Lame
Rosemary Peavler

email your friends about this site

share

follow this author

subscribe

send a message to this author

contact

reward this author with a star!

stars

follow this author

subscribe

Home

go to your pnn homepage

Start_blogging

start blogging

Helpinappropriate content
LOGIN LOGOUT Home
Politics
news, views
Green
all eco, all the time
Family
well, you know
Diversions
Your daily dose
Style
it's gotta be cheap to be chic!
World
Going global
Wellness
body and soul
Relationships
working them out - or not
Living
the good, the bad, the messy
Etc.
everything else
Food & wine
Full of bite!
Girls' Nights Out
go ahead, mingle!

Image

Gingrich, Fascism, and Sarah Palin

Posted by Rosemary Peavler Posted on: 11/19/08

Gingrich, Fascism, and Sarah Palin

Does anyone remember Newt Gingrich (R-GA)? That Republican Speaker of the House who went away in shame ten years ago after some serious Republican losses and personal scandals? The vacuum in leadership in the Republican Party is allowing an opening again for Gingrich to re-surface. He even toyed with the idea of offering himself up as the Republican candidate for President this year, but it didn’t materialize. Now, he seems to be trying to step into a leadership role in the party as it struggles to find a leader and a message.

The Republican Party is in danger of fracturing right down the middle into a party with two factions and two messages. Newt Gingrich is promoting a far right social conservatism agenda taking positions much like those we heard from Sarah Palin, former Vice-Presidential candidate. Social conservatism is an ideology that believes that government has a role in enforcing traditional morals or beliefs on individuals based on the belief that these traditional beliefs keep people civilized and adhering to traditional family values. Social conservatives are usually pro-life; they oppose secularism and privatization of religious beliefs; they are against gay marriage or any type of civil partnerships. Social conservatives oppose any kind of radical social change that would depose the values held by the traditional nuclear family social structure. Social conservatives tend to violently oppose any value system other than their own.

There is nothing wrong, of course, with a social conservative point of view, unless it falls off the scale to the right. Gingrich took a position of far right social conservatism in an interview with Bill O’Reilly on Fox News on November 14. Here’s an excerpt from that interview:

 O'REILLY: OK, now, the culture war. I know you've been flying around the country, and you're doing stuff. In the last three or four days, this is really nasty stuff. I mean, you know, hyper -- we're gonna show you some of the video. A woman getting a cross smashed out of her hand. We had a church in Michigan invaded by gay activists. We're gonna show you the video on Monday of that -- we have exclusively. We had a guy in Sacramento fired from his job. We had boycotts called on restaurants.

   I mean, it is getting out of control, very few days after the election. How do you assess that?

   GINGRICH: Look, I think there is a gay and secular fascism in this country that wants to impose its will on the rest of us, is prepared to use violence, to use harassment. I think it is prepared to use the government if it can get control of it. I think that it is a very dangerous threat to anybody who believes in traditional religion. And I think if you believe in historic Christianity, you have to confront the fact. And, frank -- for that matter, if you believe in the historic version of Islam or the historic version of Judaism, you have to confront the reality that these secular extremists are determined to impose on you acceptance of a series of values that are antithetical, they're the opposite, of what you're taught in Sunday school.

Gingrich seems to be trying to secure his place in the Republican Party as a far right candidate for 2012. Of course, Sarah Palin wants her place in the same position, though she may have been deterred when Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) lost his bid for re-election to the Senate. By all accounts, she was prepared to run for Steven’s seat in the Senate when he was ejected from the Senate since he is a convicted felon. That, of course, would only work if Stevens had been re-elected.

The fracture in the Republican Party comes when you think about some of the younger members of the Republican Party, primarily some of the governors, who are in favor of a different agenda for the party as expressed at the recent Republican Governors Association meeting in Florida. The Minnesota governor, Tim Pawlenty, wants the Republican Party to move forward and become something other than the party of older white men. He wants the party to become more inclusive of black voters, younger voters, and Latino voters and for the party to become more modern. Other Republican governor’s agree including Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal and Governor Charlie Crist of Florida. It seems that this branch of the Republican Party is economically conservative but not necessarily socially conservative.

How will these two branches of the Republican Party resolve their issues into a cohesive platform? Gingrich acknowledges that Palin will be a force in the party but not the only force. She is likely to be his competition in 2012, unless she decides to wait for six years and run for the Senate. Both of them would run on a far right platform of social conservatism. Then, we have Pawlenty, Crist, Jindal, and other Republican governors and some Senators wanting to modernize the Republican Party. Some of them are likely to be candidates in 2012 for the presidency and run on a more inclusive, modern Republican platform that is economically conservative but not as socially conservative.

