So, I ended up debating some dude online who was a conservative and he basically accused us of wanting to turn the US into Venezuela, and then he asked me what I think would happen if we became a one party state with the democrats taking over?
Honestly, trying to imagine such a scenario, I generally come away with something "better than the status quo" here. When I really think about what the modern right offers the country politically, the answer is "very little". Their ideology is literally the source of most problems with the country. From their religious extremism and racism on social issues, to them basically wanting to bring back gilded age economics on social issues, to them vascillating between neoconservatism and flat out isolationism on foreign policy issues, the modern republican party is an ideologically bankrupt organization that stands for nothing good, and is paving the way for fascism in the past half decade in my eyes. I left them in 2012, believing they were extreme and had little to offer back then and when the rise of Trump, they've only gotten worse, showing a far more flagrantly authoritarian and fascist side of the party. Honestly, if the GOP were to disappear, I can only see good things coming from it.
Of course then this guy accused me of wanting to genocide the right for saying this, while I said nothing of the sort, and since then the conversation has been on how authoritarian I am, but honestly, I did want to turn this into an article, what WOULD the country look like if the republican party collapsed and the democratic party became the dominant political force in America? Obviously, it would depend on how it happens and various factors involved so there is no one right answer, but I would like to cover some of the most likely scenarios to come to mind.
Scenario #1
For the sake of argument, I'm going to assume for most of these scenarios, that what happens here is that the GOP implodes. For one reason or another, the GOP becomes extremely uncompetitive and people flee the party like rats leaving a sinking ship. Maybe the republicans all die of COVID. Or maybe it's 30 years from now and all the baby boomers are gone. Or maybe there's a collective awakening in which people flee the GOP in droves and move left. What would the country and its political environment look like?
Well, the most likely scenario is actually one of my least optimistic but it still seems favorable over the status quo. Say the GOP implodes and becomes uncompetitive. What then? Well, the democrats move in, and now have a super majority. And then...not much happens. The democrats are a complacent centrist party that has no real desire to fix the country, and has no real incentive to try. Say it abuses the situation, and pushes to make it hard for an opposition party to make it to the ballot. Say they become like, say, the democratic party in New York, where the GOP has no real chance of winning, but the democratic party also ruthlessly suppresses third party options from rising, much like Andrew Cuomo did when he was governor?
I mean, that's the most realistic scenario for a "one party state". The dems get like 60-70% of the vote, the GOP gets 30-40%, and is uncompetitive on the national stage. If the dems abuse the situation, which I could see them doing, they could move to ensure their party has a permanent majority in the country, suppressing opposition from both what's left of the GOP and third parties alike.
Socially, the country would look like a very blue state. Abortion and gay marriage are legal. You can change your gender. Hate speech might be illegal, with anyone saying bad things about other races being harshly punished (a negative, but let's face it, possible). Still, all in all, the country would largely be a better place. People would have freedom of religion, but religion would be less central in our lives. And it wouldnt be dictating government policy. There might still be problems with policing, with this being the major issue socilly in this one party state. Police try to arrest a black person and the BLM crowd cries racism, even if it is justified. Immigration might be a contested issue too. Moderates might want some restrictions on immigration while the left wants open borders. Moderates would probably prevail in a uniparty environment.
On economics, we would see somewhat of a leftward shift, but not much. Much like states like NY or California, the democrats will resist the most progressive members of their party's demands for stuff like green new deal or medicare for all. Instead, we would get band aid fixes. Maybe a higher minimum wage. Free or subsidized community college, maybe free parental leave and preK, but most hard line progressive proposals will be denied. Economics will primarily have a more neoliberal approach, where the democrats will attempt to satisfy progressives somewhat while largely ignoring them in favor of business interests, who will form relationships with the party on every level.
On foreign policy, we largely would have a steady hand. While progressives will call for a reduce defense budget and less intervention overseas, the democrats will largely ignore them. They will remain close to our allies, rejecting hard line interventionism, but also rejecting pacifism.
While things would be better, a common thread you'll notice through this whole scenario is that the democrats will grow complacent and largely ignore wide swaths of people. While getting rid of the GOP would have immediate benefits, if we become an effective one party state, with other movements being suppressed, that isn't healthy for the country. While, for the next 36 years or so the democrats will likely do an okay job at representing at least 51% of people, in the long term, no checks and balances and no competition means that the government won't represent the people. At best this arrangement will last a few decades until it becomes horrendously out of touch with people, and then unless other movements arise to challenge it, we will descend into an oligarchy or dictatorship.
