# When did politics become more about power and less the people? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 29, 2019, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229 "2019-04-29T18:18:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2019, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229/21 "2019-04-30T03:10:19Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > I’m reading the Federalist Papers, and they are all about power. Who gets it and how it is controlled. Obviously if you want to get something accomplished, you need power to do it. > What is different these days is the use of power to rewrite the rules so you don’t lose power. Thus gerrymandering. Thus changing laws before a party loses the governorship. Making it hard for those who might be opposed to you to vote. > That’s the kind of thing dictators do to hold on to power. And these days, Republicans. One problem we have is in our veneration of the Republic of Country Hicks, with its constitution authored by a slave-owning class of aristocrats. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2019, 3:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229/22 "2019-04-30T03:48:25Z")
> [@rsat3acr](#): > > January 3 1995 when Newt Gingrich became Speaker of the House. It became no compromise , our way or the highway. Yes, then refined with Rove’s [Permanent Republican Majority.](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/what-karl-rove-really-had_b_60947) ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2019, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229/23 "2019-04-30T04:17:14Z")
> [@kunilou](#): > > And the “fix” was the final bill, and the only vote that counted. No, you’re incorrect. The main bill, H.R. 3590 (a.k.a. the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act a.k.a. Obamacare) absolutely “counted”. It was enacted into law and contained the bulk of what we call “Obamacare”. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2019, 6:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229/24 "2019-04-30T06:20:45Z")
When only the elite had political power, those elite would converse among themselves and with scholars, and could not be fooled easily. And they would understand that some concessions must be made to the underclass to prevent revolt. Paradoxically, it is in this era of universal suffrage and the “Information Highway” that voters are bamboozled and vote against their own interests. W.R. Hearst and his newspapers are sometimes compared with Rupert Murdoch’s FoxNews to claim that today’s sins are not new. But this comparison fails. Whatever his faults, Hearst had a sincere progressive political agenda — many of the radical ideas he pushed have since been enacted into law. He may have been power-hungry, but he wasn’t motivated by greed. He ran his newspapers at a loss, and would often pay all hospital bills when one of his lowly machinists became ill. Compare Hearst with the kleptocrats leading our country today! Even Huey Long had a sincere progressive political agenda. > [@Kobal2](#): > > No. Sorry, but no. Even the Kings of old cared (ostensibly ? Who can tell, and the result is the same) about the plight of Joe Farmer, if only because there was one King and tens of thousands of Joe Farmers, and a pitchfork to the gut hurts a little. In Europe there were dozens of kingly as well as churchly edicts or laws enjoining lower lords to be less greedy and provide better safety nets ; as well as umpteen distributions of bread either for free or at fixed prices regardless of any economic considerations. Which tells us two things : one, that kings ostensibly tried to fulfill their ostensible mandate of protecting the weakest (and their memoirs often tells us as much, and how seriously they took that task) ; and two that feudal lords didn’t give a shit. If they had listened, the king wouldn’t have to tell them twice, or sixteenth. Capitalism is a wonderful thing and the best system there is, guys ! 🙂 > > But even if you look only at the modern era, “power for power’s sake” is the exception rather than the norm. Teddy Roos’ might have been an unhinged lunatic but he had a vision and used his power to manifest it. So did FDR, so did Eisenhower. These were men with principles, ideas and plans. We can debate endlessly about whether those ideas were sensible, or the means used were appropriate, but you can’t argue that they were Machiavelian fuckmooks just doing whatever in order to hold on to power or increase it. The New Deal wasn’t about courting rural votes or brokering an Imperial Prsidency or whatever. Creating national parks wasn’t calculating. Fighting the Nazis was hugely impopular, even though (or possibly because) it was the right thing to do. > > “Power at all costs”, in the US, rests squarely on the shoulders of the modern GOP. Even Obama, spineless centrist shit that he was, had moral ideas and idealistic projects. He even accomplished some. The cynical and toxic idea that politics and politicians are only interested in their own ambitions and increasing their power is propaganda, crafted and popularized by people who are interested in getting people not to give a shit any more. The “every politician does it and is corrupt, everything has always been shit, so just stay home” group(s). But there are and have been people who went into politics to make the world (or just their