Arkady
President
Sometimes I get the feeling, on this board, that if some novel political issue arose, most of the posters wouldn't know what to think of it until their favorite partisan websites had told them. They'd be at a loss without partisan marching orders, because all they do is parrot talking points provided by the party. That appears to be especially true among the conservatives, who present lock-step opposition to each and every Democratic position. I almost always know what a conservative poster is going to say, before clicking on his comment, simply based on him being a conservative poster. He may present his position more or less eloquently, with more or less nuance and backing evidence, but ultimately I know he'll be more aligned with the GOP than the Democrats, regardless of subject.
So, I'm curious whether my impression is accurate, or if people here really do find themselves agreeing with some regularity with the party they more often oppose.
I'll start. I'm a registered independent, and always have been, but I definitely vote far more often for Democrats. So, I'll highlight the issues on which I find myself a bit closer to the standard Republican position, rather than my more typical alignment closer to the Democrats.
(1) Free trade. I'm definitely not a "no-strings-attached" free-trade evangelist, but I think that generally speaking it's a good idea to lower tariffs and other barriers to trade, despite the labor-market pains that inevitably causes. So, I frequently find myself roughly aligned with Republicans in defending NAFTA and the WTO. I'd handle free trade differently than most Republicans (e.g., putting more conditions on it, to gradually bring the third world up to our standards), but my overall outlook is closer to theirs than to a non-DLC Democrat's outlook.
(2) Unions. I think unions were a spectacularly good thing for America in their time, but I question how much of a positive role they can have going forward. I think that automation, free trade, and just the fluidity of the modern economy make it very hard to shore up improved working conditions through collective bargaining. I turn a different direction, from there, than the Republicans, though, in that I see that as a reason to use the political process to regulate working conditions better, to force the sharing of more of the advantages of productivity gains with the workers. But, like the Republicans, I wouldn't be spending political capital to try to recreate the union successes of prior eras. I wouldn't actively target unions, but I wouldn't waste much breath supporting them, either.
(3) Standardized testing. I'm not terribly zealous on this issue, but overall I find myself more often siding with Republicans than Democrats when it comes to using standardized testing to grade schools, teachers, and students. I think context is important (a teacher with a crop of poor students should get more credit for middling test scores than a teacher with a crop of excellent students does for good test scores), but I'm not at all hostile to standardized testing as a tool, and I don't care that people will "teach to the test." For me, that's an argument for writing really good tests, not an argument for avoiding them.
(4) Nuclear power. I think nuclear power is the only realistic medium-term energy solution that: a) contributes minimally to climate change, and b) can be done on a massive scale without raising energy prices to the point of economic catastrophe. I definitely share more in common with Republicans on that.
(5) Identity politics. I think in terms of individuals, mostly. When I think in terms of groups, it's usually in terms of economic class, not race, religion, ethnicity, or gender. I oppose race-based affirmative action, and I'm strongly skeptical about most efforts at "promoting diversity" and "multicultural education." I believe that if you address poverty directly, you'll do far more to help underprivileged minorities than if you try to address racism, instead (which often just results in benefiting privileged minorities, who become a form of window dressing to cover up the problem). The Democratic Party plays a lot of identity politics games, so I'm probably a bit closer to the Republicans on this.
If I'd put together a similar list fifteen or twenty years ago, I might also include an item about my support for high intellectual standards. I value formal education and serious academic achievement, and put great stock in many of the traditional topics -- the Western literary canon, ancient History, high European culture, etc. I'm a prickly grammarian who cringes at "textspeak," and I'm more than a bit reactionary when it comes to my appraisal of trash TV and the movies of Michael Bay. It's not unusual for me to get caught bemoaning the ignorance of "kids these days." Not all that long ago, that worldview also would have aligned me more with the fusty old conservatives of the Harold Bloom/William F. Buckley variety, as opposed to the cultural relativists, deconstructionists, populists, and radical egalitarians of the hippie left. But, these days, anti-intellectualism has overwhelmed the American right, so I'm more aligned with the Democrats on intellectual matters, despite my traditionalist bent.
Similarly, if I'd put this list together fifteen years ago, I would have listed my preference for market-based solutions, such as cap-and-trade greenhouse gas credits (as opposed to liberal CAFE standards and direct subsidies) and for market-driven healthcare reform (as opposed to UK-style government-provided healthcare). But, again, the GOP has gone from conservative to radical on those issues, so these days I'm closer to the Democrats than the Republicans, despite my positions not having changed.
