Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm still waiting for someone to answer. 14 pages of posts with different ideas on who is responsible for it, but still no definition of what "it" is.
One candidate answer goes back to the debate between Jefferson and Hamilton, 220 years ago, on what sort of republic the US ought to be. Jefferson preferred a decentralized, yeoman agrarian republic, run by gentlemen-farmers and their retinues. Hamilton preferred a French-style technocratic super-state, prioritizing progress and organization to facilitate progress.
Up until the early 20th century, or arguably even 1945, America was plausibly Jeffersonian. The impetus for centralized organization was checked by an implicit faith in the pluck and wisdom of the sole-proprietor. Then came the Gilded Age, panics of various sort (1907, anybody?), the need to raise federal revenue to fight wars and to build bridges and so on.
The transition from Jeffersonian to Hamiltonian rewarded technocrats, investors, middlemen of various stripe, bureaucrats and what might charitably be termed applied-philosophers. These are, in short, the trappings of the modern State. Is this a “decline”? Yes, it is, if we’re anchored in the Jeffersonian viewpoint.
Quote:
Originally Posted by odinloki1
The person(s) most responsible for the downfall of America is anyone who set forth policies that made wealth gain at a faster rate for people with a lot of disposable wealth (stocks, capital gains etc) than for people who work and actually produce goods or services.
But one might ask: is this a bug, or a feature? For the enterprising young-person who gets an engineering degree, goes to work for Boeing or GE, saves aggressively and invests in the stock market, there is a lifelong transition from "producer" to "investor". It can be accomplished in around 30 years. It doesn't require business-acumen or good timing. And it's open to persons regardless of parentage or details of origin. It is, in a very real way, a meritocracy.
Again I ask: is the facilitation of such a path, a bug or a feature?
The election of Reagan fundamentally ruined America
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrowGirl
Truly I don't think it is fair to land the mess on the doorstep of one person. Having said that, if I absolutely had to nominate someone it would be Newt Gingrich because, from my perspective/age, etc., he was the first where it became very transparent that he was about the political game more than policy. From my simple quixotic perspective I have greater respect and hope when people are at least focused on policy rather than winning the "game" and for me Gingrich was the one who first really focused so much on winning for the sake of partisan winning rather than standing up for principles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant
I would argue the exact opposite. Reagan presided over the shift of the Republican party from one of aristocrats, white-collar professionals, heirs and investors, to a populist-party. The party of Nelson Rockefeller was no more. While Reagan himself was folksy and likeable, the populiist direction of the party invited demogogues and charlatans of various stipe, bringing us to...
Exactly. Newt Gingrich. Gingrich gave Republican populism a nasty, combative, anti-intellectual tilt, driving educated people with money, right into the embrace of the Democrats.
Today, wokery and the panoply of lefty nonsense is possible because so many of the natural constituents of the Republican party - the so-called "elite" - are now Democrats. Today, the most affluent zip codes in America are the strongest Democrat bastions. How could this be? The great-great-grandchildren of New England bankers, are now... Democrats. Now wonder the country is upside-down.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil75230
No one person, but there are several I could list.
Joe McCarthy, Robert Welch (founder of the John Birch Society), Richard Nixon, Newt Gingrich. Then there's the theocrats like Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Gary North, or if you really wanna go far back R.J. Rushdoony (promoter of theonomy, as far as I'm concerned another name for theocracy). Then you have extreme libertarian billionaires like Robert Mercer, Peter Thiel, and such.
But mostly, it's "We The People" ourselves who are responsible for America's downfall.
"We The People" somehow came to believe that truth is what our basebrain instinctual impulses tell us it is - especially when it comes to sizing up the intrinsic worth of another's essential personhood. In a nutshell, it boils down to raw physical survival traits (strength, "backbone", social and practical intelligence, competence are what immediately come to mind).
"We The People" also confuse actual leadership for mere social dominance and charisma.
"We The People" also tend to focus on immediately visible measure of success and results; all while handwaving the long-term bad consequences for following that process (i.e. it doesn't matter how much long-term damage "this" way of gaining the good things. All that matters is that we do get the good things). In short, "ends justify the means".
"We The People" also think that traditional cultural values and attitudes (if not human nature itself) are all fine and well the way they are, and therefore we don't need to change our ways. It says that accepting our values and human nature "as it is" is "manly, gutsy, and smart". Any calls to change time-honored practices are given the opposite labels ("pansified", "wussy", or "naive" if not "stupid to the core") - ignoring centuries of efforts to change society the way it is.
If "We The People" didn't deep down believe in all that, then those people I just mentioned would never have been taken seriously in the first place. And that is how you get boorish intellectual lightweights like Donald Trump elected to office.
Quote:
Originally Posted by corpgypsy
Who's the one person most responsible for the fall of modern America?
The Newt.
Newt Gingrich turned partisan issues into bloodsport, wrecked Congress, and paved the way for the disgraced, corrupt, know-nothing Trump’s rise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freak80
Yes, Clinton was basically a Republican on economic issues, ie pro-business and anti-labor. Oddly enough, AM talk radio thought he was some kind of far-left radical. So by 1994 we had Newt Gingrich and the congressional Republicans taking the country even further to the Right.
I'm glad that a few people on here know enough about politics to know that Newt Gingrich did more than any other person to create the stalemate between the parties. Anyone who wants to understand what Gingrich did could just read a section on his Wikipedia page titled "Role in political polarization." The first sentence states: "A number of scholars have credited Gingrich with playing a key role in undermining democratic norms in the United States, and hastening political polarization and partisan prejudice."
I won't go as far to say he or anyone is most responsible for the fall of modern America? I don't think America has fallen yet, but if it does, blame Gingrich for starting the fall, and Trump for trying to overthrow the republic.
The election of Reagan fundamentally ruined America
On a small scale compared to
the election of Obama, which considerably did much more damage to America, than Regan.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
