Why Did Republicans Abandon Conservatism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter CFordUNC
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 284
  • Views: 6K
  • Politics 
i haven’t read this whole thread but I reject the premise of it.

As much as I like what CFord contributes to this community, reading his posts and knowing his history makes me feel that he never truly understood what the right in America was.

While the methods may be extreme, almost all that is happening now, from the removal of thousands of federal workers to the removal of programs like SNAP, have been in the works for decades. There is nothing in any of that that contradicts American conservatism.

Nobody could support SNAP and also support the welfare queen ads from the ‘80s.

The abandonment of the rule of law is all that has changed.
I think a lot of folks who reject the Republican Party end up doing so because they took conservatism so seriously. For these folks, if you've really bought into the idea of small government, individual rights, and personal liberty, it's hard to accept the Republican Party once you realize that they don't govern as if they actually believe in those things.

I think of CFord as being one of those folks and that his conversion out of the Republican Party is because of actually believing in these things in a way the Republican Party only lied about believing.

(In a similar vein, a lot of the folks I know who have the strongest antipathy to the evangelical church are those who grew up in those churches and truly believe(d) what they learned there about Jesus, coming to dislike those churches once they realized how poorly those churches do at actually being like Christ. If you take the biblical story of Christ seriously, it's hard to stomach the things done in his name by so many of his followers.)
 
Data, analysis, findings:


There are many reasons that the gender pay gap exists. Economists label these reasons as supply side (women’s choices) and demand side (employers’ choices), although it can be difficult to untangle the two or categorize them neatly as one or the other. Legal constraints, economic structures and gender norms have also played a role in shaping women’s preferences and choices. Sociologists may even argue that career preferences emerge in childhood from gender-specific socialization processes.


It's hardly an American problem. Probably worse in many countries.

Fewer and lower-paid female managers


Women also hold fewer executive positions: in 2020 they made up a third (34%) of managers in the EU, although they represent almost half of the employees. If we look at the gap in different occupations, female managers are at the greatest disadvantage: they earn 23% less per hour than male managers.


Again, if women tend to get into lower paying careers, take more time off, tend to work less than men, them it might also stand to reason that those lower paying careers would also pay managers less, right? It might also stand to reason that women who take years off to raise kids would have less experience and therefore be paid less as a manager or really any other career.

I was a buyer at a tech company for a year. I was in my late 20's. The more experienced buyers make and female, ALL made more than I did.

There is so much more information and detail needed to truly assess the reason for the pay gap, but I do not see how it can be definitely declared to be the result of discrimination and misogyny at this point.
 
The OP's question is one with a surprisingly specific anwer. To whit...
Simply put in the run up to the 1980 presidential election, George H.W. Bush's political political ambitions (after he lost the primary to Reagan), led him to commit the Origin Sin against big C conservatism by eating his own words criticizing Reagan's trickle down nonsense (he had called it Voodoo Economics during the primary). Because he wanted to satisfy his own personal selfish ambitions (get the VP slot). So he sold the rest of us down the road and hopped in bed with the supply side nonsense that he knew full well was bullshit.

This had two effects, for one it solidified the myth of "tax cuts for the ultra rich will make us all prosperous!" with the depressingly predictable end result that 50 years later we are all being lorded over by an oligarchic billionaire ruling class. But maybe just as consequently, it set the template for "Republicans fall in line for even the most batshit stupid lunacy" that continues to reverberate right down to this day.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top