country) better. Always. Vote for those guys. I’ve quoted this post in its entirety because every word is correct. There have been powerless underclasses but leaders had to have support from landowners and those with voting power. Where I live, politicians are often known to be criminals, even murderers, but they attract votes by corruptly diverting government money to their voters’ province. But today, American politics — most especially on one side — is dominated by Big Money and Big Lies. Kerry, a war hero, lost to Dubya, a malingerer, because of … their war records! :smack: Hillary lost to Trump because _she_ was considered the security threat. :smack: :smack: A large portion of American voters, simply put, have absolutely no clue about what their votes do. Many voters _ **who support the Affordable Care Act** _ vote Republican because _ **they oppose Obamacare** _. Politicians may not be more evil today than in olden days, but the American system makes it very easy for them to exploit ignorance. Pushing useful programs has no merit for Republicans; indeed they often prefer _to keep problems in place_ so they can exploit the problems with lies and propaganda. Think of it! Our democracy is in the hands of voters who love ACA but hate Obamacare. Maybe the Information Superhighway needs a slow lane. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2019, 8:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229/25 "2019-04-30T08:47:58Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > I’ve quoted this post in its entirety because every word is correct. I’ve sent the money, as agreed. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2019, 8:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229/26 "2019-04-30T08:59:47Z")
Newt Gingrich and the mid-90s Republican party are definitely the clear defining point where things really turned for the worse. Before, there was an idea that you had a respect for someone who felt differently than you, but who you knew wanted to do their best to make the country better. This attitude was replaced by “the democrats are trying to destroy America! We must do anything we can to keep them out of power and stop them!” - the goal became having your political opponents lose rather than doing your duty or improving the country. The switch wasn’t instantaneous, and it got worse. They managed to absolutely lose their shit in the Obama years and almost everyone was on the same page at that point - we must oppose Obama regardless of the merit of his positions or how much it hurts the country. Historic, unprecedented obstruction. And then falling in line behind Trump even, the neverTrumpers, because party power trumps (ha) all other concerns. And the worst part is all of the people who will present a false balance and pretend they’re more enlightened and more fair by just saying “politics has declined since then” or somesuch nonsense. No, the Republican party decided to become full on power-hungry dicks as a strategy. They created echo chambers to tell their base that anything not Republican was evil and bad for America and must be opposed at all costs. They decided that any sort of cheating that put them in power was okay. They decided that party loyalty and party advancement and party power is far more important than any sort of duty to the country as a whole. When you say “politics has really declined since then” or some other bullshit version of “both sides are just as bad”, you are essentially doing propaganda work for the Republican party, normalizing their abhorrent behavior. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2019, 11:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229/27 "2019-04-30T11:04:05Z")
I’d submit that Republican nastiness predates Newt Gingrich and started with the rise of the religious right in the 1980s. The televangelists like Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell realized that they had a large and committed following and could weaponize religion in American politics. You cannot underestimate the anti-abortion and prayer-in-schools movements and how they were used to forge political campaigns. This led to the kinds of procedural warfare that the Republican party has become known for, and it also influenced their political strategy which has been to take control of the federal court system, the state legislatures, and a ridiculously gerrymandered congress. While Democrats were out campaigning and trying to win high-profile elections, the conservatives were content to wage a stealthier campaign of winning control of the legal and political systems one House district at a time, one senate race at a time, one state legislature at a time, one governor’s mansion at a time, and one court justice at a time. The fact that these were not just struggles for political power but for the religious soul of this country and struggles to define the character of our society made the battles much more intense. The brutal truth is that we find ourselves in now in a situation where even if we win back the presidency and the congress, it is going to take a long, long time to push conservatives out of power to the point where our politics becomes obstructionist proof. That is how they have set this up: the conservatives have gamed the system so that even if they lose power for a few years, it is still easy to undermine liberal progress through obstruction, by blocking progressive political initiatives in the courts or through propaganda or other means so that the liberals fail. When in power, they destroy the government’s budget so that it simply doesn’t work and takes years to clean up afterward. And a majority of people in this society are so uneducated that they don’t really understand who’s to blame. Without the ability to hold the right people accountable for political failure, there is no reason for conservatives not to keep playing this sick game. ---
