The Republicans win because they know how our society really works.

First of all, in our competitive society it is always a war of all against all no matter what civilized veneer we may put on it. This is drilled into us from KG on till college and beyond. That economic imperative makes it necessary for all of us to think about our own survival first and let devil take the hindmost as the old Adam Smith economists used to say.The Republicans understand it better than Democrats and use it to increase our fear of people mooching off of us.

The second thing the Republicans understand, because they were the ones who shaped it, is that the global economy has loosened the connections between our government and our people to the point where the economic well being of our society is no longer a primary concern of our ruling classes.Sure they may pay lip service to that to get the votes, but they are more concerned about the health of the corporate global players than the cube slaves of our corporations.

This brings me to my third point.Even though countries like China, India and others may say they oppose the invasion of Iraq, they are joined at the hip to many of our corporations and will toe the line laid down by them. In effect, the entire world is now run by a handful of corporations.The U.S. is acting more or less like the policeman that keeps order to ensure that goods and profits flow smoothly from one part of the world to another.

The new Global order is:Keep the profits flowing and the hell with everything else. This is why the Republicans can squeeze our balls ever tighter and our people still vote for them because they have instinctively come to recognize that this is the way the game is going to be played.All the idealism we Democrats keep embracing i.e.truth, transparency, the common good are all out the window in this Brave New World.Here the Golden Rule is: One who has got the gold gets to make the rules.

The Democrats didn't fully understand that the success of Karl Rove's party is really a success in branding. Identity branding is something that the corporate world has understood for some time now. They're not selling a product; they're selling a desired identity, an aspirational identity of the people who consume their product. Nike understands that, Apple understands that, and so do all the successful brands. Karl Rove understands that too.

So what the Republican Party has done is that it has co-branded with other powerful brands — like country music, and NASCAR, and church going, and this larger proud-to-be-a-redneck identity. Policy is pretty low on the agenda, in terms of why people identify as Republicans. They identify with these packets of attributes.

This means a couple of things. One, it means people are not swayed by policy debates. But more importantly, when George Bush's policies are attacked, rather than being dissuaded from being Republicans, Republicans feel attacked personally — because it's your politics. Republicanism has merged with their identity. That has happened because of the successful application of the principles of identity branding.

more: http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/21099/

I am a Democrat because Democrats represent the issues I care about. Therefore I choose to support a group that can act in my behalf.

I couldn't understand why many Republican voters reject programs that would benefit them. They don't define the issues; Republicans allow a small group of people (Neocons, Wall Street, religious zealots) to define the issues for them. Thus the branding. All the Republicans need is to have the message to be verified by Rush and FOX.

Democracy is gone until the brand is tainted.

You would be in jail. That's the disturbing thing.

they thought people were concerned about the economy, jobs, social security, the environment, foreign policies, honesty and truth

but apparantly the Repugs knew that people were really concerned about gay married people having abortions

The end justifies the means. Election fraud, audio help during debates, screening out dissent, manipulating the media, lying, giving the middle class tax dollar to the wealthy (meaning them), whatever it takes, it doesn't matter. They don't have any scruples and they count on others not to question their morals.

They hold the cards of the media, and they're backed by huge think tanks distorting public discourse, and they've got these things not because they are smarter or more aware of what the world is like but because it's a good investment for their wealthy backers who know that Republican ideology will prevent the commoners from grabbing the reigns of power. They prefer to propagate the idea of an 'ownership society' instead of the idea that 'wealth without work' is a deadly sin.

Further, there's direct payback for them, and it's in keeping with their party's principles.

On the left, if there's direct payback for wealthy supporters, it's a violation of the party's principles.

The right believes in cheap labor and the elite are those that have accumulated wealth. According to Kevin Phillips("Wealth and Democracy") 40% of the this nation's wealth is in 1% of the people's hands. Futher 90% of the wealthiest 40% was inherited. Their motivation is to keep this pecking order to push more and more wealth into this 1%. They have parlayed this power into a moral code. The count of dollars decides who should run this country.

I agree that competition is built into our culture. However, "principles" are also built into our culture.

Those two, "competition" and "principles", often conflict, leaving a majority of our people disappointed, confused and angry.

I believe that the "perception management machine" manipulates people's disappointment, confusion and anger though fear-mongering, scapegoating, prideful nationalism and vengeance.

