The Republican Party is not right-wing
Debate Rounds (5)
I believe that The Republican Party, or The GOP, is not a right-wing, or conservative, political party. I believe that this is evident from The GOP's policies. In this debate I will be arguing that, instead of being a right-wing party, The GOP is a centre-left party.
Right-wing: "the conservative or reactionary section of a political party or system."
Left-wing: "the liberal, socialist, or radical section of a political party or system."
So, I think that for this debate, it would be fair to say that right-wingers are conservatives, and left-wingers are liberals. Let's define those terms.
Conservative: "holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in relation to politics or religion."
Liberal: "open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values."
So, the question is, do Republicans fit the definition of right-wing or conservative? The answer, by the definitions, is a clear and resounding "NO!"
Both major political parties in The United States support liberalism in one form or another.
For the sake of time, let's not discuss the Democratic Party. I think it is fair to say that without a doubt, Democrats are more liberal then Republicans. However, this does not make the Republicans conservative. It only makes them less liberal, not conservative. There is a difference.
Have The Republicans discarded traditional values for new ideas? Absolutely. Are The Republicans cautious about change in religious values? No, they are not.
Today, around half of all Republicans support same-sex marriage, compared to a mere 18% around 100 years ago. It is commonly accepted that supporting traditional marriage is a conservative belief, and it fits the definition of conservative.
Around 52% of Republicans support The War on Terror, and using the military to achieve the victory. War has never been classified as a traditionalist value, only self-defense.
The Republican Party is almost unanimously against secession and self-determination. These have always been seen as traditionalist, conservative values.
Now that The Republican Party has control of the House and the Senate, they should be able to completely turn the country around if they are really conservative. They could dismantle Obamacare, turn back Amnesty, securing the USA borders, stop abortion, overturn gun restrictions, and a whole host of other things real conservatives would do when they took power. And that should be only the beginning. They could stop immigration altogether, both legal and illegal. They could overturn Roe VS Wade which legalized abortion. They could force The Democrats completely out of power and make a one-party state as they did during reconstruction.(And keep in mind that was a completely different Republican Party.)
The Republicans are also almost unanimously against public show of religion, especially in public schools. Religion is pretty much classified as THE most important conservative value.
The Republicans are also, again unanimously, in favor of interracial marriage. Interracial marriage defeats the very definition of conservative. Interracial marriage destroys the races. Does that sound conservative to you?
There are, sadly, almost NO politicians in The United States that are true conservatives anymore.
I would like to begin by refuting your claim that "... around half ... support same-sex marriage. " and "Around 52% ... support The War on Terror" 39% of republicans support same-sex marriage, 58% approve of drone strikes, and 79% approve of Guantanamo bay. A reminder that Guantanamo bay was established in 2002 under the bush administration as a prison to hold "extraordinarily dangerous persons" to "interrogate" detainees. This and the rest is, since, well known.
Secession is not used as a term for personal independence, as I speculate you to have meant; it instead is used in an instance of, for example, a state leaving (seceding) from it's country.
Fully automatic weapons are allowed in Law Vegas, the U.S ranked first in gun ownership in 2012, and it's astonishingly similar each year. Keeping that information in mind, it's important to note that just 57% of republicans supported a bill calling for moderate background checks after the Newtown shooting.
To your case about the ACA (Affordable Care Act), you're right, but not for the reason you think you are. 21 states are not excepting the medicaid expansion (25 originally), Republicans brought this ability to the table by challenging it's constitutionality in the supreme court, they succeeded in 2012 and are currently using the ruling (or similar text) to suggest that the entirety of the ACA is not voluntary to a state. So, where are you right than? All of that information points to the conclusion that the republicans are in fact fighting against the ACA. It's a republican plan proposed by Richard Nixon in 1974.
For abortion, I have one word. Trap! TARGETED REGULATION OF ABORTION PROVIDERS. In short, basically these laws set up guidelines, such as forcing a clinic to rebuild or be shut down do to ever growing regulations pertaining to things such as the height of the ceiling. This is not speculation, it is admitted that this is the purpose of it.
Republicans shut down a moderate right-wing immigration reform bill in the name of completely "securing our boarders."
You are also right about religion, but not for the reason you think you are, and that, in itself, is debatable. It's the very first thing in the constitution; Congress shall not establish a religion. Florida, along with other states, allow religious material in public school.
In closing (of this round) I will state that the most likely reason for you to think this has to do with something similar. As you move toward the millennials, you see a shift toward liberalism and liberal ideas. That does not mean that the republican party is conservative, that simply means that the conservative movement is burning out and fading away, and humanity is moving toward a more progressive system.
This sounds like roughly half of the GOP.
Probably around a quarter of Republicans are neoconservatives, or neocons.
"Neoconservatives promote an interventionist foreign policy to promote democracy and defend Israel. They were the strongest supporters of the Iraq War; many of these 'neocons' were originally considered to be liberals or were affiliated with the U.S. Democratic Party in earlier days. Neoconservatives have been credited with importing into the Republican party a more active international policy. Neoconservatives are willing to act unilaterally when they believe it serves a moral position to do so, such as the spread of democracy."
"Indeed, during year one of the new presidency, Republicans, despite their campaign to sink the Obama agenda in every other area, still sided with the Kristol camp when it came to foreign policy. In July 2010, the House of Representatives voted to approve funding for Obama"s troop surge in Afghanistan, with 102 Democratic defectors and only 12 Republicans voting against. In fact, more Republicans supported Obama"s policy (160) than Democrats (148). By all indications, the neoconservative hold on the Republican Party was strong."
Neocons are simply liberals that have "infiltrated" the GOP to make it seem like a warmongering party.
The people that you can see everyday on Fox News and the like are typically fiscal conservatives. Fiscal conservatives are capitalists. They don't care much for social and cultural conservatism usually, but sometimes you can find a fiscal and social conservative.
"Fiscal conservatives call for a large reduction in government spending (particularly in entitlement and other social programs) personalized accounts for Social Security, free trade, and less regulation of the economy. Many current fiscal conservatives are backers of supply-side economics; however, there are also some deficit hawks within the faction as well. Before 1930 the Northeastern pro-manufacturing factions of the GOP was strongly committed to high tariffs, but since 1945 it has been more supportive of free-market principles and treaties for open trade.
Prominent fiscal conservatives include former U.S. Congressman Ron Paul (Texas), U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (Texas), former U.S. House Majority Leader Dick Armey, former South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, former Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, Indiana Governor and former Representative Mike Pence, the 1996 vice-presidential nominee Jack Kemp, U.S. Senator Tom Coburn (Oklahoma), Publisher Steve Forbes, and activist Grover Norquist."
Now, paleoconservatives are the true conservatives in my opinion because I feel that they are truly trying to conserve our social and cultural heritage.
"The paleoconservatives are not strongly represented in the political sphere, but are most visible in publications (e.g. The American Conservative and Chronicles) and organizations such as the Rockford Institute and the American Cause. They are traditionalist with a strong distrust of a modern political ideologies and statecraft, which they call the managerial state.
The paleoconservative worldview is both socially and culturally conservative. Paleoconservatives generally favor gun rights, the War on Drugs, and states' rights and constitutionalism, whilst opposing abortion, affirmative action, and same-sex marriage. They are highly critical of multiculturalism, with the national question being central to their politics. Additionally, some commentators allege an element of white nationalism within the larger paleoconservative faction. Paleoconservatives strongly oppose illegal immigration and favor tight restrictions on legal immigration. Paleoconservatives tend to be economically nationalist; favoring a protectionist policy on international trade.
In foreign affairs they are non-interventionist. Prominent paleoconservatives, such as Pat Buchanan, have criticized the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and neoconservatism, which many paleoconservatives believe has damaged the GOP. Buchanan left the Republican Party after his presidential primary races in 1992 and 1996, and ran as a third-party candidate in the 2000 election. Other prominent paleoconservatives include Chronicles editor Thomas Fleming, Scott P. Richert, and journalists Joe Sobran, Sam Francis, and Robert Novak."
So, is liberalism "radical"?
Radical: "(especially of change or action) relating to or affecting the fundamental nature of something; far-reaching or thorough."
Liberalism: "open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values."
So liberals are, in a sense, radical. They advocate for a strong social change and they are willing to change the fundamentals of society with the gay marriage issue, abortion, immigration, etc.
"79% approve of Guantanamo bay."
This is true, but it helps me. Torture and support of Guantanamo Bay is a neoconservative value, not a truly conservative value.
"Secession is not used as a term for personal independence, as I speculate you to have meant; it instead is used in an instance of, for example, a state leaving (seceding) from it's country."
