HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Good Reads (Forum) » A Second G.O.P. by D. Br...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 11:57 PM

A Second G.O.P. by D. Brooks

On the surface, Republicans are already doing a good job of beginning to change their party. Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana gave a speech to the Republican National Committee calling on Republicans to stop being the stupid party, to stop insulting the intelligence of the American people. . .

But, so far, there have been more calls for change than actual evidence of change. In his speech, for example, Jindal spanked his party for its stale clichés but then repeated the same Republican themes that have earned his party its 33 percent approval ratings: Government bad. Entrepreneurs good.

In this reinvention process, Republicans seem to have spent no time talking to people who didn’t already vote for them. . .

The second G.O.P. wouldn’t be based on the Encroachment Story. It would be based on the idea that America is being hit simultaneously by two crises, which you might call the Mancur Olson crisis and the Charles Murray crisis.

Olson argued that nations decline because their aging institutions get bloated and sclerotic and retard national dynamism. Murray argues that America is coming apart, dividing into two nations — one with high education levels, stable families and good opportunities and the other with low education levels, unstable families and bad opportunities.

The second G.O.P. would tackle both problems at once. It would be filled with people who recoiled at President Obama’s second Inaugural Address because of its excessive faith in centralized power, but who don’t share the absolute antigovernment story of the current G.O.P.

Would a coastal and Midwestern G.O.P. sit easily with the Southern and Western one? No, but majority parties are usually coalitions of the incompatible. This is really the only chance Republicans have. The question is: Who’s going to build a second G.O.P.?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/29/opinion/brooks-a-second-g-o-p.html?hp



6 replies, 1677 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 6 replies Author Time Post
Reply A Second G.O.P. by D. Brooks (Original post)
elleng Jan 2013 OP
longship Jan 2013 #1
MyshkinCommaPrince Jan 2013 #2
elleng Jan 2013 #4
stopbush Jan 2013 #3
BigDemVoter Jan 2013 #5
bemildred Jan 2013 #6

Response to elleng (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 12:16 AM

1. Ha! Jindal talks about stupidity at the same time he promotes creationism in LA charter schools!

Ha!


Who is he fooling? Republicans are nothing more than a theocratic cabal. Jindal included. When they say that the party is stupid it's because the Republican Party is stupid.

Jindal is the definition of stupid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 12:32 AM

2. Umm.

Thomas Frank writes about two Repug factions as the Mods (moderate Rs) and the Cons (far-right wingnut Rs), in What's the Matter with Kansas. The Cons have now driven out the Mods, for whom David Brooks seems to have been one of the national voices for some time. Brooks seems to be saying to his Mods (if they're still out there) that they need to give up on fighting to control the existing Republican party and start a new version of it. Is... is that right? Like the Repug commentators themselves, Brooks doesn't seem to be questioning the core ideas of their current party. Or at least he's not questioning half of those ideas. If their party is currently stuck between needing to please their backers (big $$$ - Mods) and their base (those southern and western types Brooks mentions - Cons), and can't move much lest they offend one or both of these two groups (which have conflicting agendas)... then the backers should throw aside the Tea Party types and the culture warriors and start a new party representing the existing Republican economic ideals.

Not expressing myself well at all, tonight. I think Brooks is making another type of "repackaging" argument.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Murray_%28author%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mancur_Olson

Edited to add wiki links for the names Brooks drops. Wondering if he's making a coded statement of some kind by citing these two thinkers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MyshkinCommaPrince (Reply #2)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 12:36 AM

4. Don't think HE knows, THAT may be what he's saying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 12:34 AM

3. Amazing that David Brooks still draws a paycheck for the drivel he writes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 01:16 PM

5. I saw this bullshit in the NYT this morning. . . .

I read about a paragraph of his tripe and muttered "idiot" under my breath & skipped on to the next page.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 08:29 AM

6. I look forward to the day when I don't see his drivel in the press anymore. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread