In response to:

Time for Introspection, but Not Surrender

Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:42 AM
Let me start by saying, the country has been lost to the secularists and the hard left, this is NOT a center-right country anymore, thats a crock of BS and it ought not ever be repeated again. To call a country that re-elects a Marxist, knowing damn well who and what he is, a center-right country is patently absurd, and I don't care what the polls say. We are dealing with ignorance, people who don't understand what it means to be liberal or conservative, so they don't know how to answer that question, they only know there is a negative connotation attached to "liberal" so they don't want to call themselves one, but thats exactly what any person who voted for Barack Obama is ... every last one of them. WE HAVE LOST THE COUNTRY
Think Freely Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 2:29 AM
Dobermite,

Your analysis is very good. We must revive the moral foundations of our country. The only place that can be done is through the church. But I agree that producing movies - which are the language of today - is desperately needed!
Panda Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 5:16 AM
Dobie,

That was a terrific analysis. My only disagreement is this: Turning the tide only has to take decades if we continue making the same mistakes. We can turn the tide quickly--as in, by 2014--if we throw out our current model and adopt a correct one.

But as I said, your analysis is one of the best I've ever read.
a Concerned American Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 5:21 AM
'Dobermite' forgot one other factor that contributed to this outcome:

- The 26th Amendment, enacted in 1971, which set the minimum voting age at 18. Passed while America was still fighting in Vietnam, the fuzzy reasoning behind this was that if 18-year-olds were old enough to fight and die in a foreign country, they were old enough to vote. Unfortunately, its passage dovetailed with the cultural Marxist Left's "long march through the institutions," with the effect that forever after, this demographic would almost entirely vote to the Left of every issue - economically, socially and culturally.
a Concerned American Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 5:26 AM
The warning signs of the true intent of this amendment came with the 1976 Presidential campaign which saw Jimmy Carter defeat Gerald Ford. While backlash over the Watergate scandal is often cited as a factor, another factor was the 18+ voting bloc. It was also an early example of popular culture shaping election outcomes, via Chevy Chase's skewering of Ford as a brainless, oafish stumblebum on what is now "Saturday Night Live" - the first of many examples of that show directly influencing the outcome of Presidential elections (think Tina Fey's Sarah Palin impression).
a Concerned American Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 5:30 AM
Coupled with the Left's takeover of academia, Hollywood and the media, the granting of the vote to 18-year-olds was a serious and disastrous mistake for the country and the direction thereof - on a par with two other notorious social experiments, Prohibition (where the rise of organized crime and, especially, the 1929 St. Valentine's Day Massacre convinced its advocates that it was a complete failure) and states' lowering the minimum legal drinking age to 18 in the late 1960's and early '70's (which saw drinking-related traffic accidents and fatalities shoot up through the roof).
a Concerned American Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 5:33 AM
The 26th Amendment was a mistake in another important way: 18-year-olds' brains are not as fully formed as older voters', and thus, as with every other decision they make (i.e. reckless and impulsive, with no thought for the future), hormones and emotions are the guiding factors in what path they choose when going to the voting booth. And then there's the overall infantilization of that society, with people in the 18-25 age group increasingly living off their parents and in their mama's basement, and not even remotely involved in some kind of occupation that would make them enough money to live independently; coupled with the rise of the celebrity culture which has also had a deleterious effect on that age group's voting patterns.
a Concerned American Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 5:37 AM
But back to the 1976 campaign: It could thus be said that it was partly the 18-year-old vote that ended up bringing us double-digit inflation, high unemployment and economic stagnation (i.e. "malaise"), long lines at gas stations, military weakness that practically invited the 1979 Iranian hostage crisis, and the beginning of the rise of radical Islam via Carter's ushering in the Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran. In addition, 18-year-olds were a major factor in Bill Clinton's 1992 and 1996 victories - and all the scandals (and defining deviancy down) that accompanied his Presidency.
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 8:44 AM
Thanks Panda

Excellent points, aCA, tremendously insightful.
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 8:44 AM
Thanks Panda

Excellent points, aCA, tremendously insightful.
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 8:47 AM
Oops, I missed think freely ... thank you too, TF
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:43 AM
The only questions that remain; how did we lose the country and is there any chance we can get it back?

We lost the country for a variety of reasons and I will list some of them.
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:43 AM
1. 1965 Immigration Act and the changing demographics.

