Fiction and the Republican Party
I’ve just finished reading, John O’Hara’s Ten North 
Frederick, the national book award winner (USA) for 1956. In it, the character, Joe Chapin, wants to run for president in the mid-1930s. He’s a Republican, rich, prominent and respected. What struck me about this novel were the ideas of the Republican base at that time, as described by the author. The ideas were the same as the ones espoused today. Nothing has changed.
Fiction continues to fuel Republican dreams. It’s a well-known fact that many high profile politicians, like Paul Ryan, follow the writings of Ayn Rand. She believed strongly in capitalism without the handouts and praised individualism over collectivism in her bestsellers, Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged. She believed that anyone who works hard can get rich. It’s the individual and his pursuit of excellence that needs to be applauded. She also believed that big government got in the way and that taxes were bad.
In a similar vein, Ten North Frederick’s lead character, Joe Chapin, a rich WASP attorney, found the ideas of the the Democratic party distasteful. “What fools these mortals are. Every day I pick up the paper and it’s getting so that if there isn’t some new socialistic scheme, I’m surprised.”
The fear of government interference was a key part of the the Republican platform. And yet, after the mess the GOP left America in when Obama was first elected in 2008, big banks and automakers came to the government with hat in hand after their greed had blinded them to good economics and they had fallen into a hole so deep they needed collectivism to get them out.
We saw the tragedy of Hurricane Sandy, and how
Hurricane Sandy, photo from bloomberg.com
important it was to have a coordinated government effort. The hurricane did not discriminate between the rich and the poor, black or white, gay or straight. It hit everyone equally. Nature knows.
Ayn Rand lived in Russia and she saw how the communist government took over industry and how that failed. She was afraid of communism. That’s what she was railing against. Socialism or capitalism with a heart is entirely different. What Ayn Rand failed to get across was that all men aren’t equal in how they start out in life. Many don’t have the connections or the opportunities to get ahead. Many have three strikes against them before they even give their first cry. What has been proposed and blocked by a Republican dominated congress have been programs like health care, programs that would even out the playing field. You can’t work if you or your children are sick. You can’t get ahead if your health bills sink you. You can’t get ahead if you fail at school because your father’s in prison or your mother’s an addict and there’s no food in the house.
Maybe the Republican party’s recent loss to Barack Obama will shake up the GOP. The Republican party lost due to its inability to win support from women, Blacks and Latinos. The GOP’S contender, Mitt Romney, famously concluded that the party’s loss had to do with the “gifts” that Obama promised. He was referring to federal benefits like health care, free contraceptives, and forgiveness of college loan interest. As a result of their unexpected loss, Republicans are now scratching their heads and hopefully beginning to examine their outdated ideas.
To help out isn’t socialism or big government, it’s common decency. For the top 2% to pay their fair share of taxes, is that so unreasonable? What will that mean to them? One less house? A decision to forgo a jet plane or one of the masters? It might mean a better sleep at night, if they have a conscience. Whatever happened to no man is an island?
I’d love your thoughts on this. Although I’m Canadian, what happens south of the border shapes what happens north of it. So far, we have our own fiction happening, but that’s another story.
Hello Diana. Good article. I partially agree. It is my feeling that both major political parties are failing to represent the public. My personal instincts would lead me toward my parents Democratic Party but that party is nowhere to be found. FDR is dead and he’s not coming back. For Republicans I would point out that Lincoln is dead.
The Democrats and their party-friendly media howled about how the Republicans had received cash from the Infamous Enron criminals. When a tally showed that the Democrats had in fact taken MORE money from Enron the media shut up.
I have never registered to a political party. I always vote. I vote my conscience. The Republicans seem to me to be living a myth. So do the Democrats. Neither of their myths has effectively included serving the people of my nation.
Both major political parties responded to 9-11 by embracing police state “reforms”. In this case “reform” translates to less civil rights, more cash and power for the governments (federal and state), and even less accountability to the public and less respect for our constitution. I happen to like that constitution and I despise politicians that treat it like an inconvenient historical relic.
If Obama wanted “health care” he had his chance. Instead he and his party gave us a giant boondoggle. BOTH parties have given us this outrageous financial crisis.
Only when people are less gullible and more demanding will our government improve.
Thanks for your comments, Jay. I’ve watched Obama’s attempts at bipartisanship and then watched him back down from the promises that led him to be elected in 2008. I’m hopeful that he will now follow through on his initial vision. One thing FDR said that holds true for today. “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” Especially manufactured fear.
But I do understand what you mean when you say both major political parties are failing to represent the public. The Democrats have moved too far to the right, and perhaps in response, the Republicans have moved even further in that direction. Again, I am optimistic that the next four years will be better for the USA. Forward.
It’s more complicated. I agree with Jay. Both parties are standing at opposite ends of the political spectrum screaming phony accusations at each other while those of us in the middle, those of us willing to compromise and be reasonable and realistic, are left unrepresented, and frankly, screwed over big time. Obama’s victory was not a mandate by any means. Romney was not the Republican I wanted, but Obama is not the Democrat I wanted either.
I’ve recently watched a documentary twice. Park Avenue: Money, Power, and the American Dream. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-OKyju06e4 A stunning portrayal of how Washington is now largely run by big business, the billionaires of Park Avenue, the hedge fund people who have the money to buy favours. They’re the ones who are keeping that 1% wealthy beyond their wildest dreams, while the rest of America goes down the tube.
yes. And people need to learn that those individuals would never be so silly as to pay for one of two Parties. They own both and Obama is a part of that.
Oh Jay, I hope you’re wrong. Like you, I’ve become so disappointed in politicians in general, and that is including our own in Canada. I don’t want to be cynical. I want to believe that good will overcome evil. And I see evil as those corporations who are hell bent on making money no matter what the cost to human lives everywhere.
I enjoyed this article and I completely agree. What makes me nuts (well, one thing out of many) is that this same party who fears government intrusion wants to dictate who can get married and who has to carry her rapist’s baby to term. They want small government with fewer regulations, but won’t even stay out of a constituent’s bedroom and/or uterus. I guess what they really want is for the government not to interfere with *them.*
So true what you say, Catherine.
“I guess what they really want is for the government not to interfere with *them.*” For some folks “smaller government” means “just MY rules and ideas. Not your rules or ideas.
Some of them are actually sincere in their fear of homosexual marriages. I have been asking people for several years precisely how some homosexual couple would “endanger” my marriage by them being married (or not married etc). Assuming that they are not getting married to my wife or myself why would it matter? This great pressing “threat” has yet to be explained to me. I’ve spent my entire life identifying “threats”. I can’t see this particular “threat” at all.
I am anti-abortion. I’m not getting one. The fact that I have a Y Chromosome makes that decision a little easier for me.
The amazing thing about the abortion debate is that I meet people (in a variety of nations) that are anti-abortion but are also anti birth control. At times it seems like an “anti-sex” agenda. Part of my “anti-abortion” agenda is to support free birth control for the entire planet. The simplest anti abortion strategy is effective free birth control. That would not cover all the cases but it would cover the vast majority.
I think you’ve got that right; it’s anti-sex. Look what happened to Clinton. A great president, but a private matter became a public one, like what’s happening to Petraeus now. In Canada, a former prime minister, Pierre Elliot Trudeau, famously said, “The government has no business in the bedrooms of the nation.” Also, people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.As for the whole gay debate, you might be interested in a former post of mine, Gay or Straight, What Does It Matter? https://www.dianastevan.com/2012/uncategorized/gay-or-straight-what-does-it-matter/