Spoiler: Yes, partly because the GOP isn't
conservative.
I think this is an interesting question. (Time to get philosophical 🤔)
The place to start, I think is how political psychologists define conservatism.
1/
2/ True conservatives, according to prof. @Jonhaidt, form a kind of yin-yang balance with liberals ted.com/talks/jonathan…
Liberals embrace forward-looking change.
Conservatives value order.
From Haidt: the conservative insight is that order is hard to achieve and easy to lose.
3/ Reactionaries, on the other hand seek rapid change—backwards to a bygone era.
Other political psychologists (see @karen_stenner) describe conservatives as embracing a desire to maintain the status quo.
4/ If reactionaries want to go back to the past, and conservatives want to maintain the status quo, it seems to me that the nation’s history and politics change the nature of conservatism and reactionism.
5/ America, in the past—say, before the 20th century—was ruled entirely by white Christian men.
America still has racial inequality.
So a desire to keep things the same and a desire to go backwards both end up with racist objectives.
6/ Reactionary politics as embraced in the United States is extremely destructive because to get back to a bygone era when white men could do as they pleased, you have to dismantle almost the entire federal government, which will cause widespread suffering.
7/ Look what happened with Covid under the leadership of a party that doesn’t want a functioning federal government.
When people say “conservatives” they often mean reactionaries because the current GOP is not conservative. It’s reactionary.
8/ So it's certainly destructive.
Whether it is self-destructive remains to be seen.
The most interesting thing happening in politics right now is that the GOP appears to be on a collusion course with time.
9/ By collision course with time, I mean that in a two party system, it will become impossible for a white-nationalist reactionary party to win national elections.
The demographics willing to embrace such a party are shrinking.
10/ All errors in my threads are entirely the fault of keyboard gremlins.
No laws can protect a democracy if a clear majority of the citizens decide they no longer want a democracy because they will keep electing officials who will destroy rule of law.
🔹No, the pardons can't be overturned
🔹Corrupt pardons can be prosecuted as a separate crime
🔹Trump can't pardon himself, so if he pardons all the insurrectionists, he'll be left to take all the blame
🔹He'll hurt his chances of acquittal in the Senate
On the other hand, not pardoning them creates a problem for him because the insurrectionists might start to realize they were duped, and he needs his base.
You'd think some of his supporters will realize that he set them up: He encouraged them to commit a crime (assuring them they're saving the country) and then left them to face prison.
The idea is to take down a criminal organization by getting the Kingpin.
The conservative dilemma, in a nutshell is this: Conservatives tend to represent the wealth and powerful corporations, therefore the policies they advocate are not appealing to the majority of people.
In other words, they will have trouble winning elections.
2/
In the years since 1954, the Republican Party, while calling itself conservative, solved the conservative dilemma by bringing white nationalists and KKK types into the party, coddling them for their votes while trying to keep them on the sidelines.
3/