Lessons for the Republican Party

Lessons for the Republican Party

That is, if they are interested in learning anything from the 2008 election.

Social Conservativism Is A Powerful Force

Americans are a lot more socially conservative than McCain was prepared to admit. Even in California with the enormous resources of the media devoted to stopping Proposition 8, it still passed! Because in some factions, GOP stands for Gay Old Party, it is difficult to persuade a lot of the party movers and shakers to take a consistent position about homosexuality. "What consenting adults do in private is none of the government's business. Don't try to force others to recognize or approve your relationship, and we'll be happy to leave you alone."

I recognize that Americans are not generally pro-life, but Obama's positions on abortion were so extreme that McCain, had he chosen to do so, could have devastated Obama even with many Democrats. Obama supported partial birth abortion, and even refused to oppose neglectful infanticide for abortion survivors when he was in the Illinois State Senate. These are positions that even most Democrats can't stomach.

Experience & Governor Palin

I liked Governor Palin, and she did energize the base. I think that by 2012, she may have enough experience to be a serious candidate. I understand why McCain picked her. McCain was trying to mend fences with the social conservatives that he has been insulting throughout the campaign. McCain was also trying motivate a lot of Clinton backers who were driven entirely by sexual identity. (Yes, they were out there--it wasn't just upset about how Obama treated Clinton during the primaries.) But clearly, picking Palin damaged any arguments about Obama's experience. Yes, Palin had more experience than Obama, but it wasn't an overwhelming advantage.

Ideals & Motivating the Young

I received an email from someone who was convinced that Obama's support among young people was because they were drunk or stoned, and didn't understand for whom they were voting. Doubtless there were such supporters, but Obama's base of support was overwhelmingly in the 18-30 age group, and the Baby Boomer generation. The hopelessly loaded crowd wouldn't have been so successful in turning out the vote! Young people and intellectuals throughout history have responded very well to politicians who preach idealistic solutions to complex problems. When John Kennedy talked in his inaugural address about "we will bear any burden, pay any price" and "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" he was engaging in this same idealistic approach that appealed to the young.

A rather darker example, however: German Hochschule and college students, as well as their teachers and professors, overwhelmingly voted for the National Socialist German Workers Party in the 1932 elections (the first German election in which 18 year olds were allowed to vote), paving the way for Hitler's rise to power in January of 1933. The National Socialist campaign slogan that year was "Gemeinnuetz vor Einnuetz" (Common needs before individual needs). Young people, because they lack experience, are easily persuaded by idealistic slogans. With time, you learn how to tell when a politician is lying (his lips are moving). You might still vote for a politician, or actively support him, but you learn not to be too trusting--certainly not to the level of idolatry that we saw.

Intellectuals, because they they are focused on ideas, also tend to let a beautiful theory take precedence over reality. In theory, the dominance of post-modernism in the academic community (which denies that there are any universals) should have scrapped this--but in practice, the intellectuals' enthusiasm for theories still wins.

Republicans need to emphasize ideals in order to motivate young people and perhaps even some intellectuals. There are a lot of conservative and libertarian ideals, and the Republican Party made a terrible mistake putting someone like McCain at the top of the ticket. I can respect McCain's service to his nation, but he clearly is not a thinker. He doesn't even seem to read any thinkers. It's a sad day indeed when you find yourself comparing the nominee to Ronald Reagan and saying, "Reagan, at least by comparison, was an intellectual."

Libertarian Values & The Soul of the Republican Party

One of the biggest advantages that the Democrats had this time around is that they cynically and dishonestly played the religion card. The idea of a Christian commonwealth provides for assistance to the poor and disabled, true, and conservatives do not disagree--they usually are only arguing about whether a particular strategy is the most effective. But if Democrats were serious about this Christian commonwealth idea, they wouldn't be simultaneously arguing in favor of sexual promiscuity as a good thing, Hollywood's promotion of depravity, and homosexuality. There's a profound dishonesty in using Jesus' teachings about the poor, while ignoring everything else that Jesus said.

Republicans have been pretty well blocked from pursuing Democratic hypocrisy on that because the Republican Party has a serious ideological split. Social conservatives generally would agree on the principle that the government has an obligation to the poor and oppressed, even if they might disagree about the most effective methods of solving these problems.

Libertarians do not even agree on the principle that the government has such an obligation. They believe that this is properly an individual responsibility--which is a fine concept--and one that is morally consistent with Christianity--but unfortunately, it does not seem to be sufficient in a modern, highly anonymous urban scociety. And there are more than a few Republicans who aren't in any sense "libertarian," but for reasons of selfishness, believe that the government should do nothing to give a hand up to those at the bottom. As someone that I used to know in the Libertarian Party put it, "Give the poor a helping hand? We should kick them while they're down until they get up and start working!" (And this was someone who grew up in an orphanage, and didn't have life handed to her on a silver platter.)

Here in Idaho, there are a lot of people that consider themselves "conservatives" but are really more libertarian. Often they regard the social conservatives as a problem for the Republican Party--and fail to recognize that the social conservative message actually has great potential to appeal to many decent and concerned Democrats who are motivated by Christian goodwill.