5 ms·

The Republican Party isn't stupid, it's inept. It's slogans are rooted in political battles that took place 80 years ago. Do young folk even care about "small g

The Republican Party isn't stupid, it's inept. It's slogans are rooted in political battles that took place 80 years ago. Do young folk even care about "small government"? No, we care about "good government" and "innovation". Dear Mr. Romney, you are pitching to the anti-Roosevelt faction of the country and it is rapidly shrinking. If the GOP pushed an "innovation" platform, they would be much better suited for the next 50 years of politics (copyright reform, low regulation, low taxes, greater skilled immigration). Of course, like 0 GOP people read Hacker News, so I should be leaving this comment elsewhere.

pekk 14y ago
It isn't true at all that 0 GOP people read Hacker News. A lot of people here have a strong interest in reduced taxes, deregulation, and privatization (included in 'small government').
- cbs 14y ago
  A lot of people here have a strong interest in reduced taxes, deregulation, and privatization (included in 'small government'). This is what I hate about political messaging. All of those vague terms are nice and all, but the different ways to implement/achieve them are all over the political spectrum. That is not a refutation of the idea 0 repubs are on HN. I know they're here, but you're merely saying some people on HN happen to agree with some of the vaguest of vague messaging ideals also used by the R's.
  - tptacek 14y ago
    There are multiple people who self-identify as Republicans on HN (contrary to popular belief I am not one of them), but few of them are crazy enough to say so because the spirit of the grandparent comment is correct: HN is very hostile to Republicanism.
  - pekk 14y ago
    There is nothing ambiguous about wanting low taxes, or deregulation, or privatization.
    - cbs 14y ago
      Everyone can say they want that, within a very large subset of the political spectrum. There just happens to be one party within that subset that is really loud about wanting those things. They want those things, and they want it implemented in their specific ways, to benefit their specific financiers. But by no means do they have the monopoly on those laudable goals.
- jacoblyles 14y ago
  I'm sure there are a few GOP voters here (I very publicly endorsed Romney last election, I thought he was a super-competent guy). But there aren't very many movement types. On the other hand, there are plenty of people that pitched in on the Obama campaign here and that participate in liberal media. Ramesh Ponnuru is surprised when I tweet at him with articles that I found here. I doubt anyone that works at National Review reads Ars Technica.
- onetwothreefour 14y ago
  The buzzwords you just used don't have anything to do with the GOP.
  - protomyth 14y ago
    They do at the local and state GOP level. Congress, not so much...
  - pekk 14y ago
    They would be buzzwords if I were actually inclined toward the GOP, but I'm not at all.
- mullingitover 14y ago
  I'm interested in eliminating sales and income taxes entirely. (...and making it up with increased capital gains, wealth transfer, and real estate taxes. Tax the money that people didn't work for.)
  - flyinRyan 14y ago
    You couldn't get further from the republican platform.
gojomo 14y ago
Giant democratic governments have diseconomies of scale. They become more beholden to insiders and professionalized/incumbent interest groups, and less able to assess/follow the general diffuse "public interest". So both "good government" and "innovation" will require "small[er] government".
untog 14y ago
Do young folk even care about "small government"? Yes. I'm not one of those people, but I promise you that a lot of them exist. Your GOP "innovation" platform sounds like a big winner because you like the idea and you surround yourself with people you agree with- as everyone does, don't get me wrong. While there are certain demographic trends that come with generational shifts (decades ago it was racial segregation, now it's gay marriage) concepts like "small government" don't. But when you're living in liberal metropolises you tend not to hear much about them.
- jacoblyles 14y ago
  Good point. The GOP needs to adapt their message to local conditions. There's miles of distance between Scott Brown and Rand Paul, but they both were well equipped to win their districts. Right now, the GOP brand is crap on the coasts but there are parts of the GOP DNA that would show well here. Picking up the Silicon Valley crowd is very important for the GOP. They are wealthy, passionate, and activist. When Obama ran in 2008, hundreds of tech savvy engineers put their lives on hold to build the most technically advanced campaign of all time. The right wing complained for decades about getting shut out of the old media. They shouldn't forfeit control of the new media without a fight.
moheeb 14y ago
Nobody ever tell me what small government is. Does that mean no roads and schools? Smaller police departments? No libraries? I have no idea. To me those words (small government) mean "shady politician". How about a definition?
- saraid216 14y ago
  If it were properly defined, it would get torn apart. It's an ideological banner for disparate, otherwise-opposed groups to unite under.
- pekk 14y ago
  It should mean that the government does less and taxes less, but in practice people have different things in mind which the government shouldn't do. For example, Reaganite Republicans who like the phrase usually favor high defense spending and many who otherwise like 'small government' want the government to be more intrusive with respect to things like abortion and drugs. So it is true that in reality people use this phrase in a very unprincipled way.
thaumaturgy 14y ago
> Do young folk even care about "small government"? It was primarily young people's enthusiasm for Ron Paul in 2007 - 2008 that drove his campaign, platformed as it was on small government values. His campaign principles (and some of its messages) were then co-opted into the current-day Tea Party. "Young people" -- as much as any over-generalized demographic can agree on anything -- seem to understand the value of small government, they just want a specific kind of small government: smaller military, less international presence, more infrastructure and social welfare (both at home and abroad). > Dear Mr. Romney, you are pitching to the anti-Roosevelt faction of the country and it is rapidly shrinking. Conservatism didn't suddenly appear in politics thirty years ago; it has been around, in this country, since before it was a country. In the colonial U.S., the conservatives of the time would have been called "Tories". So while the demographics of modern conservatism might be mostly old white people, they'll either be replaced in a few years with idealistic young conservatives, or modern-day young liberals will slowly age into conservatism. > If the GOP pushed an "innovation" platform... ...then it would no longer be the GOP. The GOP is not simply a group of people who like each-other and regularly meet to decide what they should have as a platform; it is the political realization of an idea, the idea of conservatism. You might as well say, "if the Democrats pushed a 'tax the poor, cut welfare, and abolish the estate tax platform'..."! Conservatism exists for a good reason in society. It's there to act as society's "rudder", to (theoretically) keep it from evolving too rapidly and adopting too many stupid ideas. It can certainly be harmful when it gains a disproportionate amount of influence in a society, as in modern Afghanistan, but it is not inherently harmful -- and it shouldn't necessarily adopt aspects of a liberal platform.