In the 60's there was a move by the left to promote third word immigration and suppress the more traditional white European immigration, which resulted in Ted Kennedy's 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act, and as is often the case with liberal social engineering it was presented in such a way that to oppose it was racist, a desire to maintain a cultural and ethnic composition that was the basis of western civilization had suddenly been classified as a white supremacist idea, therefore the bill was passed and 45 years later 70+% of whites can vote for the same candidate on the national level and lose, and that trend is only going to continue, by 2050 whites will be the minority.
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:43 AM
At the time some folks tried to warn that this would be the inevitable outcome, but they were shouted down as racists, they were ostracized by a liberal media at a time when there was no alternative (conservative) media to speak of, so the act passed, the floodgates opened and the rest is history.

As for illegal immigration, for a long time, most of the 70's thru 90's, to oppose that was also portrayed as racist, and nobody wants to wear that scarlet letter, so that too went virtually unopposed for decades.

This why we are talking about the changing demographics today and how that is the new reality Republicans have to deal with. In other words we might not even be able to elect George Washington or Thomas Jefferson or Ronald Reagan.
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:44 AM
2. The Cultural Revolution.

Some of us are old enough to remember the 60's counter culture and the cultural/sexual revolution. I myself was only a child, but growing up in Greenwich Village, only a few blocks away from St. Marks Place, it was easy to see the cultural shift that was taking place in dramatic terms.

Inside my home I was watching the Andy Griffith Show and what at that time was still traditional programing, at that time Golden Age movies were still a fixture on television as well, so the America we were was still very vivid, but outside a whole different world was beginning to emerge, completely alien to the one on TV.
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:44 AM
The cultural fabric was unraveling right before my eyes and the social mores I saw on TV were nowhere to be found right outside my window, except with my parents generation. It was as if two worlds were living side by side and they had absolutely nothing in common.

As a child thats how I saw it. I didn't understand anything about liberalism or socialism or marxism. I just knew the cultural paradigm was shifting dramatically and it was happening right before my eyes.
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:45 AM
It was only as I got older that I realized this was a clash of civilizations, a culture war if you will, and the counter culture was winning big. They may not have been winning elections, their candidates may have been getting trounced at the polls, but they were winning the culture and they were winning it in a rout.

It was only later, much later, that I came to realize this was an orchestrated effort to impose Marxism by another means, through the culture after failing to persuade the west in traditional (economic) terms.
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:45 AM
The idea of Cultural Marxism being, the reason why the west has rejected traditional Marxism is because the west is wedded to a Judeo-Christian ethos which blinds them to their own class interests, therefore a breakdown of the culture and a breakdown of the traditional family is essential if Marxism is going to prevail in the west.

For example in practical (not philosophical) terms, married women still vote overwhelmingly Republican, which is to say married women, generally speaking, remain traditional or conservative in their own lives.
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:45 AM
Yes, unlike prior generations they are in the workforce now and not necessarily stay at home moms in the traditional sense, they can't afford to be (though I suspect many would like to be), but they still depend on their husbands and themselves to take care of their families and not government, whereas single women/moms (especially if they have children) are far more dependent on government, even if they work because today two incomes are practically a prerequisite to having all of ones needs met, so they are far more dependent on government than their married counterparts, which is the first step to accepting socialism/marxism, so you can see (in practical terms) where the breakdown of the family translates from cultural to economic.
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:46 AM
This is just one example. There are hundreds more. Marxist theoreticians figured this out a long time ago.

Thus began what Antonio Gramsci called "the long march through the institutions (of the west)."
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:47 AM
3. Allowing the left to control our institutions.

For years we conservatives have complained about Hollywood, academia and the MSM indoctrinating people with leftist dogma and propaganda, but for the most part we never did a damn thing about it.

Why didn't wealthy conservatives start their own version of Hollywood 50 years ago, or 40 years ago, or 30 years ago, or 20 years ago, or 10 years ago, or even today?
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:48 AM
Clearly there are billions of dollars to be made in the movie business, so from that perspective, purely from an entrepreneurial POV, its a lucrative endeavor, just as new (conservative) media is making a fortune (ask Rupert Murdoch about that), but nobody on the right ever thought to challenge Hollywood with an alternative, to tell stories from a conservative perspective, where the leftist (communist) is the villain and not the victim, and the Christian Conservative like Alvin York is someone to be admired, not lampooned, mocked and ridiculed.

You don't think that project would have been successful?

You think millions of Americans like being made fun of and having their values derided?
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:48 AM
You don't think they would prefer to see the truth depicted about who they are and what they believe, rather than a constant caricature that portrays them in the most unflattering light?