The bad side about ANY single party country, is that ultimately there's no competition, and nothing serving as a check to that party's power. It's what allowed, for example, the USSR and other communist states to descend into dictatorship. It's also what gives modern Russia so much political consolidation around Putin. These are one party states where anyone who defies the party are suppressed.
So, don't make any mistakes, a one party state is not a good thing, no matter the party. It will inevitably descend into corruption, and we do want alternatives to exist.
Scenario #2.1
Okay, so, say, the republican party collapses, leading to democratic rule for the time being, but the democrats do not do anything that disallows other parties from existing and challenging it. Well, then we might have a scenario akin to the 1930s, where the Democrats effectively did make the US a de facto one party state for 20 years. The republicans collapsed after Hoover, and they didn't win the presidency again until 1952 with Dwight Eisenhower. The republicans got destroyed in the 1930s, and lost elections up and down the ballot nationwide. The democrats simply had too popular an agenda, finally caving to populist pressure that had been mounting since the previous alignment due to the great depression and the twin threats of fascism and communism. They enacted labor laws, social security, public works projects, etc. Heck, FDR actually had a lot of ideas planned for after WWII that sounded a lot like Bernie Sanders' 2016-2020 platforms, but he died before they came to fruition. And Truman was a bit more moderate. Still, we had real progress in that era, and by the time the GOP resurfaced, they had become far more moderate, essentially refusing to challenge FDR's legacy to come back into power. In the 1960s under Johnson we had civil rights and safety net expansions, but this caused an ultimate schism in this unbeatable coalition, where the GOP started winning in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Still, for a time they were progressive, with Nixon even being for a limited version of UBI for a time. But, ultimately this did not stick as the democrats kept death spiraling in the 1960s and 1970s, and Reaganism became the dominant ideology in the 1980s, which essentially undid much of FDR's legacy. And from then on, the GOP got far more extreme over the past 40-50 years, while the democrats moderated significantly.
Say the GOP starts collapsing. Again, say super COVID comes along and all the anti vaxxers bite it. Or say we fast forward until the 2030s where the demographics that propelled conservatives to power begin to die off naturally. Or say that all of this juicey Trump stuff implodes the party. Or say the country has a mass awakening and abandons conservatism en masse, realizing they were lied to. Well, what happens?
Well, it depends. Hence why I called this scenario 2.1. many of these version 2 scenarios are based on this general premise, but I have different approaches to these things playing out.
But say Trump wins again in 2024, his presidency is a disaster, he is forcefully removed from office, and the party fractures from there. What happens?
Well, the democrats will essentially own the country. The democrats will be a relatively moderate coalition trying to balance the concerns of the far left, but also facing resistance from the center left. And ultimately, the democrats fracture, their tent being too big.
The centrist democrats start bringing in moderate anti Trump fiscal conservatives, and become the ultimate centrist party. These guys represent a more moderate form of fiscal conservatism than the GOP that preceded it, essentially being the party of the center left and the center right. The democrats abandon the left, shifting toward the center. They tend to largely support the status quo, refusing to embrace the old school republicans' mentality toward cutting safety nets, but refusing to expand them either. At best, they might offer moderate band aid fixes that appeal to affluent suburbanites, but they tend to reject large scale changes in either direction.
Socially, these guys are cosmopolitan, and confusing. As it turns out, as the right collapsed, there also began a civil war on the left over social issues. The democrats had always pandered extremely hard to POC and the like in an effort to pander out their demographics, forming an alliance with them while pushing centrism. They maintain this approach, growing insufferable with the post modernism, and driving more "class based" white progressives out of the party. The democrats become somewhat conservative on economic issues as a result, representing their POC constituents views on old school social issues like abortion while being quite left wing on race and identity based social issues. The Christian right has a mild resurgence within the democrats, but nothing like they are today. Again, they're forced to be more moderate because the right collapsed.
On foreign policy, the democrats will remain neoliberal and interventionist. They will seek to continue the Obama-Biden approach to foreign policy of remaining active in the world, without getting too active. However, they might inevitably get involved in tensions overseas in a few decades, driving us to an unpopular war in say, the 2040s or 2050s.
The second party that arises is the progressive party. It essentially is originally made up of disaffected democrats, but quickly absorbs the more populist remnants of the Trump coalition. Economically, it starts out as very progressive, supporting a green new deal, medicare for all, free college, etc., but it quickly gains a nationalist streak as the party pivots to being anti immigration and anti free trade to appeal to the trumpers. it works, and these guys end up flipping from right to left on the basis of being against the democrats and their brand of open border neoliberalism.
