Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
cathyn: (Bacon)
[personal profile] cathyn
Something to keep in mind whenever someone points out something in history that was done by one of America's political parties or the other: Once upon a time, it was the Republicans that were the environmentalists (T. Roosevelt), the Republicans that were (at least in the limited way allowable in their era) the ones moving towards racial equality (A. Lincoln), and the Republicans that were essentially pro-worker and anti-Military Industrial Complex types (D. Eisenhower). Then along came Lyndon Baines Johnson. There had already started a shift, where some Democrats and started adopting liberal ideas, and promoting racial equality and such, with JFK proposing the Civil Rights Act. LBJ bulled this through Congress, along with the Voting Rights Act. This pushed a large number of racist Democrats to switch parties, and join the Republicans.

There was what amounts to a polarity shift in the parties, and, while this is a broad and sweeping generalization, it largely invalidates giving credit or assigning blame to either party on some subject or another. I have seen image posts (rightly) claiming that the Democrats opposed freeing the slaves. I have seen image posts (rightly) claiming that the Republicans created the National Park System. Then along came LBJ, and now it's the Democrats who promote equality, and the Republicans fight it. It's the Democrats who promote improving environmental responsibility, and Republicans who believe corporate profits trump the public good.

Neither is, nor has been, always and invariably right; neither is, nor has been, always and invariably wrong. My deepest wish is that we as humans realize every other person we see, regardless of skin color, hair color, faith, gender identity, sexual preference, whatever, even those who exclusively rely on Fox News for their views on world events, we're all the same humans. Let's all try, just for a day, to treat each other as welcome guests in our tiny little worlds, and see how it feels. You might like it, and want to try it again tomorrow. Give it a shot.

Date: 2016-01-05 11:30 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] madbaker.livejournal.com
I'd modify that from "Fox News" to "Fox News or Daily Kos" as blind partisanship is not limited to one side of the aisle. But I agree.

Date: 2016-01-05 11:44 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cathyn.livejournal.com
Very fair cop there! Blind partisanship can't not go in both directions, really. I wish it could, but probably never happen.

Date: 2016-01-05 11:44 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cathyn.livejournal.com
It should also be noted that this thing I wrote is three paragraphs long, and encompasses roughly 150 years of American Political History. It cannot help but be a GROSS AND VAST oversimplification. Not an inaccurate oversimplification, and yet...
Edited Date: 2016-01-05 11:46 pm (UTC)

Date: 2016-01-06 01:59 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] joycebre.livejournal.com
I've always found party affiliations to be irrelevant. Most people bring them up when they're losing the argument and want to throw some sand to obscure things.
Vote for the best person.

Date: 2016-01-06 07:07 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kareina.livejournal.com
I was still in High School when I realised that pretty much every political party or religion stands for at least one concept for which I approve and at least one concept behind which I cannot stand. I do not believe it is possible for a large group to agree 100% on every issue, and therefore the concept of aligning ourselves into "Parties" never made sense to me. Especially since, as you say, over time the list of points a party supports with which one agrees or disagrees can and will change.

March 2017

2627282930 31 

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Page generated Sep. 25th, 2017 03:16 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios