PDA

View Full Version : The Future of the American Left and Right


Porpoise101
September 24th, 2016, 12:31 PM
People today may think that the left is on the ascent in the US. Democrats have demographics growing in their favor, the nation is becoming more left-leaning, Republicans are older on average. The Democrats have slightly higher odds at winning the White House this year and maybe the Senate if they are lucky. Yet, Democrats are losing at the state level massively. Thanks to initiatives like Project REDMAP (http://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2016/07/19/gerrymandering-republicans-redmap), the right has taken over the states and have redrawn districts to their favor. The states also have gotten more right wing as the governors have become Republicans instead of Democrats.
I also have an interesting video which inspired this thread:
15WhOT_lQiA

In my view, the left is going to be strong in the short term, but fail in successive years. In the long term however, the left has the right clinched in my view. Unless some guy comes up out of the blue and creates a New Right, I doubt they can recover in perpetuity. If Trump wins though, I feel that could spark a huge backlash against the right. I have thought of this before, and I almost want Trump to win just to screw over the Republican control of the Legislature and the States.

candorgen
September 24th, 2016, 02:10 PM
What about the redefining of the congressional districts in 2020 (if I got the year correct), if there's majority of republican power being present in govt at that time?

Vlerchan
September 24th, 2016, 02:31 PM
Whilst it will never be adapted, I would be entirely in favour of relying on computers that re-district on the basis of a predefined algorithm, and up-to-date census data.

I think the demographic changes in the long-run will benefit the Left in terms of getting their economic and identity platforms implemented.

---

What I find much more worrisome, though, is the polarisation this is likely to inspire. The number of Republicans who would be upset if a family member married a democrat is around 50% (and its not much better for Democrats). You have record numbers believing that members of the opposite party are more lazy, unintelligent, etc. than the average American. Our generation then-so happens to be the most intolerant since records began when it comes to extending equivalent speech and representation rights to groups they dislike (racists, homophobes, etc.). What this ends up meaning for the legitimacy of government - including the one emerging in the upcoming presidential election - is anyones guess.

If Republicans believe they can't win, how long do you expect them to keep playing the game?

Porpoise101
September 24th, 2016, 03:19 PM
If Republicans believe they can't win, how long do you expect them to keep playing the game?
I don't know. Based on the past, we have seen what happens when a political party singularly dominates and alienates a segment of the population. The remains of the old mix with some new elements and create a new Party.

The future of the Right in the US in my view will be what Pew calls 'Young Outsiders'. (http://www.people-press.org/2014/06/26/typology-comparison/types/young-outsiders/)
My guess is that they will ditch the republicans and form a new party. Or they will just be apart of that bloc of people that don't vote. I think the Libertarian Party could become the new 2nd party in the distant future. Younger generations tend to be for freedom socially, but on the economic side of things they are pretty divided.

candorgen
September 24th, 2016, 03:58 PM
I think the Libertarian Party could become the new 2nd party in the distant future.

That would be interesting, but I'd guess many decades with all other things 'kept equal'.

jamie_n5
September 24th, 2016, 08:12 PM
I don't think there is as much of a defined left and right as there was in the past. In some ways like the congress playing games and completely standing on political sides then yes. If you look at the norm however you will see that both sides are more in the middle when it comes down to real business. The Obama administration has caused so much havoc in congress with all of the executive orders he has done that it may take decades to get back to a congress that will actually work together civilly again. The best thing that could happen this year is that Trump wins and there is a huge house cleaning of both the house and senate. Get some new people and ideas going and get down to business and make the country better again.

Porpoise101
September 24th, 2016, 09:49 PM
I don't think there is as much of a defined left and right as there was in the past.
By all accounts we are more polarized as a nation right now than we have been in over 100 years. We aren't in post-Civil war levels, but it is pretty high. Liberals hate the idea of being associated with conservatives, and conservatives would never step within a mile of a liberal group. We judge institutions as being liberal or conservative, and treat them as such. Every action or decision is judged as being 'political'

Of course, when people actually talk and meet face-to-face, they actually get along quite well. This is why I am for integration of society.

PlasmaHam
September 24th, 2016, 11:01 PM
I don't think there is as much of a defined left and right as there was in the past..

I beg to disagree. Look at today's society, and we are more segregated by race, ideologies, and opinions than we were forty years ago. To be accepted in popular society, you almost have to be a hardcore leftist or a hardcore conservative. The moderate middle ground is dissipating, with extreme positions like the Alt-right and radical liberals going mainstream. You can't talk about anything anymore without it devolving into politics.

Vlerchan
September 25th, 2016, 07:17 AM
To be accepted in popular society, you almost have to be a hardcore leftist or a hardcore conservative.
It might be the international influence but I have noted that ROTW seems much less polarised - though it has increased, I believe - than civil society and the centre-ground feels as if it might be a much more tenable position than in mainstream politics. Do wonder what that is.