**Author:** ![flip-68](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e99b99/32.png) [@flip-68](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flip-68)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2019, 11:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229/28 "2019-04-30T11:09:06Z")
I would say that after WW2 there was a great feeling of ‘we’re all in this together so let’s work for the common good’ - certainly in the UK. by the 1980’s that generation’s ideals were old hat and the common theme of politics and power came back to the front. what we need now is a good war 😉 ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2019, 12:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229/29 "2019-04-30T12:56:39Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > Politics is always about power. Humans are hierarchical creatures and egalitarian at the same time. We acknowledge that there has to be a structure of power and that not everyone is qualified to make decisions, but at the same time, we also believe on some level that those who hold power should not use that power to enrich themselves at everyone else’s expense. This has been the struggle since time immemorial. > [@Voyager](#): > > I’m reading the Federalist Papers, and they are all about power. Who gets it and how it is controlled. Obviously if you want to get something accomplished, you need power to do it. > What is different these days is the use of power to rewrite the rules so you don’t lose power. Thus gerrymandering. Thus changing laws before a party loses the governorship. Making it hard for those who might be opposed to you to vote. > That’s the kind of thing dictators do to hold on to power. And these days, Republicans. I would add to these sentiments that the more unevenly that power is distributed, the greater the tension between politics being about power v. being about the people. If we all have roughly the same clout, then it’s about what some people want v. what other people want, and which group has more power in a given situation is a mixture of numbers and passion. But political power wants to follow economic power, so the more skewed the wealth distribution is, the more you get legislation passed that is for the benefit of a few. For instance, what sort of groundswell of popular demand led to last year’s tax cut? Or the 2005 Bankruptcy Act? Practically none. Moneyed interests put these issues on the agenda, and got them through Congress. ---
**Author:** ![AHunter3](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ahunter3/32/368_2.png) [@AHunter3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AHunter3)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2019, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229/30 "2019-04-30T13:02:14Z")
> [@bump](#): > > Politics has always been about power- the legitimate power of the state. Now I think what you’re getting at is when did US politics quit being about doing what’s best for the nation, as filtered through one’s party’s lenses, and about garnering as much power for one’s party as possible, consequences or good of the nation be damned. > > I’d say that in some sense, that’s an attitude that’s mostly limited to the GOP, and it began sometime between about 1988 or so. I think it was a sort of perfect storm between the Contract With America and subsequent increased party discipline, the advent of right-wing talk radio, and the advent of the Web. Yeah, basically. I think the GOP really got entranced in the 1980s with the idea that they were the permanent majority party now. Kennedy and Johnson were a long time ago and the Left in America had been marginalized. Nixon had been elected to two terms, and his doing stupid things that got him kicked out of office was seen by the GOP as an anomaly. Carter winning his one term was part of that anomaly, and quickly remedied. American wanted the Right, obviously. Reagan, Reagan again, then Bush, all ticking along as it should. Then that upstart Clinton _wins_ and the Republicans act like it just ain’t fair, that’s not supposed to happen!? And they go all trench warfare like it’s THEIR goddam White House and they want it back and they want it back NOW. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2019, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229/31 "2019-04-30T13:16:45Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Only that what I meant by having to take “the people” into account meant when some political power began to be held outside of the aristocracies, as opposed to just managing the masses in an effort to prevent revolts and uprisings and such. First, there were other forms of government before, during and after the feudal ages. Second, even in those feudal ages, aristocrats weren’t the only ones to hold power. I’ve told before the story of how surprised Felipe V of Spain was when he found out that “calling Parliament” in the Foral areas wasn’t calling for a meeting of himself, a bishop, two dudes with big titles and a handful of mayors, it was calling for a meeting with anybody who wanted to attend and could afford to do so (I don’t know if he ever got to the point of being informed this included women). There were cities (plural, Venice wasn’t the only one) where the ruling class was merchants rather than aristocrats. The concept of “nobility” was different in different places: the majority of Spain’s nobles wouldn’t have been considered so in England. There was an enormous range between the legal, social and economical situation of a Russian farmer and one in Sicily. Back to the OP, there has always been and will always be people who are power-hungry and who want to have a seat just to have one, and part of the game of seats involves keeping the worse ones from plunking down. There are also people who are willing to lose money and sleep in order to serve, those who jump in thinking they won’t get elected, get elected and do a good job… “politicians” are no more a uniform species than “computer programmers”, “policemen” or “airplane pilots”. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2019, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229/32 "2019-04-30T13:21:05Z")
There’s also some merit to the idea that all of it was sort of “in-solution” like carbon dioxide in a shaken soda bottle, for years, if not decades prior to the late 1980s/early 1990s, and the disintegration of the Soviet Union and subsequent end of the Cold War was like taking the cap off. Now they (the GOP) didn’t have to toe the line and work with/compromise with the Democrats in order to get their particular national defense stuff enacted, so they kind of went hog-wild. I think that era’s increased party discipline is what made the GOP realize that hey, if we stick together like glue, we can get what we want done OR we can be incredibly obstructionist if we need to be. And they’re all singing in tune, and in harmony, so to speak, with very, very few dissenters. That’s pretty politically powerful, especially in our system. You’re not dealing with the Southern Republicans who are big on defense, or the Midwestern Republicans who are anti-immigration, or the Eastern Republicans who are anti-drug. You’re dealing with the REPUBLICANS, who are ALL about a specific set of policies and seem to have very few, if any policy mavericks. That’s why this Tea Party and Trump stuff is so perplexing to outsiders- you’d think these guys would put personal ethics and beliefs, and those of their constituents ahead of party, but that’s not how it works for them- they’ve been indoctrinated that if they’re loyal to the Party, the Party will be loyal to them (eventually). So they’re collectively sticking to their guns and doubling-down. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2019, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229/33 "2019-04-30T13:26:13Z")
> [@Kearsen1](#): > > I have often wondered why the political process has struggled to find any common middle ground, at least the past 2.5 presidencies, but when did that dynamic start? > > I think I remember as far back as Carter but I don’t remember much of his presidency. Was it Reagan? > > In my opinion, it is continuing this downward trend to the detriment of the populace. > > I guess I have a bunch of questions why but 2 glaring ones. > > When did it start? > Why do we the people continue to allow it? What are you talking about? Politics has always been a struggle for the public welfare against the powerful. Occasionally something good breaks through, like emancipation or sufferage or the New Deal or the Labor Act or Lyndon Johnson. It’s always been a slow excruciating process of small advances with frequent setbacks favoring conservatives. Remember, the sole true conservative value is preservation of the status quo hierarchy. So that’s the enemy that we are always fighting in order to improve the public welfare. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Kearsen1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen1)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2019, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229/34 "2019-04-30T14:49:42Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > What are you talking about? Politics has always been a struggle for the public welfare against the powerful. Occasionally something good breaks through, like emancipation or sufferage or the New Deal or the Labor Act or Lyndon Johnson. It’s always been a slow excruciating process of small advances with frequent setbacks favoring conservatives. > > Remember, the sole true conservative value is preservation of the status quo hierarchy. So that’s the enemy that we are always fighting in order to improve the public welfare. Ok, so I realize that my question was phrased poorly. I understand that politics in general, has always been about power. What I mean is when did politicians stop cooperating with one another for the betterment of society at large. My thought was that it started sliding about the Reagan era. And then we have what we have today, total obstructionism. So was it a bill that eliminated pork projects? Some sort of elimination of any reason for cooperation? Are the projects (healthcare, guns, abortion, etc) themselves just more divisive, single voter type stuff? Or is it something else. The 24hr news cycle? ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Kearsen1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen1)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2019, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229/35 "2019-04-30T14:52:15Z")