The question is: How do we go about throwing a wrench into the manipulative "perception management machine"?

We have been trying to inform our people. We have protested. We are having continued discussion about how to more effectively communicate in an environment where double-speak/think is dominant.

The Republicans win because they embrace a primitive view of what a society is and are willing to use deception in the form of propagands, outright lying, and violence to achieve it. They believe the top of the hieracharchal chain of human society is inherited wealth and the militarily stong. These are the people who know better than the rest of us. How else, in their thinking, did they get there? It uses religion as a tool to suppress any other view by presenting them as evil or dangerous to the people's way of life. It has taken them years as they have built institutions to implement this view(Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute, Regnery Publishing, etc.) As we all know they now use these organizations to slant and control information to the public through our present media organizations. They actually believe in what they are doing. They truly believe that this is the essence of human society and is an inviolate, and unquestionable truth. Until I understood this, I was continually wondering why you can't get to first base with these people. If you do not harbor this ordering of society, you are the enemy and can be dealt with in any manner. It becomes morally right in their minds because they are protecting the correct structure of human society.

The Democrats must now present the alternate view and have the guts to label it the "right way" and theirs the "wrong way." This involves declaring a "social contract" which deals with human survival. It goes like this: As reasoning creatures with a desire to live together, it follows it is our intellect(of which there are several kinds) not brute force or the power of wealth which is necessary to ensure a meaningful existence and secure our niche on this planet. This calls for an open society where those who are well educated, have strong communication skills, and appropriate life experience should become our leaders. Religion, as Desmond Tutu has said, is neutral, neither good nor bad, but it is what people do in the name of religion which is judged. The spiritual intellect of humans is personal and is not a govermental tool since it is a belief system not based on experience or knowledge. Government is used to deal with what Thomas Paine called our "wickedness,", namely violence, greed, corruption and deception. Government exists to ensure trustworthiness, security, and true freedom(the ability to do what one wants to achieve intellectual and emotional contentment without fear of harm, but always within the law enacted by appropriate representation.)

We also understand humans are tribal, but we can expand the tribe to be as inclusive as possible since this helps to reduce conflicts arguing what belongs to whom. The sooner this includes the whole human race, the better off we all will be. Under the neocon model this is not possible since they believe in a society which is better than anyone else's. This is a call for perpetual conflict. In my own mind I play with this idea. What if somehow this country with all its inhabitants were suddenly removed from the Earth, would the rest of the world get along without us? The answer, of course, is a resounding yes. Therefore we need a unifying model, not one that breaks us up into different tribes. This is a multi-year project to implement and will require a major effort. However, I feel it becomes easier when you know where you are clearly headed and can clearly articulate it. It has the ring of authenticity which is what the other side is using to convince people to join them. We must energetically and convincingly show there is a better view. It will take people of all talents and therefore all intellects with the strong exception of deception and blind faith to carry this out.

How I got here: "The Naked Ape," "Common Sense," biographies of Benjamin Franklin, Jefferson's letter to Adams on "Equality," "Blinded by the Right," "The Republican Noise Machine," "Don't Think of an Elephant," "What's the Matter with Kansas," "Guns, Germs, and Steel," "A People's History of the United States," the economic theories of Henry George, and Scott Ritter.

The Pugs operate on a more primitive basis. They know what motivates the average family (and it isnt high ideals). A full tank of gas in the SUV, cheap electronics at Box Mart, and low wages that keep the price of a take and bake pizza cheap enough to afford for a weekly treat. And some lip service to Jesus.

Meanwhile, we are talking about obscure details in a federal program that they have never heard of, or political philosophy. Our convention delegates are lofty educators and professionals, and theirs are admen and sales reps who have studied the middlebrow to death.

I have to have hope. The right is taking away the means for people to better themselves and at the same time, ironically, telling them they are the salt of the earth, and living the right kind of life. If you do not present them with an effective alternative in a clear, convincing, "authentic," manner, they will continue to support the economic and military hierarchy. I have more faith in my human beings than you express. They have fallen into their thinking by an accident of birth. Pressing on a better model and challenging the present "dog eat dog" existence is our task.

I keep making the point that European middle class has made huge strides by electing politicians who promised new government benefits upfront. They didnt try to swamp them with tippytoe detail like HRC did with the health care plan in 93-94.

