormack, a Massachusetts housewife, sought the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination on that issue. Ronald Reagan, who sought the GOP nomination that same year, had been “pro-choice” as Governor of California in the late 1960s and early 70s. The only thing the Republican platform in 1976 had to say about abortion was that it was a states’ rights issue rather than a federal issue. As I see it, “pro-life” is hardly a conservative principle born of morality. Anti-abortion or pro-life sentiment was adopted by Conservatives rather than being a natural child of Conservatism.
In my view, professional Liberalism and Conservatism must be defanged. They’re neither informative nor do they provide political or social unity. They primarily serve to divide. Worst of all, they stir and reinforce preconceived fearful opinions much more than they encourage critical thinking!
One of my readers, a gentleman who probably has forgotten more history than I’ve ever known, recently reminded me in an email of the fact that in 2000 just five Supreme Court justices decided that election rather than allowing the citizens of Florida a second opportunity to vote their consciences. That election in combination with the outcome of the 2016 election is enough for him to challenge me to convince him to vote in 2020. For openers, I don’t think he can afford not to vote. However, that’s merely my opening argument. There will be more coming soon. Stay tuned!
In case you are wondering who’s at fault for this era of national discontent, it’s not Donald Trump — it’s you and me! Only you and I can make matters even worse!
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
EDWIN COONEY
No comments:
Post a Comment