The following is the opinion and analysis of the writer:
Readers of the Baby Boom generation (1946-64), who followed politics in their youth, will no doubt remember when the Democratic and Republican parties had conservative, moderate and liberal wings. Indeed, many conservative Democrats arguably had more in common with liberal Republicans than with liberals of their own party (and vice versa). While confusing and complex, in that era, party labels were somewhat explanatory.
Today, that is no longer the case.
Currently, these two parties recognize, advance, and abide by only conservative and liberal values and ideologies. They do this with a passion akin to religious zealotry.
To continue to call them the “Republican and Democratic” parties is wrong. It is far more sensible (and accurate!) to retitle them the “Conservative and Liberal” parties.
People are also reading…
The Republican party mirrors conservative thinking, which resists change, tolerates social inequality, upholds traditional morality, and craves security, predictability and authority. Accordingly, this group supports limited government, “traditional” values, fiscal conservatism, lenient gun laws, free markets, strong national defense, strict border control, personal responsibility, lower taxes, deregulation, free trade and individual liberty.
The Democratic party mirrors liberal thinking, which embraces change, rejects social inequality and seeks novelty, nuance, and complexity. Accordingly, this group supports a strong central government, universal healthcare, criminal justice and immigration reforms, racial equality, climate/environmental protection policies, progressive taxation, civil liberties and a strengthened democracy.
That said, consider the opening paragraph of the 2021 Pew Research Center report, Beyond Red vs. Blue: The Political Topology which states, “Partisan polarization remains the dominant, seemingly unalterable condition of American politics. Republicans and Democrats agree on very little — and when they do, it often is in the shared belief that they have little in common.”
Interpretation: Each camp understands the world differently; is sure it alone knows the truth; and wants governance only on its terms.
This inability to find common ground has hamstrung if not gridlocked our collective ability to get things done.
Within the extremes of these two polarized parties, the Pew report found a spectrum of beliefs that provides a clearer picture of American political views.
It found that we are subdivided within our respective parties into nine distinct ideological categories.
Going from most conservative to most liberal, these factions are: Faith and Flag Conservatives, Committed Conservatives, Populist Right, Ambivalent Right, Stressed Sideliners, Outsider Left, Democratic Mainstays, Establishment Liberals, and Progressive Left.
Note the conservative/liberal characterizations.
From where do these different predispositions emanate? Research tells us they are innate components of our personality, as distinctive as other genetic traits. We are cautioned however that these mindsets can be influenced by parents, environment, socialization, and life events; and that these tendences represent probabilities, not certainties.
Research at the University of Pennsylvania indicates the core difference between conservatives and liberals is whether the world is intrinsically hierarchical. It concludes that conservatives believe more strongly than liberals that the world should demonstrate a stratified orderliness.
They observe, “People who score high in hierarchical world belief see the world as full of differences that matter because they usually reflect something real, inherent, and significant. Such individuals often separate things of greater value from things of lesser value. You might imagine that to them the world looks full of big, bold black lines. In the opposite view — held by people with lower scores for this belief — differences tend to be seen as superficial and even silly. For those with this perspective, the world is mostly dotted lines or shades of gray.”
Research has also shown that humans, along with other primates, are tribal (i.e., expressing an us-vs.-them mentality). It confirms that we naturally divide ourselves into in-groups and out-groups. Indeed, think of our joy rooting for hometown sports teams and our desire/need to affiliate with specific religious, social, and political “teams.”
Fortunately, history has also demonstrated that despite these divisions, our “tribes/teams” have nevertheless cooperated to advance societal well-being and bring modernity to us all. Yes, differences can be tempered, and good things can get done.
These same studies, however, caution us that because politicians’ “primal world beliefs” are genetic, efforts at persuasion will likely fail. It is therefore compromise rather than endless unproductive deliberations that political rivals should seek. This will be the key to achieving cooperation between our nation’s two competing legislative factions. Understanding the roots of this diversity dilemma and accepting our differences as irreconcilable, might just help to overcome our social, political, and religious divides. This approach is certainly worth a shot.
(Aside: Our children need to be educated about these inborn differences in values and ideologies. Schools should offer age-appropriate courses on all aspects of conservatism and liberalism.)
Renaming political parties is not the magic bullet that will make government work better. But, giving them titles that correctly describe their values and legislative philosophies is just common sense —and a big step in the right direction.
Gil Shapiro lives in Oro Valley. He was the spokesperson for Freethought Arizona from 2005 to 2016. Contact him at: gdshapiro@comcast.net