When Gingrich accuses value systems other than his own of being fascism, he is setting himself up to fill that position of that far right candidate in direct competition with Sarah Palin, even though she has never directly used the word “fascism” to describe a value system other than her own. It will be interesting to watch the younger members of the Republican Party try to reinvent itself and find a more modern and inclusive message with Gingrich pushing for a leadership position with a radical socially conservatism position.

 

 

 


3Vote!
Comments (6)

Like this story? Share the news by clicking below:
This is a permanent link to this article. A great way to save it.
PermaLink
Post your article on Digg and let others vote on it.
Digg
Technorati is a blog indexing site.
Technorati
del.icio.us is a social bookmarking site.
Delicious
Kirtsy is a social bookmarking site featuring voting.
Kirtsy_addicon
  • Oh,no the fascist gays are coming!...Palin didn't use the word 'fascism". She did use communism, socialism and terrorism. Any differing point of view is couched as a frightening '-ism'. It's code for "not fundamentalist Christian". It's also an avoidance. Scare people with the prospect of a looming '-ism' and you don't have to debate the actual policies being promoted or explain why they would have any tangible negative impact on society. (Um, Massachsetts has the lowest divorce rate in the country and we fascism is not on the rise, but we do give people of any gender combination the right to marry.) Whenever a politician starts talking about another's '-isms' it's a red flag. Which is why I recommend staying away from labeling Gingrich, too. Even if accurate, it forces us to identify or not with an entire group of Americans, rather than simply making determinations about Gingrich, triggering tribal behaviors. Harder to get open-minded consideration from everyone that way.
    By allison on November 19, 2008 15:41

  • I will say that I've fallen into this mode of using the shorthand of -isms to make a point and I think it was a mistake. Most people use them so incorrectly, that besides pushing people to choose tribes, the point of what you're trying to get at is lost because nobody understands the proper meaning of the words. (For instance, the USSR was not a communist country. Communism does not include a ruling class. So, China doesn't qualify as a communist country either. Ironically, real communism would be a far more just and respectable system than what they've got. So, I laugh we demonize communism, which simply means that all citizens have equal power and share equally in the resources.) Anyway, just wanted to acknowledge that it's compelling to frame things this way, but I'm learning that it's not helpful to ongoing civil dialog. Cheers.
    By allison on November 19, 2008 15:45

  • I don't understand how people can possibly think that a far-right candidate would do well in 2012. While I do believe that our country is pretty smack dab in the center-right, I think a lot of moderates (including a lot of moderate conservatives) dislike the way the far right has begun to associate so closely with evangelicals. I think that there are plenty of pro-life, small government, free-market-loving, anti-gay-marriage conservatives who still wince when far-right candidates say things like "dinosaurs and humans walked the earth together" (as Sarah Palin believes) or uses terms like Mr. Gingrich used in that interview. I honestly think that the far right has become so paranoid and hate-filled and blatantly self-serving that only moderates have a chance even in 2012. If I were the Republicans, I'd run Olympia Snowe (the very moderate Republican Senator from Maine) as the presidential candidate and Bobby Jindal (who is pretty conservative and who would energize the base) as VP.
    By anewphilosophy on November 19, 2008 19:55

  • I have to agree with Gingrich. These Prop 8 rallies have been violent and there has been an attack on traditional Christianity for years. Of course, it didn't help that nuts like Falwell were representing the Christians, but the attack has still been there. Its not that I don't believe that gays have any less right than any other American, but when they take it to the extremes that being gay is RIGHT and everyone else is wrong, I have a problem. I too would hate to see Gingrich resurface in a powerful way, but I hate the idea because it would mean that the Republican Party is not refocusing its agenda, just moving far more to the right.
    By YeaYeaWendy on November 19, 2008 20:18

  • This is an interesting conundrum. So many of the moderate, centrist, or left-lending Republicans (think of the Rockefeller Republicans who voted in droves for Reagan) have leaned Democrat in this last election, running like rats from a sinking ship. And Philosophy is right, our nation is so centrist in general that there is no way that a far right candidate can gain traction. So, either they are gone to have to compromise, or the left wingers are going to have to scurry back. Should be interesting. And even more interesting is watching Gingrich go farther to the right than he was before. Back in the day, he almost sounded reasonable. Now he's sounding a lot like Pat Buchanan. And that scares me.
    By laurieboris on November 19, 2008 23:00

  • Philosophy....I think you'll find that Olympia Snowe is WAY too liberal for the current crop of Republicans....or most any crop of Republicans...to put on a Presidential ticket!
    By Rosemary Peavler on November 20, 2008 01:52

Leave a Comment


about us | contact | terms | privacy | goodies | advertise | help | press | feedback