Its not that hard. Its been done in over a dozen countries. But the Democratic Party does not understand the basic drives of average people. Ergo, its impossible to overcome the GOP attacks that stop these programs in their tracks.

We have too many teachers and soft-science people in the leadership positions. They deal with the middle class children or misfits, not the adults who pay the bills.

Study the "middlebrow". Refine the method of explaining your philosophy so that the "middlebow" can understand it and relate to it. Then repeat that message ad nauseum.

I agree.

Not so for our competition. I hesitate to say this but we are way too lofty and intellectual.

The GOP has embedded into the mindset of joe blow so well that it knew that the Swiftboaters would make a huge impact. People like Shrum and Cahill, otoh, were so out of touch that they fumbled the ball. Its a problem at all levels.

I'm ready now for the solution. What's next? What do we stand for and can we support it?

They really believe that is all it takes to succeed and that America offers it. It isn't cynical at all, it's what they truly believe. The government's job is to provide security and infrastructure for trade. If the government does that job, the individual has the freedom to work hard and provide for himself. That is what they believe.

The only way you're going to get around that is to show them the deck is stacked against them and that the Republicans, primarily, are doing the stacking.

Calling people "Joe Schmoe" only throws gasoline on the fire. Either they are our fellow Americans or they are not. This is when they start calling us "the blame America first crowd," or some other such nonsense. They are suffering, but have latched on to the wrong solutions. We are going to have to mount a better vision of the society to live in to bring some(not all) around. We are currently at 48 to 49% counted votes. It is only a small percentage more to develop a stronger foothold. At this point if that is achieved we must have what I call a deeper sense of Democracy. It is time to start governing by paying attention to all our citizens, not a precious few. We can not keep acting as if there is only one way to do things, but all solutions need a fair airing.

for a long time, the american people pretended that everything was debated and wisdom prevailed but...it was never like that (see jfk murder, huey long murder, pearl harbour, the 'lusitania' 'remember the maine' abe lincoln murder etc) and the pretense is just no longer being maintained.....bush is a criminal and that's obvious even to his supporters (911 was MIHOP!) so there's no hope except this: 'nothing fail like success when working for the devil'...iow the bastards will eventually fail, and for that alone life is worth living

Republicans represent one part of corporate America, and the modern Democratic Party represents another. The dialogue is restricted by our corporate media, and "left and right" are defined very narrowly. There is no real debate in US politics.

If Republicans faced a real labor movement, they'd either be swallowed or crushed. They're like Sean Hannity- they win "debates" by shutting the mic off.

Jesusland has been established by the Nazi Party. America is gone and dead.

It's time for secession.

party UNITY, we don't!!

Kerry ran one of the most dishonest campaigns in US history. He never challenged the GOP lie that the Iraq invasion was based on 'WMD.' He never portrayed the absence of WMD as a scandalous war crime. He never mentioned the word 'oil.' He never made an issue of Enron, Abu Ghraib, or the stolen election of 2000, or Bush's own AWOL history. He basically pretended that his own personal history as a critic of the Vietnam War 30 years ago didn't exist.

If that is "standing for truth," then I have a bridge to sell you.

Much of your main thesis, though, is true. Another way of phrasing it would be to say that Republicans represent capitalism in a more direct way than Democrats. The R's represent unalloyed "pure" capitalism, while D's advocate a capitalism with some limits on it. The D's version is "reformist" capitalism -- a few gentler rounded edges on what is basically a survival-of-the-fittest system. And the fact that Dems call for some limits is exactly why their position is intrinsically weaker than that of Republicans: it's always possible for Republicans to trump the Democrats by pointing to the seeming contradiction between being proponents of capitalism (as both parties are) and being for a bit of reformism (as only D's are).

Your end statement about only D's being for a bit of reformism seems to ignore that Bush is promising to reform the tax system, to reform the immigration laws, to reform social security. So reform is popular enough for Bush to co-opt the word.
Also, Republicans do not really run on their platform, because it would not sell. What they run on is "character, patriotism, hatred of government and taxes, anti-abortion, pro-gun, pro-prayer, strong defense, etc."
After the convention, the DNC was running "defend America" ads, trying to out-Republican the Republicans. In Bush's acceptance speech he promised to increase student loans, and expand all kinds of social programs, trying to out-Democrat the Democrats. We need to start right now comparing his current budget to the promises in that speech.