Younger generations tend to be for freedom socially, but on the economic side of things they are pretty divided.
I actually see the biggest divides occurring over identity issues.

Economic views have a pretty normal distribution, with slight upward ticks at the tails (Socialists, Libertarians), from what I have seen.

ThisBougieLife
September 25th, 2016, 10:41 AM
I beg to disagree. Look at today's society, and we are more segregated by race, ideologies, and opinions than we were forty years ago. To be accepted in popular society, you almost have to be a hardcore leftist or a hardcore conservative. The moderate middle ground is dissipating, with extreme positions like the Alt-right and radical liberals going mainstream. You can't talk about anything anymore without it devolving into politics.

It does seem that way sometimes. I've never considered myself a "radical liberal", yet I used to post on a site where most members were quite far-left and I came off being the odd centrist out, often accused of being "right wing" even though I'm nothing of the sort. Yet I feel I've been driven to choose an extreme side because everyone is becoming so extreme; it's as if I have no choice but to join up with the side I hate less...

ethan-s
September 25th, 2016, 11:55 AM
Thank you left wing schools. We all know that dem politics don't work, but you have brainwashed our kids into thinking they do. Good job ruining the country.

Porpoise101
September 25th, 2016, 12:43 PM
I actually see the biggest divides occurring over identity issues.

Economic views have a pretty normal distribution, with slight upward ticks at the tails (Socialists, Libertarians), from what I have seen.
Well to me, I see a general consensus forming across America in terms of social issues. Young people are more tolerant of atheism and homosexuality. They are fine with people doing drugs. Issues of race are the exception in my view, where people are divided still.

As for economic policy (I include environmental, science, and public health here), the right is pretty clearly against regulation. The left is definitely for increased redistribution of wealth. While neither side wants to radically change anything, they are still extremely firm in their convictions. Maybe that is more telling of the political environment rather than the actual disagreements though.

Vlerchan
September 25th, 2016, 01:15 PM
Maybe that is more telling of the political environment rather than the actual disagreements though.
There's a bit of this. Though I'd agree there's been definite partisan shifts since 2008: However I am not sure as to whether that's a product of a shift in the party (recall: Trump and Romney never advocated anything Cruzian) as much as the tails being particularly loud. The increased number of people declaring independent might also be prompting the party-identifiers to seem more extreme.

Definitely an interesting question though. Don't have the time to research it now but I imagine it's been studied.

---

I would also be much closer to the Democrats in economic terms, despite a generally quite favourable outlook on the free market. That I can be accepted with it means the Sanders wing hasn't won yet.

Thank you left wing schools. We all know that dem politics don't work, but you have brainwashed our kids into thinking they do. Good job ruining the country.
This exposition is far superior to what Porpoise or I might have been able to rely upon in defence of our own points. Thank you, ethan-s.

candorgen
September 25th, 2016, 05:49 PM
By all accounts we are more polarized as a nation right now than we have been in over 100 years. We aren't in post-Civil war levels, but it is pretty high. Liberals hate the idea of being associated with conservatives, and conservatives would never step within a mile of a liberal group. We judge institutions as being liberal or conservative, and treat them as such. Every action or decision is judged as being 'political'

Of course, when people actually talk and meet face-to-face, they actually get along quite well. This is why I am for integration of society.

Social integration is a thing that the US could do very well with, especially with its increasing internal stresses that you're mentioned.


I beg to disagree. Look at today's society, and we are more segregated by race, ideologies, and opinions than we were forty years ago. To be accepted in popular society, you almost have to be a hardcore leftist or a hardcore conservative. The moderate middle ground is dissipating, with extreme positions like the Alt-right and radical liberals going mainstream. You can't talk about anything anymore without it devolving into politics.

I don't have to bring in personal political issues to get along with society though. Granted, it's going with the flow of others' actions overall, but I could easily mention no political views whatsoever in my everyday social interactions and it wouldn't make a difference, and I'm sure the same could be done with most other people.

If I follow 'short-term / close-up' social convention and have a reasonable self-sufficient economic life, then I'm basically accepted by society. I don't know what you mean by not being able to talk about anything 'anymore' without it devolving into politics.

"How's the weather today?" Is usually a question beyond such matters.

Sorry if I've read you wrong, but what you said felt as such.



This exposition is far superior to what Porpoise or I might have been able to rely upon in defence of our own points. Thank you, ethan-s.

:D

jamie_n5
September 25th, 2016, 06:22 PM
That is why if you read my whole post you would have seen the part about our congress. They are definitely playing the party game. Democrats stick to the liberal side and the Republicans stick on the conservative side. That is why we are virtually accomplishing jack squat in congress. I was speaking on behalf of the people of the country are more in the middle wanting to get things done and changes made while our lovely congress is playing their little political game of left and right and not doing anything. Sorry I should have been more clear before.

phuckphace
September 26th, 2016, 08:56 AM
I see the future of both sides as hanging on the results of this next election.