On social issues, the party becomes anti post modernist. Taking a more barstool conservative approach to social issues. Basically, they won't be conservative or restrictive on various issues, and they have a libertarian streak. They hate being told what to do, and will be the party of abortion, gay marriage, free speech, etc. They will maintain somewhat of an "own the lib" mentality, with the right and left adherents merging in their mutual hatred of the democratic party, hating how much they police free speech and wanna tell people what to do and how to live. They may be known for crude humor against the other side.
On foreign policy issues, these guys are generally isolationist. The right wingers because they dont care about overseas and they'd rather spend the money at home, while the progressive wing will believe the US are war mongers. While there are inherent contradictions between the left and right factions on various issues, their hatred mutual hatred of the democrats and coming to similar conclusions from opposite sides of the aisle will make it work.
Generally this alignment will last from 2028 until the 2060s, potentially fracturing in 2064 (following the 36 year rule). If I had to guess which party will crack, it will be this one. This party will likely drag the overton window left on economic issues, but over the coming decades, they might become more and more extreme, where by the 2060s they'll be calling for literal socialism or some sort of weird nazbol thing. While the alliance started out good, over coming decades its weaknesses will become apparent and it will schism as it eventually does something that makes that faction too extreme, causing the parties to eventually split and come together again through the 2060s and 2070s. What comes next, we will never know.
Still, I believe that for the time being this will be a good option for America. The worst of the right will be destroyed, and its coalitions will be absorbed into the new two party system, leading toward one party being economically center right, and the other being a form of nationalist left. On social issues, one will be more libertarian, while the other will be more multicultural. Both will functionally be "left" by modern standards, but both will have elements of the right. The democrats being a de facto centrist party, and the progressives being a flair of libertarian. One party will be interventionist, but the other moderate.
Obviously the alignment will inevitably come to its end through a mess of contradictions, but the realignment will relieve the pressure for the next 30-50 years.
Scenario #2.2
In this scenario, the parties split according to a more traditional left-right divide. The republican party fractures, and becomes irrelevant nationwide. The democrats are left with a de facto supermajority. And this is driven by a popular polarizing left wing figure who pulls the entire democratic party to the left. The party starts passing massive public works projects like the green new deal, free college, universal healthcare, etc. On social issues, they become more extreme, being more progressive, sometimes insufferably so. Postmodernism rules the day on cultural issues, although they also maintain a strong libertarian streak, being a lefties' wet dream. On foreign policy they shift toward being more anti war, letting the left wing faction take over, and being more isolationist.
This inevitably forces the conservatives to moderate in the face of repeated defeats both in national elections and down ballot. After several elections, it is forced to run to the center. On economics it becomes a moderate party driven by the old school principles of liberal conservatism. It supports more incremental changes than the left does, and seeks to restrain its ability to implement wide scale changes. Alternatively it could have some elements of yang's forward party with its relatively moderate outlook. Maybe UBI would come back into style among conservatives to counter an expansive and bureaucratic welfare state. Maybe it actually grows to accept the ACA framework and seek to bring it back and privatize the healthcare industry again or simply oppose nationalization. Who knows. Depends where we end up with 50-50 support on both sides roughly.
On social issues, the party would likely abandon religious conservatism, having the same boistrous barstool conservative approach of the progressive party from 2.1. Basically, libertarian, supportive of small government and noninterventionism, and relentlessly anti PC.
On foreign policy, once again, it becomes anti interventionist. Much like the progressive party in 2.1. I mean, in all honesty, in any left wing dominated future, I feel like these social and foreign policy stances will become mainstream. One side will be more libertarian and anti PC, and the other will be more multicultural and PC. One side will be more interventionist and the other more anti interventionist. And on economics one will be left and one will be center.
It's just really a matter of where the coalitions land.
This isn't inevitable. I really am not sure the left WILL win the realignment battle. It seems practically suicidal and determined to lose it and throw away its moment at all costs, and allow the right to potentially shift us right. BUT, these are assuming the right loses. What comes next? And ultimately, one party is going to represent a left position, and the other a center position. However, the ultimate factions depend. if the left remains unified and moves further left, the republicans will come back to the center and embrace a more moderate conservative stance on things. If the left fractures, the GOP goes away, and a third party becomes the second party, we might see something more akin to say, the jimmy dore left arise from the ashes, where the second party is more economically progressive, but more culturally conservative.
Either way, I consider this a win for the country. The right as we know it implodes, elements come back in a more moderate form and either the republicans moderate, or the party implodes causing the coalitions to fracture and be reabsorbed by the two left wing parties that arise from the ashes.
