Conservative Gradualism

Someone very recently asked me what my problem was with the Republican Party.  As I read this gentleman’s email I laughed to myself as I continued to read his assumptions of who I was. I simply replied with a thank you and stated that I appreciate his reading of what I have to say, especially on race and politics. I politely ended by informing this gentleman that he has misjudged me and my intentions and in fact have many things wrong about me and the specific group of people he believes I’m in. A group in which I would love to be considered apart of since I regard them so highly, but I do not have the academic credentials to be considered apart of such an elite group of people he mentioned in jest. But I thank you anyway.

So in efforts to demonstrate what I’ve been saying, I considered the arguments, assumptions and misinterpretations presented as if they were true and without bias and compared them to what I’ve said. I believe this is a calm and fair response. I hope someone can lend the same level of consideration to me who may have been offended by previous posts, despite the warning.

Perhaps it’s not fair to categorize the entire Republican Party as being The Party of No regardless of the evidence of their actions. Perhaps, and this is only a thought, many who affiliate themselves in some way with the GOP simply are subscribers to what I’m coining as ‘conservative gradualism’.

What is conservative gradualism?

Conservative Gradualism – is a philosophy of or tending or disposed to maintain existing views, conditions or institutions of tradition that asserts a policy of approaching a desired end in stages.

Haven’t you noticed how many of those who self-affiliate themselves with the Republican Party tend to display adverse tendencies to change?  Yes, it’s not all by no means because those who are moderate have a progressive measure to their conservatism, but are more prone to changes over longer periods of time.

Now I’m not suggesting that there’s anything wrong with being a Republican, conservative or whatever you may choose to identify yourself as politically. I’m just trying to understand the reason for the extreme levels of non-cooperation with bipartisanship demonstrated and influenced by the GOP. If it isn’t about the race of the President, if it is about the good of the American people and not politics, then I’m trying to understand the reasons for the need of a party to become so exclusive and virtually politically cultural isolationist. The only positive conclusion I’ve determined is conservative gradualism.

When we look at what the GOP has proposed as a counter argument or alternative to what the Democrats may have proposed the list can be categorized as either non-existent, no or a form of gradualism.

Think about it. What was the GOP’s alternative to the Financial Crisis and/or Economic Recovery?

What was the GOP’s alternative to the Auto Industry Crisis?

What is the GOP’s alternative to Healthcare Reform?

The answer is the same for all of these. No, Nothing or few changes here and there, all characterizations of a subscription to gradualism.

I believe it was a notable 20th Century Black southern minister who said that gradualism is an escape for do nothing-ism, which ends up in stand still-ism when asked repeatedly about integration. We may disagree philosophically, but in the distant past we have managed to maintain a level of professional courtesy towards one another.

If it is not about race, then what are the sudden delusions we’re witnessing today? What’s different with this President than any other of our previous presidents? The excuses are rooted with a level of racial resentment, guilt and hostility. Many psychologists would say that what we’re seeing can be characterized as signs of a guilt complex. Some want to resolve the issues we all have with race and politics, but we are seeing more people indulge in the activity of what you have guilt about. So the most positive conclusion I can determine is what I’ve defined as conservative gradualism.

I believe many understand and know that we need to change many things that were destroyed by our previous Republican administration. It’s not a contest, but a democracy. Let us ALL work democratically to make this democracy work for ALL of us.

To those who say they want “My Country” back. I ask you to be honest and explain the America you’re wanted to return, and then consider the history of others who also live in that same America. Is the America that was initiated where the very buildings of democracy where it was created in was built by slave labor? Is the land where a Supreme Court can enact a Separate, but Equal ruling as law which gave license to the many of the deficiencies we continue to see passed down from generation to generation to this very day? The America that gave ordinance to Jim Crow and the likes of such is not the country I want “My Country” to return to. Do you?

Despite the examples of the good America has to offer, there are many examples of the evils America has birth. This land is not exclusively yours, nor is it of a specific racial group, unless you want to talk to our Native American friends. So if it’s not about race, then what is it then?

Now you must forgive the academic eloquence of this Black liberal as you called me, but sarcasm aside, I appreciate the compliment. I will always accept any criticism that refers to me as speaking with academic eloquence. I know your intent wasn’t to compliment, but thanks anyway for the unintentional compliment.


