I've noticed a tendency on Dkos for various posters to dismiss the idea that the Republican party is serious about its wing-nut social agenda. Especially when it comes to issues like abortion and marriage rights, the response often seems to be that Republicans don't really want to do what they say--overturn Roe v Wade, for example, or ban same-sex marriage via a federal constitutional amendment.
Rather, the thinking goes, what Republicans want are the issues, as a means to excite and turn out their base. The conclusion: victory would actually be a defeat for Republicans, because they'd have lost those means to rile up the masses. (For some excerpted examples of this line of thinking, see the end of this diary.)
I have two problems with this line of thinking:
- I'm not at all sure it's correct
- I'm pretty sure it's dangerous (even if it maybe is correct)
and I wanted to start a more focused discussion on these points.
As to #1--is this line of thinking right?:
- Of course, there's no doubt that many Republicans support the party for economic reasons, and are indifferent or hostile to the fundamentalists and their social agenda, even while they're happy to reap fundie votes.
- But for the "they don't really mean it" line of thinking to be correct, you've got to believe that those non- or anti-fundie folks are in sole and secure control of the party. But there are also clearly true believers--not just among the unwashed masses of Republican voters (Thomas Frank's Kansans), but among office holders and party officials as well--who want to overturn Roe and amend the US constitution to deny marriage rights to same sex couples. Which gets us to...
#2 - the dangers:
- We're playing a very high stakes game of chicken if we're counting on Republicans to swerve at the last second--that is, to not carry through on their announced intentions. Even if that is the strategy of some Republicans, we can't count on them winning the day against the true believers.
- Complacency is a big danger here. We run the risk of being so sure the Repubs won't actually try to put an anti-Roe justice on the SCOTUS, that we're not prepared if/when they do. If nothing else, prudence dictates a bit less certitude that the Repubs' goal is "losing on issue after issue" rather than winning.
- An even greater danger is false courage. Some posters have followed the "they don't really mean it" line of reasoning to the conclusion that Democrats ought to call the Republicans' bluff by, for example, sponsoring a constitutional amendment on the right to privacy, which would supposedly drive a wedge among different Republican factions. (I saw this sort of thing proposed a few weeks ago, in a diary I can't now find.) This kind of gamesmanship probably fails as often as it succeeds--often because you've "misunderestimated" the opposition. For a historical example of how "wedge" strategies can backfire, just look to the 1964 Civil Rights Bill. Opponents thought they could split the bill's supporters and sabotage its passage by including a provision to ban discrimination on the basis of sex as well as race. I'm glad that strategy backfired in 1964 and the bill passed with the ban on sex discrimination. But strategically, it's not an example I'm eager to follow.
***
I'll quote here a few examples of posts that follow this line of argument--I'm not trying to pick a fight with the individual posters (and to that end will omit their names), but I do think the following provide some of the more concise and well argued examples of such thinking.
For example, this post to a thread on "Gay Marriage Causes No Harm"
It's not about winning substantively (none / 1)
on any of the fundamentalist bedrock issues.
It's all about making enough hardcore and borderline hardcore Christians--especially lower and lower-middle class blue collar Christians who swould otherwise be solidly in the Dem base--constantly feel as though their values are being threatened, so that they continue to vote against their economic interests.
As the guy who wrote "What's the Matter With Kansas?" states, it's not about winning for the people who pull the strings. They don't really believe in the fundie stuff. For the people who pull the strings in the Republican Party, it's about losing on issue after issue, and then using the resulting sense of fear of the counterculture and coastal elite moral bankruptcy to retain power so that they can continue to plunder the nation.
or this, on a thread "What Does Bush Want from the Supreme Court?":
Corporations would mind [if Bush appointed Scalia/Thomas clones to SCOTUS] (none / 0)
Roe v wade is the way to power.
Once it's overthrown, so is the gravy train.
They have built themselves a fine box.
It will be interesting to see what they do next.