3 ms·

> since the fundamental ideology is actually opposed to the idea of well-functioning social institutions with mutual accountability A charitable interpretation

> since the fundamental ideology is actually opposed to the idea of well-functioning social institutions with mutual accountability A charitable interpretation of Republican "fundamental ideology", as it were, would be that they prefer more well-functioning social institutions at lower levels of government, closer to the people those institutions are meant to serve. It would make sense than beyond just a publicity stunt to lower federal taxes and have states and localities tax more. I can't take you seriously if you're claiming that one of the two major parties in this country isn't interested in the well-being of the country.

wwweston 4y ago
There was a point where I would have held the charitable reading of Republican ideology and I still know some people who identify with the party who probably understand their own position this way. But at this point, no, I don't believe that's actually what's animating it. Selective election denialism is as nihilistic about local institutions as it is about national ones, while theories about state legislatures overridding citizen ballots sure isn't moving things closer to the people. Whether you can take me seriously isn't any particular concern of mine, whether you can take the actual underlying topics seriously is the primary matter of concern.
- bb88 4y ago
  Republicans have mostly lost their ideological way it seems like. They seem to just be against anything the Democrats are for these days. The J6 response from the Republicans is the hallmark about power and politics in the party these days. Law and Order is fine long as it's only applied Biden's son or Hillary Clinton.
  - slowmovintarget 4y ago
    > They seem to just be against anything the Democrats are for these days. This. This was the problem with Democrats for a long time. They weren't for anything, they were just against Republicans. Republicans in government used to be well-educated and their main ideological thrust was based on a set of principles of limited government, free-market capitalism, and maximum agency of the governed. They fell short of this ideal, but the ideal was there. Not any more. They're doing stupid symbolic things like this resolution to "get them Democrats" not to actually fix anything, and not as a matter of principle. Part of the problem is any conservative leaning person of any intelligence or reasonable level of education doesn't go into government, they go into business. We end up stuck with bozos like we have now. This move to abolish the IRS is as much theater as the move to "abolish" daylight savings time in the U.S. which never goes beyond submission of a bill. If they'd backed this with something like a flat tax, that would have been a bold move, even semi-realistic. But this is circus fare.
    - jrs235 4y ago
      They would have and could have done it when they controlled the House, Senate, and Whitehouse 4 years ago. But they aren't seriously about getting things done, just optics. Edit: When they controlled all three during the beginning of the previous President's time in office. Still waiting for infrastructure [week] to end and I'm still waiting to see what the Republicans ACA replacement will be... SMH
    - ashwagary 4y ago
      This political posturing will probably ensure an increase in support come election time. People are getting savaged by inflation while the Democrats want the IRS to hire more agents that have a habit of targeting the middle income and poor because they are low hanging fruit.
      - esarbe 4y ago
        Please stop spreading such nonsense. They don't have "a habit of targeting the middle income" people because they are low hanging fruits. They currently target middle income people because the lack the funds to go after the affluent and the wealthy and the obscenely rich. That's what the additional funds is trying to rectify. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-20/super-rich-aren-t-getting-audited-as-much-new-irs-data-show https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-20/super-ric...
        ashwagary 4y ago
        >They don't have "a habit of targeting the middle income" people because they are low hanging fruits. >They currently target middle income people because the lack the funds to go after the affluent and the wealthy and the obscenely rich. Low-hanging fruit: The obvious or easy things that can be most readily done or dealt with in achieving success or making progress toward an objective. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/low-hanging%20fruit https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/low-hanging%20fru... It's not nonsense, it's the reality. Additionally, do you really believe US corruption is minor enough that politicians will target the major donor class for tax violations en mass?
theironhammer 4y ago
[dead]
jfengel 4y ago
A charitable interpretation of Republican "fundamental ideology", as it were, would be that they prefer more well-functioning social institutions at lower levels of government, closer to the people those institutions are meant to serve. But that's not what this does. This doesn't do anything to transition power away from the federal government. It just makes it impossible for the federal government to do its job. That doesn't prove that they're not interested in the well-being of the country, but only because they know this won't succeed. If they thought it could pass, it would be wildly irresponsible. Instead, all we know is that at this moment they've chosen to make a grand and pointless gesture instead of actually governing.
- kodyo 4y ago
  > It just makes it impossible for the federal government to do its job. Where do I sign up?
  - timeon 4y ago
    If you guys are going to loose your federation then you are going to be less relevant in world stage.
    - kodyo 4y ago
      Most of the people I know and care about are within 10 miles of my house. I don't care about my town's relevance on the "world stage," whatever the heck that means to you.
  - jfengel 4y ago
    Here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somalia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somalia I'd refer you to their web site, but they don't appear to have one.
    - kodyo 4y ago
      [flagged]
- 4y ago