Yes, I did mean secession as in a state or province leaving one's country. Secession has been a political right for millenia. This, in strictly MY PERSONAL OPINION, qualifies it as a conservative value.
To your excerpt on Moderate Conservatives - the idea that what has been defined describes half the party has already been partially debunked. I'll reiterate and add. Only 39% of republicans approve of same-sex marriage, 30% approve of same-sex adoption, 32% approve of abortion, approximately 46.5% approve of moderate gun reform where 56% approve of arming teachers, 83% of republicans are in favor of the keystone pipeline, 62% approve of fracking, 71% approve of the death penalty, 79% approve of Guantanamo bay, and only 31% approve of marijuana legalization. The one area where you would be correct is civil rights, and you contradict yourself in that correctness. The death penalty, and something that you've spoken against, Guantanamo bay, is unconstitutional in that the eighth amendment protects against cruel and unusual punishment. In case it's not clear enough, the excerpt that you quote, that this paragraph is addressing, says " moderate Republicans differ in that some are for ... anti-war policies ..." So I'm confused, is interventionism, or non-interventionism conservative? I will state that I am not going to write a paragraph on paleoconservatives because this paragraph addresses that as well with a majority of republicans supporting paleoconservative values.
To quickly touch on secession, now understanding your meaning of it - nothing, to me, seems less conservative than secession. I can't think of more of a change, but, I suppose, nothing says I love my country like leaving it.
I feel the need to again address your poor conduct in this debate. I hope that you will not cause this to become a separate debate, but, instead, understand my concern with your definitions and blatant partisanship towards the conservative party and display of views that you, yourself, uphold such as "Interracial marriage destroys the races".
By defining Liberals as "radical," but not conservatives as "radical," is an unfair comparison considering that by definition, they are two opposites of the same spectrum. I hope that you will respect my wish as we continue this debate, and that this part of the discussion will not continue. This is the last word that i will say on the subject.
Then why don't the Republicans fight the Democrats by proposing a bill that would make the federal government reject homosexuality and make it illegal? Because to The Republicans, money always seems to trump morals.
"The house passed the keystone bill on Nov, 14, 2014. "
This alone proves that the GOP is not conservative, because what is less conservative than destroying the Earth for financial gain?
"So I'm confused, is interventionism, or non-interventionism conservative?"
Non-interventionism is a conservative belief, while interventionism is imperialism, which is not a conservative value.
"nothing seems less conservative than secession. I can't think of more of a change, but, I suppose, nothing says I love my country like leaving it."
Anti-secessionism, like what is found in the GOP, is, in actuality, pro-imperialism, which, again, is not a conservative belief.
"Nothing says I love my country like leaving it."
The United States was technically not supposed to be a country, but rather, a confederation of sovereign states. Unfortunately, The Civil War changed that. We are longer "these united States", we are The United States. The States were supposed to be countries. If the government had followed conservative beliefs, kids would be standing up every day in school to pledge allegiance to their State's flag. Secession in this case is simply breaking away, peacefully of course, from a federation that was not designed to be permanent.
The idea that because Republicans are not currently trying to sign into federal law a ban on same-sex marriage they are not conservative is wrong because trying to do so would be obstructionist to conservative values. on 9/1/1998 democrat president Bill Clinton had to sign into law H.R. 3396, better known as the Defense of marriage Act, federally defining marriage as between one man and one woman and therefor banning it on a federal level. This act was introduced by republican Bod Barr on on 5/7 that same year. It had 106 (90%) republican cosponsors, passed through the house and senate with an 84.4% Republican yes vote. So what happened to it? It was found unconstitutional in 2013 by the supreme court. It is only being protected on the state level because that is the only place that it can be.
I find it strange that you define non-interventionism as a conservative value when what you cited explained that anti-war policies are not conservative but moderate. That aside, your definition plays to my favor. Only 41% of republicans approve of the Afghanistan war - a war that went into action under the bush administrations policy of a "preventive war" strategy - a strategy proclaimed by intellectuals on both sides of the political spectrum as an imperial strategy.
As to secession, I could not find any specific stats on republican views of allowing secession, but, using two stats, I've managed to find my own ruff estimate of 80% approval of allowing secession. View below to see equation.
25% approval of allowing secession among the U.S people as a whole
33% republican base during this time in the U.S.
33% of 25% is 80%.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.