Clinton and Kaine will lead us indirectly to becoming the next Venezuela within the next few decades. their immigration policy will have the effect of "browning" the country almost fully, and this emerging brown supermajority will eventually elect a highly corrupt champagne-socialist demagogue in the vein of Hugo Chavez. this Chavez-like figure will pack out the government with his cronies, skim mad payola off the IRS, build huge crass-looking villas and mansions all over the place, fill the DEA and FBI with Cartel operatives, etc., and of course the common man will live in destitute poverty.

there is a tendency for high levels of brown to correlate with very low levels of civic freedom, as Millennials will unfortunately have to discover the hard way in the coming years (provided Trump loses). with this browning comes an ever more consolidated and empowered State, since this is the only way brown countries can be ruled at all (note I didn't say 'effectively').

consider Venezuela a crystal ball of sorts. peer into it and ask yourself if you want to starve to death in a country with bountiful natural resources, because that's exactly what you're going to get.

StoppingTom
September 26th, 2016, 10:21 AM
Thank you left wing schools. We all know that dem politics don't work, but you have brainwashed our kids into thinking they do. Good job ruining the country.

yes that explains it

phuckphace
September 26th, 2016, 11:49 AM
Thank you left wing schools. We all know that dem politics don't work, but you have brainwashed our kids into thinking they do. Good job ruining the country.

the country was ruined by demographic upheaval, which was set in motion by the civil rights act of 1964 and the immigration act of 1965. you can think of 1965 as an epoch year that marks the dissolution of the American republic established in 1776. post-1965 "America" is After Dead Gay Empire or A.D.G.E. for short. 2016 is year 50 A.D.G.E.

anyway, liberals and "conservatives" both had a part in throwing our borders wide open, credit where it's due. it's a given that liberals are subversive by nature, so let's focus more on purging the "conservatives" who saw fit to foist the orcs on us because we're a proposition nation (protip: if you hear a so-called conservative say "America is an idea!" you should make a note of their physical description so they can get purged first)

Vlerchan
September 27th, 2016, 03:57 PM
[...] civil rights act of 1964 [...]
You can make an argument out of the changes in immigration law circa 1965 (though, as you might have guessed, I disagree) but I don't believe for a second that the civil rights act contributed to the issue you're describing. Black people were already settled in cities by 1964 and the dynamics that contributed to rising crime - peaking in the 90s before undergoing a precipitous drop thereafter - would have occurred regardless, and I'd say probably would have been worse, otherwise.

If you mean, they voted in the Democrats, your support for their establishment Republican competitors is charming but from examining the record, I don't believe a few more of them would have made much of a difference.

Porpoise101
September 27th, 2016, 10:25 PM
the immigration act of 1965.
Yep, can't underestimate that act. Without it, this nation wouldn't have the boon known as Asian Americans. Thank God it passed, if it didn't, our borders would be closed off still. More importantly, I wouldn't exist.

Of course, if we hadn't shut out immigrants in the 20s it wouldn't have been necessary. (Side note: the 20s and 50s are way overrated in the US)

jamie_n5
September 28th, 2016, 11:58 AM
I beg to disagree. Look at today's society, and we are more segregated by race, ideologies, and opinions than we were forty years ago. To be accepted in popular society, you almost have to be a hardcore leftist or a hardcore conservative. The moderate middle ground is dissipating, with extreme positions like the Alt-right and radical liberals going mainstream. You can't talk about anything anymore without it devolving into politics.

Please read my second post. I explained there that it is the citizens of the USA that are in the middle. It's the Politian's in congress that are playing the far left and right games and not accomplishing jack squat in the meantime.

phuckphace
September 28th, 2016, 03:59 PM
Yep, can't underestimate that act. Without it, this nation wouldn't have the boon known as Asian Americans. Thank God it passed, if it didn't, our borders would be closed off still. More importantly, I wouldn't exist.

yeah man I don't know what we'd do without an extra 100 million Chinese buffets and entrance-exam cheats. I just wouldn't feel at home in America without hearing the nasally cacophony of spoken prole-Chinese on every visit to the laundromat

Of course, if we hadn't shut out immigrants in the 20s it wouldn't have been necessary. (Side note: the 20s and 50s are way overrated in the US)

the 20s were decadent and degenerate, so a correction was needed anyway. it came in the form of the stock market crash - I still smirk when reading about rich people jumping from high windows

candorgen
September 30th, 2016, 04:54 PM
I see the future of both sides as hanging on the results of this next election.

I fully agree.

Porpoise101
September 30th, 2016, 07:40 PM
I fully agree.
Yeah, that is kinda true for all presidential elections. This is because when a president of one party is elected, there is usually a reactionary wave in the congressional elections.

candorgen
September 30th, 2016, 08:05 PM
Yeah, that is kinda true for all presidential elections. This is because when a president of one party is elected, there is usually a reactionary wave in the congressional elections.

That is a factor, yes.