And in both scenarios, I could see this lasting until around the 2060s. By then, the alignment will likely shift or radicalize in some way, or the two parties' politics just become out of touch with the world we then live in, and are forced to shift again, possibly in predictable ways.
Scenario #3.1
In these scenarios, I come up with scenarios that would need to happen for the left to be as insane as the republican guy who inspired this says it is. Basically, somehow the socialist left would have to become dominant and suppress the opposition and turn us into "Venezuela." I honestly struggle to see a realistic scenario in which this happens, but I'm going to be creative here.
In this 3.1 scenario, I'll start semi realistic. In this case, one of the 2.x scenarios happen. And we're now fast forwarded to 2064. Since the 2020s, the left has, shall we say, radicalized. This largely follows the same path way of the right from Richard Nixon's southern strategy all the way to the election of donald trump and him being a borderline fascist.
Here, we start in 2016 with Bernie being a Barry Goldwater type for the left. Fast forward to 2024, and a lot of weird stuff happens. The GOP implodes, Biden retires, and Nina Turner or someone like that replaces Biden as the nominee somehow. Idk, magic. She essentially runs on Bernie's platform, Bernie being too old, but has Bernie's endorsement. She comes into office, enacting a green new deal, medicare for all, free college, as well as setting the standard for what the left is for the next 40 years. In 2032 her VP, let's say Brianna Joy Grey, becomes president. She is less popular, but still quite popular among the left. In 2040, she loses the election to a more aged Andrew Yang, who took up the republican party's mantle, pushing a more conservative progressive vision. While his politics are completely left wing by our standards, the left is deranged by his very existence, attacking him as a conservative trojan horse and acting like the GOP did to the moderate clintons in the 90s. Something something socialism. In 2048 things switch back to the dems, with AOC becoming president after a long stint as speaker of the house. She is less popular, and ultimately by 2056 her presidency is regarded as a semi disaster. The left starts pushing literal socialist candidates after this, while yang's successor is the same brand of moderate conservatism that he established. In 2064, something interesting happens, as the dems elect a literal socialist as president. This guy has full on dictatorial tendencies, mirroring those of Trump in our era. And he essentially uses his powers to enact a socialist coup, nationalize the economy, and start rounding up and killing the opposition. Capitalists have no place in this new world order.
That's....probably the most realistic scenario in which anything venezuela like happens. Essentially conservatism collapses, the new left wing order of things works, but much like the conservatives becomes more and more extreme, where violence erupts in the 2060s and we descend into a socialist dictatorship. It ain't gonna happen otherwise.
And honestly, there WILL be a relatively conservative alternative to this. I chose Yang and his forward movement being the face of the conservatives in 20 years as a hypothetical, but we could talk all kinds of scenarios for moderation. THat's just one scenario. I was just trying to explain how far left the sanders revolution ends up pushing the country where yang becomes a conservative by default, and while he does keep us somewhat center, eventually the socialists win out and become strong men and try to take over the country by force.
Scenario #3.2
Trump wins in 2024, tries to commit a coup and succeeds. But, the left fights back, not willing to tolerate fascism. We get in a civil war, and somehow, the left wins. THey take over, but they also have strong man tendencies, and believe in punishing with jail time or execution anyone who sided with Trump. There is no room for tolerating the intolerant after all.And then they purge the right wingers and we become venezuela.
I dont see this one as happening. This is an insane, fantastical scenario, but it's the only way I actually see us becoming venezuela in under 30 years. Basically, the right would have to do something so drastic a civil war happens and violence erupts, and then the left wins.
Honestly, if the left wins in a more realistic scenario, there's no danger of them going full on socialist any time soon. There are too many conservatives and moderates unwilling to go along with it, and "leftism", especially violent leftism is too small of a faction to be taken seriously.
While I could see the threat of violent leftism arising over several decades, with us potentially hitting a crisis point in the 2060s or something if the left follows the same path to radicalization the right has since the 1970s, I just don't actually see it happening any time soon, if at all.
Scenario #3.3
This scenario follows scenario 1. After 36 years of one party rule, violence breaks out. The democratic party has become unresponsive to the concerns of the people for a while, becoming a de facto oligarchy that pays lipservice to the left but doesn't actually fix problems. This leads to the actual far left radicalizing into socialism, believing that capitalism cannot be saved. These guys then bring the country into civil war, and ultimately win. But rather than ensure the country is democratic again, they become their own oligarchy that even more ruthlessly suppresses political opposition.
