[Paleopsych] Disappearing Democrats?
Lynn D. Johnson, Ph.D.
ljohnson at solution-consulting.com
Sun Nov 28 05:26:36 UTC 2004
It would be very bad for the country. Dialog helps create better
solutions. But the premise is a weak one. The democrats will not
disappear, and the notion that the repubs can somehow get rid of them
doesn't make sense. The dems may be in the same position the repubs were
in from 1930 to 1980, a minority party with old, tired ideas. There may
be 50 years in the wilderness, so to speak, due to demographic trends.
What I hope for is some really ingenious and innovative thinking
from the dems. Currently the most interesting ideas come from the
moderate to conservatives, like the flat tax, social security reform,
and so on. In the traditional sense, the democrats have become
conservatives, opposing change to the 60 year old welfare state, and the
Republicans have become the liberals, embracing change and creating new
Also bear in mind that American Conservatives are sui generis, and
cannot be associated with conservatives in any other part of the world.
The right wing in this country is emphatically not about privilege or
power, and that is why the democrats failed to win enough hearts and
minds this election. They are fighting straw men of their own make
(e.g., Edwards two americas argument). Hence my anxiety about our
country. We cannot flourish if the loyal opposition doesn't become
creative and challenging. I hope for a stronger democratic party because
it makes both parties more vibrant.
Geraldine Reinhardt wrote:
> If you substitute the word viewpoint for prejudice, your sentence
> below should make more sense.
> My question concerned the initiation of a one-party system.
> Apparently you disapprove of such a setup. Please explain.
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Hovland"
> <shovland at mindspring.com>
> To: "'The new improved paleopsych list'" <paleopsych at paleopsych.org>
> Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2004 5:47 PM
> Subject: RE: [Paleopsych] Re: Disinfopedia
>> We all tend to think that sources that reflect
>> our own prejudices are objective.
>> A lot of liberals listen to right wing media.
>> How many conservatives listen to Air America?
>> Steve Hovland
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Geraldine Reinhardt [SMTP:waluk at earthlink.net]
>> Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2004 5:19 PM
>> To: The new improved paleopsych list
>> Subject: Re: [Paleopsych] Re: Disinfopedia
>>>> This looks like a very useful site. But there's a conundrum. The
>> For Media and Democracy is a special interest group with a prejudged and
>> premeditated point of view. It's also a public relations machine. A
>> successful one. >>
>> CMD staff members Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber have finished writing
>> their fifth book, Banana Republicans: How the Right Wing Is Turning
>> Into a One-Party State. It's now in bookstores, or you can order it
>> You can also find chapter summaries, an excerpt, and reviews of the
>> book on
>> our new Banana Republicans website.
>> Are those who wish to turn America into a One-Party State considered
>> "undemocratic". Or un-bananarepublican? After a "skim" at election
>> results worldwide it would appear that initiating a one party system
>> the present time) is not an unacceptable idea. Could you explain your
>> calling The Center For Media and Democracy a prejudged and premeditated
>> group? Is it only because they supported the Hutu-Tutsi conflict?
>> Presently I have very few bones to pick with The Center.
>> << File: ATT00000.html >> << File: ATT00001.txt >>
>> paleopsych mailing list
>> paleopsych at paleopsych.org
> paleopsych mailing list
> paleopsych at paleopsych.org
More information about the paleopsych