wwweston 4y ago

There was a point where I would have held the charitable reading of Republican ideology and I still know some people who identify with the party who probably understand their own position this way. But at this point, no, I don't believe that's actually what's animating it. Selective election denialism is as nihilistic about local institutions as it is about national ones, while theories about state legislatures overridding citizen ballots sure isn't moving things closer to the people. Whether you can take me seriously isn't any particular concern of mine, whether you can take the actual underlying topics seriously is the primary matter of concern.

bb88 4y ago
Republicans have mostly lost their ideological way it seems like. They seem to just be against anything the Democrats are for these days. The J6 response from the Republicans is the hallmark about power and politics in the party these days. Law and Order is fine long as it's only applied Biden's son or Hillary Clinton.
- slowmovintarget 4y ago
  > They seem to just be against anything the Democrats are for these days. This. This was the problem with Democrats for a long time. They weren't for anything, they were just against Republicans. Republicans in government used to be well-educated and their main ideological thrust was based on a set of principles of limited government, free-market capitalism, and maximum agency of the governed. They fell short of this ideal, but the ideal was there. Not any more. They're doing stupid symbolic things like this resolution to "get them Democrats" not to actually fix anything, and not as a matter of principle. Part of the problem is any conservative leaning person of any intelligence or reasonable level of education doesn't go into government, they go into business. We end up stuck with bozos like we have now. This move to abolish the IRS is as much theater as the move to "abolish" daylight savings time in the U.S. which never goes beyond submission of a bill. If they'd backed this with something like a flat tax, that would have been a bold move, even semi-realistic. But this is circus fare.
  - jrs235 4y ago
    They would have and could have done it when they controlled the House, Senate, and Whitehouse 4 years ago. But they aren't seriously about getting things done, just optics. Edit: When they controlled all three during the beginning of the previous President's time in office. Still waiting for infrastructure [week] to end and I'm still waiting to see what the Republicans ACA replacement will be... SMH
  - ashwagary 4y ago
    This political posturing will probably ensure an increase in support come election time. People are getting savaged by inflation while the Democrats want the IRS to hire more agents that have a habit of targeting the middle income and poor because they are low hanging fruit.
    - esarbe 4y ago
      Please stop spreading such nonsense. They don't have "a habit of targeting the middle income" people because they are low hanging fruits. They currently target middle income people because the lack the funds to go after the affluent and the wealthy and the obscenely rich. That's what the additional funds is trying to rectify. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-20/super-rich-aren-t-getting-audited-as-much-new-irs-data-show https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-20/super-ric...
      - ashwagary 4y ago
        >They don't have "a habit of targeting the middle income" people because they are low hanging fruits. >They currently target middle income people because the lack the funds to go after the affluent and the wealthy and the obscenely rich. Low-hanging fruit: The obvious or easy things that can be most readily done or dealt with in achieving success or making progress toward an objective. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/low-hanging%20fruit https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/low-hanging%20fru... It's not nonsense, it's the reality. Additionally, do you really believe US corruption is minor enough that politicians will target the major donor class for tax violations en mass?

theironhammer 4y ago

[dead]

jfengel 4y ago

A charitable interpretation of Republican "fundamental ideology", as it were, would be that they prefer more well-functioning social institutions at lower levels of government, closer to the people those institutions are meant to serve. But that's not what this does. This doesn't do anything to transition power away from the federal government. It just makes it impossible for the federal government to do its job. That doesn't prove that they're not interested in the well-being of the country, but only because they know this won't succeed. If they thought it could pass, it would be wildly irresponsible. Instead, all we know is that at this moment they've chosen to make a grand and pointless gesture instead of actually governing.

kodyo 4y ago
> It just makes it impossible for the federal government to do its job. Where do I sign up?
- timeon 4y ago
  If you guys are going to loose your federation then you are going to be less relevant in world stage.
  - kodyo 4y ago
    Most of the people I know and care about are within 10 miles of my house. I don't care about my town's relevance on the "world stage," whatever the heck that means to you.
- jfengel 4y ago
  Here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somalia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somalia I'd refer you to their web site, but they don't appear to have one.
  - kodyo 4y ago
    [flagged]
4y ago