Once again, lack of political choices is bad, and by the time this scenario happens, the country will have suffered from decades of stagnation and lack of receptiveness to the American people. This is never a good thing, regardless of the side it takes. And if differences cannot be resolved peacefully, it inevitably leads to violence. So this scenario is a cautionary tale against oligarchy and the system being unresponsive to the needs of the people.
Disclaimer
I know I discussed some potentially violent scenarios here, but I do not endorse any political violence, and these scenarios are completely hypothetical. I'm basically trying to look at different ways that politics can shift in regard to the right collapsing in this country, and the left becoming the dominant political force. If anything I'm trying to point out how absurd the idea of us becoming like venezuela and purging our political opposition are. In most scenarios in which the right collapses and the left remains as the default, I don't see the country becoming violent any time soon. If anything I see more violence if the modern right remains relevant.
Conclusion
As I told the guy who brought up this crazy idea of the left dominating everything, don't threaten me with a good time. In most scenarios, I actually see the right collapsing and the left filling the void to be an extremely positive experience for America. I don't really see the "venezuela" scenarios particularly realistic, and would say that scenarios 1 and 2 are most realistic.
In scenario 1, the US becomes a single party state with only the democrats in charge, and the country essentially looks like a blue state under the current system, where the republicans are uncompetitive, but there is constant suppression of third parties too. This leads to an oligarchy that becomes increasingly out of touch over the next 30-40 years, after which we basically become an authoritarian state with little to no political freedoms.
In scenarios 2, the right collapses, and the democrats split into two parties. Conservative elements are absorbed into either one or both parties, but the dominating politics remains fairly liberal in all cases. This is likely to be a more traditional alignment between two parties that lasts for 36 years before beginning to have trouble and collapse.
In scenarios 3, I discussed more violent scenarios involving us becoming literally venezuela. One involves the left radicalizing into literal socialism, with the party alignment ending with the left becoming outwardly socialist and authoritarian. And the other involves a civil war leading to the left somehow winning and establishing a socialist dictatorship.
I honestly don't think the 3rd set of scenarios will happen, and again, I either see 1 or 2 happening. Both will lead to much more positive outcomes for the next 36 years, but will inevitable end poorly, as most alignments do.
I mean, that's normal. For an alignment to end in 36 years, or start to collapse with a transition period. it's happened periodically every 28-48 years since the inception of our country, and I honestly believe that the right collapsing is the best thing that could happen to this country. if I were to discuss the scenarios where the left wins to battle for the next realignment, I dont see ANY scenario as positive.
I mean, I know that the right winger I was arguing with probably sees me as a terrible person for thinking this, but I really don't think the right has much of value to offer any more. They're bankrupt on all fronts. Their economic policy is basically stuck in the gilded age, trickle down doesn't work, and the only way to solve the economic plight of the people is with some version of "left" interventionism.
On social policy, the republicans might have somewhat of a point on free speech, guns, and maybe immigration, as I can see those being important in the next alignment, even a left dominated one, but the religious conservatism and outright nationalism and authoritarianism has to go. A lot of that stuff is playing with fire, and is at best unnecessarily intrusive and authoritarian, and at worst outright dangerous.
On foreign policy I actually think that the moderate interventionism of the democrats strikes a right balance, and i reject both neoconservatism and isolationism, the one being way too brutish, and the other being naive and soft on our enemies.
Honestly, the best thing for this country would be for the right to collapse. While the left has problems, and the left will be working through these problems over the next 36 years or so if it happens, a split between the center and the left is going to be better than anything involving the modern right. Even if the left inevitably goes too far, I really don't even think the more extreme scenarios I posted here will happen. I think it's actually far more likely that people will abandon the extreme left, and the more moderate conservative party will eventually get a super majority and shift things back to the right. And then they'll screw up and then a new alignment will happen.
I mean, this is how the two party system corrects itself. Every so often a realignment is needed as the two parties fail to represent the needs of the people any more. It's the safety valve of our democracy. And I would actually argue that right now that valve needs to be pulled hard to the left, driving the current "right" out of the overton window. If we shift toward the left becoming literally venezuela, another course correction will be needed. But ultimately, I just see political bouncing back and forth in 36-48 year cycles until some major breakthrough happens with how we organize society.
But yeah, right now, the right collapsing is the best thing that could happen to us. Even if it bites us and we need further course correction later. Generally speaking it's best for the left to be right of socialism and the right to be left of fascism. When one party starts rubbing up against one of the two, the best thing that can happen is when things go back the other way. If anything it's essential for the survival of the republic.
No comments:
Post a Comment