America has always rejected fanaticism, especially since WWII. We are supposed to be E pluribus unum – out of many, ONE. Now, the right wants America to be E unum pluribus – out of ONE, many.
The why is kind of hard to pin point and I would probably say someone with a higher degree in poli sci could answer better.
However, I just wanted to point out that they don’t see it as fanatical. They truly believe the left to be evil and doing demonic rituals. I’m almost willing to say they have delusional disorder or symptoms of light psychosis. Shits wack
deleted by creator
Fanatics don’t see themselves as fanatical.
It’s also worth mentioning that Russia and China have been caught manipulating online conversations, spreading misinformation, etc. The USA does it too, and probably a lot of countries. One of the most effective ways to gain geopolitical ground is to spread political division within your rival.
Internet makes that easy, especially when profits line up. Creating information bubbles and ragebait pays the bills.
You can go back as far as you want but I think the current situation is because they got routed in the 2008 election and decided that openly courting the worst people in society was their only option. There’s always been racists and conspiracy theorists in America — see The John Birch Society, for one of many examples — but parties didn’t openly court them, at least without plausible deniability. Maybe a wink and a nod but not open courtship.
So, after 2008, Republicans started saying the quiet parts out loud because they were desperate. They — especially Mitch McConnell, in my opinion — thought they could control the beast they unleashed but, it turns out, that isn’t how unleashing beasts works. It started with the Tea Party and pretty quickly escalated into a situation where “moderate Republican” became an oxymoron. And then Trump came along yelling the formerly quiet parts and that was that.
IMHO 2012 was the one that really broke their brains. The tea party types tried to get various firebrands on the ticket, but end up having to support Romney. Hey, at least he’s a squeaky-clean telegenic millionaire pushing the most severe conservative fiscal policies! Proceeds to get stomped by the Obama campaign so bad that Karl Rove couldn’t believe it as it was happening. THEN the establishment GOP flirts with moving to the center on immigration. The backlash against that on the right, supercharged by the mainstreaming of mobile social media (plus social justice protests and the looming Clinton campaign) was what fueled the rise of Trump.
Add to that that they simply don’t have any rational arguments. They have no program and no plan. On most real issues there is a broad consensus among the American public towards progressive positions. All the right wingers have is hate, resentment and weaponised stupidity.
Buddy sent me this link. I’m a professional social scientist who works in this area. There’s a lot, but I’m gonna focus on two things.
- Donald Trump, 2) Slanted elections
- Donald Trump. He has been the de-facto party leader since his nomination for the presidency in 2016. He has repeatedly endorsed and encouraged violence among his supporters, culminating with the January 6 Capitol Attack. And he hasn’t stopped. (The opinions and beliefs of leadership trickle down to shape the beliefs of their supporters–see an example here. Despite many of their misgivings, one of three things happened to Trump’s GOP opponents: -A) They voluntarily left elected office (Bob Corker) -B) They were punished for criticizing him (Liz Cheney), or -C) They fell in-line (Ted Cruz). Those who left the GOP or were forced out have been replaced by more extreme leaders yet–folks like Marjorie Taylor Greene. Few left in the GOP openly challenge Trump because they’ve seen what happens to those who do. So there’s no one of much influence within the GOP capable of leading a credible anti-Trump charge.
- The GOP is better shielded from the electoral consequences of extremism than Democrats. Owing to aggressive partisan gerrymandering after Republicans swept statehouses in 2010, MANY state and U.S. House districts were drawn to maximize the number of uncompetitive elections that would all but ensure Republican majorities. You see this in many states that are very competitive at the state level like North Carolina and Wisconsin, but Republicans have locked up enough statehouse seats to retain control of legislatures, even when most of the state’s vote went to Democrats. Uncompetitive elections mean that incompetent, corrupt, and extreme candidates who alienate most voters can still defeat moderate consensus-builders. What happens is Democrats have to run candidates with exceptional cross-appeal (i.e., moderate consensus-builders) if they want even slim electoral wins. Meanwhile, Republicans can hold onto those majorities without having to moderate.
This answers the question of why republican politicians are behaving the way they are, but not the republican voters.
Presumably none of these people would have any power were they not voted in, even with gerrymandering.
Can you give another answer focusing on the average republican voter as well?
first-past-the-post voting artificially limits the number of viable political parties. This reduces the competition in the electoral system, reducing the quality of the representation across the political spectrum.
During WWII the United States government rounded up tens of thousands of people, including many US citizens, and put them in internment camps because they looked sort of similar to the people who bombed pearl harbor. Why? Because fear is a powerful drug and when people are afraid, logic tends to go out the window, if there was any logic to begin with. If you pay attention to conservative rhetoric, you’ll notice that much of it is intended to stoke fear, while inserting themselves as the solution. They do it because it works.