Of course it would be successful, just as Fox News has been wildly successful, but conservatives sat on their fat @sses for 50 years complaining about Hollywood's shift to the left (the Golden Age, while sometimes liberal, was mostly affirming of American values), and never bothered to create an alternative.
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:48 AM
We already had a model for this, its called OLD HOLLYWOOD or the Golden Age, and we know it would be successful because it was successful on a grand scale and many of those movies (classics) are still beloved till this day, movies that, again, were largely affirming of American values, what we used to call western civilization.

You think another Cecil B. Demille wouldn't be embraced today? You think the 10 Commandments wouldn't sell?

Oh Really, then how do you explain the Passion of the Christ, essentially a foreign film with subtitles that was one of the most successful films at the box office ever made?
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:49 AM
I'll tell you how, because people are starving for something decent that doesn't mock who they are and what they believe, doesn't caricature them and their beliefs, but is affirming and reverential, so there is a fortune to be made in the more traditional alternative to current Hollywood and that has been the case for 50 years, but no wealthy conservatives ever thought to create such an alternative.

Well if we are ever going to win back the culture somebody better think of it, AND FAST, because as the late Andrew Breitbart said on many occasions and as Marxist theoreticians figured out a long time ago, politics is downstream from culture, ultimately where you are culturally will determine where your society is politically.
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:49 AM
So conservatives better get in the game. This might take a generation or more, just as it took the left a generation to translate a cultural shift into a political shift, but there is NO CHANCE to overcome this political shift to the left until we have done so culturally.

Echoing the smartest political tactician I have ever known, Andrew Breitbart, I'll say it again because it cannot be emphasized enough ... politics is downstream from culture and NOT the other way around.

The same applies to academia and media, though we have finally begun to attack the later with the emergence of new (conservative) media, but its not enough to sit around and whine about liberal indoctrination in academia at every level, starting with K thru 12.
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:49 AM
Conservatives have to do something about it. They can no-longer just accept this as the way it is, they have to demand "diversity of thought" on college campuses and that leftist indoctrination in K-12 is no longer tolerable.

They have to start a movement on this issue that challenges every leftist in education at every level, starting with local school boards, do not mince words, expose the malevolence of these people and out them in every community, and challenge them in local elections wherever possible, and be prepared to battle the local media too, to explain how they are the palace guards for these malevolent leftists, how the media will portray all of their opponents as religious kooks to maintain the status quo.
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:50 AM
4. Restore the Judeo-Christian ethos which was once the staple of western civilization.

Lastly, IMO it is wrong to think you can win over minorities and single women and anyone else who has grown dependent on government simply by promoting free enterprise and job creation, and how that, ultimately is more beneficial to the individual than socialism and free stuff.
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:50 AM
Mitt Romney was the perfect candidate in that regard. In that respect you are not going to find a better candidate than Mitt Romney. For all of my problems with Romney, he made that case and he made it beautifully, and still he failed and failed miserably with these voters ...for whatever reason they were NOT persuaded, so its going to take a lot more than that to win these people over.

Already we have professional politicians and self appointed experts suggesting the GOP will have to swing left, particularly on social issues, to win these people over, but IMO the opposite is true, the only chance we have to win these people over is to appeal to their religious sensibilities.
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:50 AM
For example, we know that blacks and hispanics are mostly opposed to gay marriage on religious grounds. Each time gay marriage has appeared on a ballot, blacks and hispanics have opposed gay marriage in much larger numbers than whites, so they are even more conservative than whites on this issue, and if you study the numbers carefully you will find the same is true on a number of social issues including abortion.

This is where we have to appeal to these people, its our only chance to win them over, because its clear that taking away their freebies and offering economic freedom was not a tradeoff they found particularly appealing.
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:51 AM
Yes, we continue to preach free enterprise because we know its superior to the bondage and financial ruin the statists have to offer, but right now these voters are not going to hear that message until they have been moved by something deeper than politics.

Just as the Cultural Marxists astutely observed that western civilization will not be swayed by Marxism until they have been striped of their Judeo-Christian underpinnings, we must surmise the opposite if we are going to win back those who have been swayed by Marxism.
Dobermite Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:51 AM
This is not going to happen right away, its going to take decades, we didn't lose the culture then the country over night and we are not getting it back over night, but IMO this is the only blue-print that can get us there, what in effect is a counter cultural revolution and a reverse march through the institutions.

Has the nation gone irreversibly blue? Did intraparty disunity sabotage Mitt Romney's presidential quest? Or is there some other explanation for the nation's re-election of a president with the worst record in decades?

 

I received an email from a brilliant conservative friend who wonders whether Republicans can ever win another election and thus whether the nation is forever lost. I ran into a college student at church the Sunday before the election, and despite his strong conservatism and high intelligence, he admitted confusion about the candidates' respective positions after the presidential debates.

My first reaction after...