Total Posts:1|Showing Posts:1-1
Sources Wanted: Progress and Decay
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2016 2:30:28 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
I've been interested in writing a post about my own views on how "progress" and "decay"--I'd rather just call it change--happens. Especially in liberal democracies, but in all societies, I think all leaders (both of individual movements and of actual governments) are constrained by relatively homogenous and well-defined winning coalitions such that the only way significant change happens is by either finding different issues to reshape the coalition or by the generally arduous task of changing the coalition's values.
In plain speak, I wonder if change specifically happens whenever a leader succeeds in making certain issues most important and reshapes the base of power to come from those sympathizers (provided there are enough of them). This is true for both state leaders and revolutionaries.
As a recent example, Trump changed the winning coalition by making the economy a huge issue--the working class, both minority and white, significantly shifted to him. Thus, I'd expect that, if nothing else, we're going to see those restrictions on trade, infrastructure projects, repeal of the ACA, and perhaps even the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall actually happen. I would not expect the mass deportations of non-criminal illegal immigrants to happen because that issue is not as salient to the new groups in Trump's coalition, though I would expect restrictions.
This is purely speculative at this point, and I'd like to find sources that elaborate on this. If anyone has read anything that vaguely sounds like this, or vaguely sounds like it disagrees with this, please share.
SO to Bailey, the love of my life <3
Believer in the heart of the cards.
" . . . most people can't see the cherries for the trees" - Mixed metaphors are bae