> [@bump](#): > > There’s also some merit to the idea that all of it was sort of “in-solution” like carbon dioxide in a shaken soda bottle, for years, if not decades prior to the late 1980s/early 1990s, and the disintegration of the Soviet Union and subsequent end of the Cold War was like taking the cap off. Now they (the GOP) didn’t have to toe the line and work with/compromise with the Democrats in order to get their particular national defense stuff enacted, so they kind of went hog-wild. > > I think that era’s increased party discipline is what made the GOP realize that hey, if we stick together like glue, we can get what we want done OR we can be incredibly obstructionist if we need to be. And they’re all singing in tune, and in harmony, so to speak, with very, very few dissenters. That’s pretty politically powerful, especially in our system. You’re not dealing with the Southern Republicans who are big on defense, or the Midwestern Republicans who are anti-immigration, or the Eastern Republicans who are anti-drug. You’re dealing with the REPUBLICANS, who are ALL about a specific set of policies and seem to have very few, if any policy mavericks. > > That’s why this Tea Party and Trump stuff is so perplexing to outsiders- you’d think these guys would put personal ethics and beliefs, and those of their constituents ahead of party, but that’s not how it works for them- they’ve been indoctrinated that if they’re loyal to the Party, the Party will be loyal to them (eventually). So they’re collectively sticking to their guns and doubling-down. This makes a bit of sense to me. And it is an answer to the question that I asked poorly. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2019, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229/36 "2019-04-30T16:16:13Z")
> [@Kearsen1](#): > > Ok, so I realize that my question was phrased poorly. I understand that politics in general, has always been about power. What I mean is when did politicians stop cooperating with one another for the betterment of society at large. > > My thought was that it started sliding about the Reagan era. And then we have what we have today, total obstructionism. The 77th Congress, from 1941-1943, did everything possible to impede war preparation, before and after Pearl Harbor. They hated Roosevelt and didn’t want to give him anything or allow him to look good and they were terrified of taking any stances that might be unpopular with the public. The earlier Roosevelt battled the Senate - at that time still appointed by states and often bosses of their parties - every moment because they were entirely the tool of business and flatly refused to consider any opposing policies, especially those for the working class. You can run up and down U.S. history and find similar examples. The notion that politicians worked together for the betterment of society at time is simplistic grade school textbook propaganda. Politics has been a blood sport since the Washington administration. It may get better due to odd moments of public unity or worse - we’re certainly seeing a party-line split that is unusual and extreme, but mostly you’re simply displaying ignorance of actual history rather than the rosy glow Americans are determined to lay across the past. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2019, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229/37 "2019-04-30T16:41:03Z")
> [@Kearsen1](#): > > Ok, so I realize that my question was phrased poorly. I understand that politics in general, has always been about power. What I mean is when did politicians stop cooperating with one another for the betterment of society at large. > > My thought was that it started sliding about the Reagan era. And then we have what we have today, total obstructionism. > > So was it a bill that eliminated pork projects? Some sort of elimination of any reason for cooperation? Are the projects (healthcare, guns, abortion, etc) themselves just more divisive, single voter type stuff? Or is it something else. > The 24hr news cycle? I’d say it’s been a long process. I’d mark at least three stages: 1. The Progressive Era – When Theodore Roosevelt came to power as a Progressive Republican and started curbing the excessive power that capitalists enjoyed in the era of the Robber Barons. That hardened the resolve of a certain strata of the super-rich to try to ensure that they controlled the politicians. 2. The New Deal Era – When Franklin Roosevelt came to power and saved capitalism and democracy from authoritarianism, this further hardened the mercantilists, who started joining up with other types of conservatives who for one reason or another disliked the progressives. 