8 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
Maryah Haidery's avatar

Have you actually read Stuart Stevens’ book? If you have, then maybe you need to read it again because racism is really just the first chapter (though there are references elsewhere). When he says “it was *all* a lie - he literally means *all* of it - including the lie about fealty to tax cuts aa a reflection about deeply held values about fiscal responsibility (chapter 3) which cover much of the same ground you do here. He also discusses the “lie” about a deep commitment to “family values” (chapter 2) and the lie about “Patriotism” and defending democracy abroad (chapter 7). It was *all* a lie backs up every claim it makes with overwhelming support (I know because I looked up every footnote and original source I could access). But the most important point is that it wasn’t written by a Democrat but someone who spent his entire career (which is probably longer than JVL has been alive) working for Republicans. If you can’t bring yourself to completely buy in to his opinion, it might be because it’s incredibly disconcerting to come to terms with the fact that the party and the principles and the political heroes you supported for so long were largely an illusion - a “mind palace” built on sand.

Expand full comment
TW Falcon's avatar

It was all a lie. I haven't read Stevens' book, but I agree that the claim of fiscal responsibility was a lie, as well as the other items you cite. But the fealty to tax cuts of the top rates is definitely a thing. Follow the money. The only immutable Republican/Conservative principles are those benefitting the wealthy. Everything else is negotiable based on whether it aids in gaining the power to achieve that goal.

Recognizing that racism was just a strategy rather than a core principle does not minimize the culpability for the extent to which the Conservative movement and the Republican party fanned an appeal to it in order to win elections. It is and was deplorable. It just wasn't largely what the establishment was focused on, other than to win elections. On the other hand, for their voters, sure. That's how the party cultivated them.

Expand full comment
Maryah Haidery's avatar

Stevens makes the same point about fealty to tax cuts of the top rates as almost the only thing Republicans were unwilling to compromise on. So forgive me for being unclear. He just says that it didn’t really reflect seriousness about fiscal responsibility because you can’t have massive tax cuts while also increasing spending by something like 186%. People think of Reagan as some great fiscal conservative but he ranks among the top 4 or 5 Presidents who were responsible for ballooning the federal deficit. In fact, he started that ball rolling! And unlike FDR who was fighting a massive Depression and a World War or Obama who had inherited the worst economic crisis of the time as well as two ongoing wars, Reagan’s main issue was a Cold War. And we can argue whether or not that merited the huge increase in military spending but it has been a feature to increase it ever since - whether in peace time or in war.

The only Republican President after that who was serious about fiscal policy and called Reagan’s trickle down economics “voodoo economics” was George HW Bush who was correct as history would bear out. His biggest sin was compromising with Democrats so he could cut spending by increasing taxes. And he was destroyed for it - by both the right and the left!

Even though because of what he had accomplished, Clinton was able to leave the White House with a budget surplus instead of a deficit! And instead of being praised for that by Republicans who claimed to care about fiscal responsibility, he was constantly maligned by Newt Gingrich for silly things like increasing spending for food stamps by something like an extra $2000/year.

This may sound like I support progressive policies like massive government spending and drenching the rich in taxes which I don’t! I believe in trying to balance budgets and bring down our federal debt to a number my brain has the capacity to conceive. After reading Stevens’ book (which is fantastic and you really should read!) I no longer believe that most Republicans leaders and voters - especially after Reagan ever sincerely believed in actual fiscal responsibility.

They love to raise a hue and cry about entitlement reform or repealing Obamacare or bailing out banks or Covid stimulus checks or student debt relief (much of which they’re justified on) but have they ever proposed a serious plan to curb spending on these of these issues?!?! Even when they controlled the WH and both houses of congress? No! Because these things are not popular with the base.

The only cards they play are cutting taxes while increasing spending, rolling back regulations and petty fights about the debt ceiling.

Then predictably they blame Democrats for being “fiscally irresponsible”, not doing enough to prevent pandemics and train disasters and bank collapses which were are systems that probably should be regulated based on the domino effect their failures cause. And somehow convincing voters that raising the debt ceiling is a “responsible” thing to do instead a fancy term for defaulting on loans, decreasing our credit rating and throwing the markets in to a mass panic.

Sincere belief in fiscal responsibility? Yeah - it was all a lie.

Expand full comment
David Mancke's avatar

You tell us, "recognizing that racism was just a strategy rather than a core principle"

If racism is a strategy, then that 'strategizer' is devoid of principle.

This leaves us with racism as the defining feature.

Expand full comment
TW Falcon's avatar

For sure. I didn't mean to imply otherwise.

Expand full comment
GREGORY MCISAAC's avatar

I had read the book when it first came out but forgot that it had covered more than race. Thanks for the helpful review.

Expand full comment
Uncle Abe's Revenge's avatar

I have not read his book and was basing my characterization of it purely on JVL's remarks.

Expand full comment
Maryah Haidery's avatar

Makes sense. But I highly recommend it! I’ll admit learning about some of the behind the scenes details came as a bit of a shock (which is why I felt compelled to check the references) but it’s always helpful to understand the roots of a problem if you’re serious about trying to solve it.

My only quibble (if you can call it that) is that the last chapter is entitled “How Lies End” and while it does give a shout out to people like Mona Charen and Bill Kristol, it’s mostly an expression of despair for what the Republican Party has become and doesn’t offer many concrete solutions about changing it. So just up to places like the Bulwark I guess and the people who support them. I pray to God there are enough of us.

Expand full comment