Way out in the Arkansas Delta, in a soybean field 50 miles from anywhere, there is a memorial where one of these internment camps stood. If you aren’t looking for it, you’d probably drive right by it unnoticed. All around the camp there are these little voice boxes that you push a button on and it explains what you’re looking at. The voice providing the narration is none other than George Takei who was held there with his family as a child. Spend a little time at a place like this and it will quickly disabuse you of the notion that America has always rejected fanaticism.
There was also the very real fear of spies during WWII. Not that at all excuses interment camps.
Because Conservativism is not an ideology. It’s narcissism dressed in a stoic costume. Conservatives believe themselves to be righteous, so they support policies and legislation that benefit themselves. They gain followers by promoting a sense of belonging so they can defend the self and attack the other. There is no lie to brazen, no hypocrisy too obvious, no depth too low for a conservative seeking power, because they are justified by their identity. If the conservative is good, then anything the conservative does or says is good while they are doing it or saying it.
When they can no longer hold power through politics, they always fall back on fascism and bigotry.
We have never rejected fanaticism.
The revolution was built on fanatical ideas and ideals of American exceptionalism and where was propaganda to support that.
The civil was started primarily because the wealthy didn’t want to give up free labor (slaves) but a lot of individuals supported it because they felt the big scary northern government was attacking their homes and they had to defend them and their way of life (still, slavery,).
Pretty much every war is sold based on fanaticism. The Spanish American war was wholesale created by yellow journalism. The world wars were a bit different because America was very isolationist then and it needed a push.
Overall America isn’t an exception here. Most humans need to be fanatical to really do big things like war or revolution.
Actually a lot of the southern secession was built on the so called conserstone of the Confederacy that maintaining a racial heirachy of white supremcey was the only way to preserve the white race and avoid total violent retribution from the freed slaves.
And I mean the latter idea really wasn’t crazy most slave rebellions had very very bloody, because obviously they would be (and very justifiably so).
I think it’s important to question the idea that the US has “always rejected fanaticism”. Sure, our state doesn’t want to be viewed that way. I just think that looking at our history shows a lot of fanatic shit, from the way settlers treated the native population, to all of our conflicts in the 1900’s to now.
Mention the concept of a daily stand-up pledge of allegiance in schools in any other democracy and get laughed at.
Hell, in the inter-war period, mainstream America was even generally pretty comfortable with…uh…if not actual fascism, at least things that looked and sounded a lot like fascism.
It helps them ignore actually doing good things for their constituents. Identity politics is what fascists use to work voters into a frenzy to manipulate them into voting for them in order to sneak extreme corporatism into office.
Because they reject facts, logic, and reason at every opportunity. When you’ve kicked those things to the curb, all that’s left is fanaticism and blind faith. Plus, fanaticism allows you to be an inconsistent, unpredictable hypocrite without consequence. You can dictate rules without being bound by them. It’s the juvenile, irresponsible definition of “freedom”.
Much of the world is moving in that direction. The many crises of recent years and an uncertain future outlook for humanity are fertile ground for extremists promising easy solutions and “going back to the good old days”.
Create the problem, sell the solution.
Fanaticism is overcompensation for doubt. They’re afraid.
Yep this. They are afraid that their way of life is being threatened… Just like the other fanatics There are religious fanatics, sporta fanatics, Independent fanatics prepping for the aliens to come and kill them, etc. Mobs are dangerous no matter the flag they wave.
The rejection of fanaticism went out the door along with E Pluribus Unum in the 50’s when the Christian nationalists forced their religion on the national motto. Then over the next decade black people were lynched and attacked with fire hoses when they were asking for basic rights.
They also started conversion camps where they emotionally and sometimes physically and secually abuse minors in conversion camps to attempt to change sexual orientation.
I believe it was Nixon who helped foem fox News to pull the Republicans further right and we’ve been seeing the consequences of that.
Basically the fanaticism has always been there, but with the internet and social media, it’s easier for them to make their voice heard.
America has always rejected fanaticism
lol. Let’s see: fought a war to keep slavery, Jim Crow, KKK, Scientology, Kenneth Copeland, the Bakkers, the Mormons, National rifle association, survival preppers — seems to me that the opposite is true.
“Survival preppers” lol. My year worth of food and water made the pandemic extremely un stressful for me. I did miss toilet paper tho.
I think it’s because they’re cowards. They have been scared into believing that the boogeyman exists, and brainwashed into believing that it’s everyone that disagrees with them.
And when those doing the brainwashing promises to be the hero that will slay the boogeyman- well, I’d image the cowards will do just about anything to make that happen.
No one likes a boogeyman. Especially cowards that believe in them.