pekk 14y ago

It isn't true at all that 0 GOP people read Hacker News. A lot of people here have a strong interest in reduced taxes, deregulation, and privatization (included in 'small government').

cbs 14y ago
A lot of people here have a strong interest in reduced taxes, deregulation, and privatization (included in 'small government'). This is what I hate about political messaging. All of those vague terms are nice and all, but the different ways to implement/achieve them are all over the political spectrum. That is not a refutation of the idea 0 repubs are on HN. I know they're here, but you're merely saying some people on HN happen to agree with some of the vaguest of vague messaging ideals also used by the R's.
- tptacek 14y ago
  There are multiple people who self-identify as Republicans on HN (contrary to popular belief I am not one of them), but few of them are crazy enough to say so because the spirit of the grandparent comment is correct: HN is very hostile to Republicanism.
- pekk 14y ago
  There is nothing ambiguous about wanting low taxes, or deregulation, or privatization.
  - cbs 14y ago
    Everyone can say they want that, within a very large subset of the political spectrum. There just happens to be one party within that subset that is really loud about wanting those things. They want those things, and they want it implemented in their specific ways, to benefit their specific financiers. But by no means do they have the monopoly on those laudable goals.
jacoblyles 14y ago
I'm sure there are a few GOP voters here (I very publicly endorsed Romney last election, I thought he was a super-competent guy). But there aren't very many movement types. On the other hand, there are plenty of people that pitched in on the Obama campaign here and that participate in liberal media. Ramesh Ponnuru is surprised when I tweet at him with articles that I found here. I doubt anyone that works at National Review reads Ars Technica.
onetwothreefour 14y ago
The buzzwords you just used don't have anything to do with the GOP.
- protomyth 14y ago
  They do at the local and state GOP level. Congress, not so much...
- pekk 14y ago
  They would be buzzwords if I were actually inclined toward the GOP, but I'm not at all.
mullingitover 14y ago
I'm interested in eliminating sales and income taxes entirely. (...and making it up with increased capital gains, wealth transfer, and real estate taxes. Tax the money that people didn't work for.)
- flyinRyan 14y ago
  You couldn't get further from the republican platform.