5 thoughts on “Conservative Gradualism

  1. I’ve been thinking a lot about Republicans of late. No doubt, the are the party of No. But I keep thinking about the past … two parties, each with moderates, each with wings (left or right). There seemed to be enough to establish a common ground, and probably leaving both the left and right grumbling.

    Today, the Republican middle is only a thin slice, thus the party has shifted to being more conservative — but as the their majority especially demonstrated from 2000 to 2006, their stance is only on paper and NOT in action.

    I have not forgetten John Boehner’s “we lost our way’ description … no sh#@ Sherlock! So now, an unquestionable minority in Washington, the take a party-first, no-common-ground approach.

    Of course the Dems aren’t saints, and they have a greater split between their moderates and their wing (left). At least the moderates are trying to act as a balancing, compromising force.

    Given the continued “no” from one side, the Dems are facing the dilemma of going alone … thus focusing on appeasing their moderates … but I’m not sure that will be enough to capture the countries center because the center is not being fully represented.

    1. I absolutely agree. I still have my analysis on the Democrats coming. Over the past two weeks I’ve been trying to answer or illustrate in detail where I believe the GOP has lost its way and continue to run towards, because it’s the same thing that the Democrats use to suffer with and still has elements of today, although not to the same extent as what we’re seeing in the GOP. The Democrats suffer with gradualism, but I’m not going to give away an upcoming post this time. The DNC must learn to be more discipline and stand-up and speak out more. Can’t please everyone all of the time.

      I’ve seriously considered taking a shot at Congress, but I know that if I ever got elected I would be a one term congressman because I would do the right thing and I would have various special interest groups attacking me for it. Plus if it isn’t right or fair I wouldn’t vote for it. So I probably wouldn’t get elected.

      Going it alone is not so bad if you’re uncorruptible and confident of the results, but the Democrats are corruptible. That comes from a Democratic supporter. Not all are bad and the ones I’ve had the opportunity to meet over the years were generally nice, both Dem & Rep. But there were some that I felt they were hiding something. The President is very close to the type of politician I would be, but need a little Teddy Roosevelt, Jack Kemp and LBJ too. He’s not as evil as many have suggested, but he’s not Superman either as others believe.

      I’m basically near my conclusion with this series of analysis of the GOP. I’ve found it very interesting that those who has normally criticized me whenever I say anything about the GOP have been as quiet as a church mouse. Not a peep. Perhaps I’ll get them going next week when I talk about guns. 🙂 I appreciate those who I know are moderate Republicans who get what I’m saying. It’s not the GOP I don’t like, but what they’re allowing themselves to become. The Democrats will be in the spotlight very soon on here. We’ll see how that goes.

      Thanks once again for reading.

  2. Well almost no one. I forgot about this guy who attempted to insult me, but actually gave me an unintentional compliment. I’m surprised he knew about some of the guys he mentioned. Doesn’t that make him an academic eloquence liberal Black too, although I can assume he wasn’t Black or Liberal by his email. 🙂

    Anyway, had to give him credit, since I referenced him.

  3. You say that if elected to Congress you might be a one term because you would do the right thing no matter what the special interests would say or do.
    But when we set up this country the idea was that a citizen go serve in government, do what has to be done and then go home and get on with their lives, I always heard Jesse ‘The Body” Ventura always say that when asked why he did not run for another term or if he wanted to be a long term member of the Senate.
    But like you said, You might not get elected because you would tell people depending on the issue “No, You are wrong on that issue” no matter weather they are a “Conservative” or a “Liberal”

    I always thought about running say I want I get elected so I can get very rich and live a lifestyle of traveling, fine dining and being treated like a God, by thousands of people. That would be my platform.
    I am a crook. But I am rich and you are not.

    1. What’s up Larry.

      I actually liked Gov. Ventura and generally agreed with him. Where I live today I have a 50/50 chance of getting elected, if I say the right things. I’m a little too willing to question people and/or organizations regardless of who they are. I’m polite and will be respectful as much as possible, but I’m interested in seeking the best solution regardless if it is conservative or liberal solution.

      Of course we all have the opportunity to become corrupt by power and wealth. I would be viewed very harsh towards hate groups of any stripe using my power to shut them down under any reason, which would be unfair. So I agree with you that we all would be tempted. I say that you run for political office. I’ll even help promote you. 😀

Comments are closed.