I don't quite understand the reference to the "bridge to the 21st century," but the post itself seems all true to me.

Certainly, when Bush uses the word "reform" it's a completely different animal than my use of the same word (as it would be for words like "freedom" and "democracy" etc).

My point there was that a party that stands for no-holds barred capitalism has a certain conceptual advantage, compared to a party that embraces capitalism, but also advocates putting restraints on it. The more "pure" ideology can always cast the "hybrid" ideology as being wobbly & self-contradictory (as indeed, in a sense, it is). Thus, if you're for regulating business, the rightwingers can always say, "What you really mean is that you're not for FREE ENTERPRISE as much as we are. You're just a lover of BIG GOVERNMENT!"

of our economic ladder are lazy bums that need to be thrown off the welfare rolls, any financial or medical help and other socalled welfare programs. This appeals to the vast majority of the middle class who are themselves beset by economic uncertainty and want a scapegoat to blame.Because the corporate bigwigs are out of their reach, they take it out on the helpless bottom rung of our society.

By and large, most Americans now realize that their economic condition is precarious and any moment their jobs and living standards could come to a grinding halt because of the emergence of powerful and more populous countries like India, China, Brazil etc.
The fact that our corporations are going to abandon our society's well being is a jarring reminder that our uniqueness as a powerhouse economy are numbered.A population that is fearful of its own future does not look kindly at helping others advance both domestically and internationally.This is why our population seems to want to kick ass in both the U.S. and abroad.That,in essence, is what I tried to say.
This is what makes the Republicans such a potent force now because they give voice to this pent up rage of a society that has always fancied itself as the Number One and is suddenly being made to realize that there are are many countries who are capable of dethroning us from our perch.

what you said: "If that is "standing for truth," then I have a bridge to sell you."
So I wondered if the bridge you had to sell me was one that went to the 21st century?
I always try for the lame joke, to soften up whatever riposte I make. As in this post, I made a parody from the movie "Hang 'em high".
Maybe a key difference is that Bush promises not to "reform" society or capitalism, but to "reform" government.

bully, bribe, blackmail, threaten and murder

conning and duping the majority of the citizens.

Fear is all they know. Fear of God. Fear of Gays. Fear of change.
Then they go out and vote for the party that panders to those fears.

asshole of the year awards?

maybe if we quit valuing money so much, we can participate in a different game - one where decent people can win.

Society is not naturally competitive. In fact the very reason societies exist is because of our own social natures. We need each other to survive. We desire the company of others like ourselves. We are a naturally social species.

So where does the competitivness come from? It is because we have managed to invent a nonsocial entity and placed it in our midst. Corporations have none of our biological drives to be social. They truly are modeled by social darwinism. There is no impetus for them to cooperate at anything long term.

In order to make the world over in their image to better survive they are naturally going about reprogramming our society to copy their's. They need us to be dependent on them. They need us to subvert our own natural drives to survive and turn them to their need to survive. They will show us the lure of success as defined by them and then put us in competition with one another to achieve it. This breaks down our natural social defenses. In time it makes us over as corporate drones.

Consider the programming on these days. All these so called reality shows. Only they aren't reality. Survivor. If a group of people were stuck on an island they would not be trying to bump each other off. They would be working together to survive. Reality shows create an image of how corporations want us to think. Made over in their own survival of the fittest mold. Seperated from each other we are weak and defenseless. Together we are strong.

This goes to the republican efforts to minimize government. We The People are the government. It is our voice they are trying to silence. Deregulate the corporations and we lose even more control of the beast we have created.

Societies are not naturally internally competitive. We have been taught to be competitive with each other. We have been taught not to trust one another. We have been taught to trust the corporation. Have faith in them. As we are lead to the slaughter.

They win because they lie, cheat, steal, and G-d knows what else! They rely on people's bigotry and hate. They manipulate and cajole. The wrap themselves in false patriotism. They will find the LOWEST denominator and exploit it!! They fight dirty, and expect that liberals and democrats will not defend themselves. They keep democrats on the defensive! This is not ALL Republicans, but it sure does describe a good many of them!