This is an archive page of the Blogger News Network. All stories posted on BNN are copyrighted by their author. All site elements on BNN are copyright 2005, Robert Hayes.
Political Nuclear Winter
by John Brothers
Originally posted to BNN 3/9/2005
I think Mark A. R. Kleiman is an intelligent and perceptive gentleman, even though I disagree with him all the time.
However, this post is fairly disturbing on several levels.
First, Democrats always go on and on about how they're the party of nuance, of sophisticated grown-up responses to problems. And I agree, they are - it's just that sometimes a blunt, simple response is better. But here, of course, he's suggesting that they take political combat to a new level of viscousness.
Second, Democrats always crow about how they're the party who thinks about the long-term. But what are the long term ramifications of this model? Every state ends up with a block slate..
Think about it - if California does it, other states will see the clout that California now has, and will want to move in that direction. It won't be an overnight change, but you can bet your asses that over 20 - 40 years every state will end up having to move to this model, in order to get any sort of influence in congress.
As each state does this, the voters who are essentially permanently disenfranchised (philosophically, not legally), will want to leave the state, and move to another state that is less hostile to their opinions. This, in turn will give more power to the extremists on both sides. Essentially we'll end up with a near-Civil War style lack of tolerance for the other side's viewpoints. I don't know about you, but that's not a model of government that I'd like to repeat.
As opposed to, you know, suffering for the next couple of years, and then actually trying to woo voters with proposals and initiatives that they believe in and/or respect.
John Brothers blogs at Indefinite Articles.
Archive Page