Finally, please understand that there are a lot of issues where, although I differ with the Democrats, I align to their left, not their right. For example, I oppose Obama's decision not to prosecute Bush-administration criminality (e.g., warrantless wiretapping). But, obviously, opposing the Democrats doesn't always mean finding myself aligned with the Republicans, so those things didn't make my list.
So, how about you? On which issues do you differ from the party with which you more commonly align? On which policy questions do you find yourself aligned with those you more often fight?
So, I'm curious whether my impression is accurate, or if people here really do find themselves agreeing with some regularity with the party they more often oppose.
I'll start. I'm a registered independent, and always have been, but I definitely vote far more often for Democrats. So, I'll highlight the issues on which I find myself a bit closer to the standard Republican position, rather than my more typical alignment closer to the Democrats.
(1) Free trade. I'm definitely not a "no-strings-attached" free-trade evangelist, but I think that generally speaking it's a good idea to lower tariffs and other barriers to trade, despite the labor-market pains that inevitably causes. So, I frequently find myself roughly aligned with Republicans in defending NAFTA and the WTO. I'd handle free trade differently than most Republicans (e.g., putting more conditions on it, to gradually bring the third world up to our standards), but my overall outlook is closer to theirs than to a non-DLC Democrat's outlook.
(2) Unions. I think unions were a spectacularly good thing for America in their time, but I question how much of a positive role they can have going forward. I think that automation, free trade, and just the fluidity of the modern economy make it very hard to shore up improved working conditions through collective bargaining. I turn a different direction, from there, than the Republicans, though, in that I see that as a reason to use the political process to regulate working conditions better, to force the sharing of more of the advantages of productivity gains with the workers. But, like the Republicans, I wouldn't be spending political capital to try to recreate the union successes of prior eras. I wouldn't actively target unions, but I wouldn't waste much breath supporting them, either.
(3) Standardized testing. I'm not terribly zealous on this issue, but overall I find myself more often siding with Republicans than Democrats when it comes to using standardized testing to grade schools, teachers, and students. I think context is important (a teacher with a crop of poor students should get more credit for middling test scores than a teacher with a crop of excellent students does for good test scores), but I'm not at all hostile to standardized testing as a tool, and I don't care that people will "teach to the test." For me, that's an argument for writing really good tests, not an argument for avoiding them.
(4) Nuclear power. I think nuclear power is the only realistic medium-term energy solution that: a) contributes minimally to climate change, and b) can be done on a massive scale without raising energy prices to the point of economic catastrophe. I definitely share more in common with Republicans on that.
(5) Identity politics. I think in terms of individuals, mostly. When I think in terms of groups, it's usually in terms of economic class, not race, religion, ethnicity, or gender. I oppose race-based affirmative action, and I'm strongly skeptical about most efforts at "promoting diversity" and "multicultural education." I believe that if you address poverty directly, you'll do far more to help underprivileged minorities than if you try to address racism, instead (which often just results in benefiting privileged minorities, who become a form of window dressing to cover up the problem). The Democratic Party plays a lot of identity politics games, so I'm probably a bit closer to the Republicans on this.
If I'd put together a similar list fifteen or twenty years ago, I might also include an item about my support for high intellectual standards. I value formal education and serious academic achievement, and put great stock in many of the traditional topics -- the Western literary canon, ancient History, high European culture, etc. I'm a prickly grammarian who cringes at "textspeak," and I'm more than a bit reactionary when it comes to my appraisal of trash TV and the movies of Michael Bay. It's not unusual for me to get caught bemoaning the ignorance of "kids these days." Not all that long ago, that worldview also would have aligned me more with the fusty old conservatives of the Harold Bloom/William F. Buckley variety, as opposed to the cultural relativists, deconstructionists, populists, and radical egalitarians of the hippie left. But, these days, anti-intellectualism has overwhelmed the American right, so I'm more aligned with the Democrats on intellectual matters, despite my traditionalist bent.
Similarly, if I'd put this list together fifteen years ago, I would have listed my preference for market-based solutions, such as cap-and-trade greenhouse gas credits (as opposed to liberal CAFE standards and direct subsidies) and for market-driven healthcare reform (as opposed to UK-style government-provided healthcare). But, again, the GOP has gone from conservative to radical on those issues, so these days I'm closer to the Democrats than the Republicans, despite my positions not having changed.
Finally, please understand that there are a lot of issues where, although I differ with the Democrats, I align to their left, not their right. For example, I oppose Obama's decision not to prosecute Bush-administration criminality (e.g., warrantless wiretapping). But, obviously, opposing the Democrats doesn't always mean finding myself aligned with the Republicans, so those things didn't make my list.
So, how about you? On which issues do you differ from the party with which you more commonly align? On which policy questions do you find yourself aligned with those you more often fight?