gojomo 14y ago

Giant democratic governments have diseconomies of scale. They become more beholden to insiders and professionalized/incumbent interest groups, and less able to assess/follow the general diffuse "public interest". So both "good government" and "innovation" will require "small[er] government".

untog 14y ago

Do young folk even care about "small government"? Yes. I'm not one of those people, but I promise you that a lot of them exist. Your GOP "innovation" platform sounds like a big winner because you like the idea and you surround yourself with people you agree with- as everyone does, don't get me wrong. While there are certain demographic trends that come with generational shifts (decades ago it was racial segregation, now it's gay marriage) concepts like "small government" don't. But when you're living in liberal metropolises you tend not to hear much about them.

jacoblyles 14y ago
Good point. The GOP needs to adapt their message to local conditions. There's miles of distance between Scott Brown and Rand Paul, but they both were well equipped to win their districts. Right now, the GOP brand is crap on the coasts but there are parts of the GOP DNA that would show well here. Picking up the Silicon Valley crowd is very important for the GOP. They are wealthy, passionate, and activist. When Obama ran in 2008, hundreds of tech savvy engineers put their lives on hold to build the most technically advanced campaign of all time. The right wing complained for decades about getting shut out of the old media. They shouldn't forfeit control of the new media without a fight.

moheeb 14y ago

Nobody ever tell me what small government is. Does that mean no roads and schools? Smaller police departments? No libraries? I have no idea. To me those words (small government) mean "shady politician". How about a definition?

saraid216 14y ago
If it were properly defined, it would get torn apart. It's an ideological banner for disparate, otherwise-opposed groups to unite under.
pekk 14y ago
It should mean that the government does less and taxes less, but in practice people have different things in mind which the government shouldn't do. For example, Reaganite Republicans who like the phrase usually favor high defense spending and many who otherwise like 'small government' want the government to be more intrusive with respect to things like abortion and drugs. So it is true that in reality people use this phrase in a very unprincipled way.

thaumaturgy 14y ago

> Do young folk even care about "small government"? It was primarily young people's enthusiasm for Ron Paul in 2007 - 2008 that drove his campaign, platformed as it was on small government values. His campaign principles (and some of its messages) were then co-opted into the current-day Tea Party. "Young people" -- as much as any over-generalized demographic can agree on anything -- seem to understand the value of small government, they just want a specific kind of small government: smaller military, less international presence, more infrastructure and social welfare (both at home and abroad). > Dear Mr. Romney, you are pitching to the anti-Roosevelt faction of the country and it is rapidly shrinking. Conservatism didn't suddenly appear in politics thirty years ago; it has been around, in this country, since before it was a country. In the colonial U.S., the conservatives of the time would have been called "Tories". So while the demographics of modern conservatism might be mostly old white people, they'll either be replaced in a few years with idealistic young conservatives, or modern-day young liberals will slowly age into conservatism. > If the GOP pushed an "innovation" platform... ...then it would no longer be the GOP. The GOP is not simply a group of people who like each-other and regularly meet to decide what they should have as a platform; it is the political realization of an idea, the idea of conservatism. You might as well say, "if the Democrats pushed a 'tax the poor, cut welfare, and abolish the estate tax platform'..."! Conservatism exists for a good reason in society. It's there to act as society's "rudder", to (theoretically) keep it from evolving too rapidly and adopting too many stupid ideas. It can certainly be harmful when it gains a disproportionate amount of influence in a society, as in modern Afghanistan, but it is not inherently harmful -- and it shouldn't necessarily adopt aspects of a liberal platform.