3. The Civil Rights Era – This accelerated the process of whites of all kinds, but particularly middle and working class men, becoming Republican and conservative. Such people might have been progressive, or unionist, or socialist, or liberal on some issues in the past, but couldn’t tolerate racial equality. Ever since then, the right has progressively strengthened itself as a tribal entity, and has built itself by increasing alarms against the threat of elimination. Every issue on the right now is a matter of identity–guns, abortion, same-sex marriage. Every bit of social progress is a threat to their existence. So that means that there can be no compromise with the enemy. That attitude slowly solidified throughout the late '60s and the '70s, and the first wave of white anger brought Reagan to the top. Reagan successfully combined tribal anger with anti-progressive economic policies, but as time went on, the rhetoric of “no compromise” became more and more a reality. It all became an excuse for the right/Republicans to do anything in the name of winning–impeaching Clinton, investigating Hillary to death, suppressing votes, denying Obama a legitimate Supreme Court nomination. It all coalesced when McConnell declared that the job of the Republican majority was to deny Obama a second term. So, that’s how we come to this point – Republicanism and conservatism have merged, and they have merged under the banner of “whatever it takes to win.” It’s a tribal identity–define the “other” in disparaging terms, and then if you want to identify with the “good guys,” it’s now okay–well, not only okay, but absolutely necessary–for your side to do absolutely anything and everything it takes to seize and maintain power. That’s failure of “cooperation” and “compromise” as a value is the story of the modern conservative movement. It’s the end result, and the logical result, of everything that conservatives have been saying and doing at least as far back as 1900. ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2019, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229/38 "2019-04-30T17:15:26Z")
> [@AHunter3](#): > > Yeah, basically. > > I think the GOP really got entranced in the 1980s with the idea that they were the permanent majority party now. Kennedy and Johnson were a long time ago and the Left in America had been marginalized. Nixon had been elected to two terms, and his doing stupid things that got him kicked out of office was seen by the GOP as an anomaly. Carter winning his one term was part of that anomaly, and quickly remedied. American wanted the Right, obviously. Reagan, Reagan again, then Bush, all ticking along as it should. > > Then that upstart Clinton _wins_ and the Republicans act like it just ain’t fair, that’s not supposed to happen!? And they go all trench warfare like it’s THEIR goddam White House and they want it back and they want it back NOW. This is pretty much the exact opposite of what happened. What actually happened was that after the Great Depression the Democrats had control of the House for 58 of the next 62 years and control of the Senate for 52 of the next 62 years. During this time there became an accepted way of getting legislation passed and acquiring power. If you were a democrat you worked your way up into seniority and got whatever you could get with whoever was in the white house. If you were a Republican you tried to work with moderate democrats to rein in the worse excesses and get stuff for your district. In 1996 Clinton’s blundering and the overall tilt of the country led to the GOP taking over congress for the first time in 40 years. However in contrast to the huge majorities enjoyed by the Democrats the Republican majorities were small and fragile. This meant Republicans had to be united to get anything done and obstruction was easy. At the same time the rise of first cable news and then the internet meant that the partys’ bases to monitor everything happening and gave congressmen less flexibility in their votes. Since then both parties understand that the only way to get stuff done is to wait until you have both houses and the presidency and pass as much stuff as fast as possible. Because the party in power always loses power in the congress after the first two years of a presidency. Adding to this is the fact that the last two presidents have been callow newcomers to the national political scene and didn’t know how things worked when elected. Thus there is no support for compromise only opprobrium from the partisan masses who run the parties. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2019, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229/39 "2019-04-30T17:29:30Z")
Adding to this all is the fact that in recent decades, both sides now desire the political extinction of the other. It’s no longer about working together, it’s about stamping out the other side’s very political existence, by out-voting or out-maneuvering them out of existence. That sort of cutthroat mindset kills any incentive to compromise, and drives an utterly fervent desire for power at all costs. I think it was Mao, perhaps, who said that politics is simply peaceful warfare, and warfare is simply violent politics. Politics and warfare are the same thing, just on different levels of intensity. ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2019, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229/40 "2019-04-30T17:35:57Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > This is pretty much the exact opposite of what happened. What actually happened was that after the Great Depression the Democrats had control of the House for 58 of the next 62 years and control of the Senate for 52 of the next 62 years. During this time there became an accepted way of getting legislation passed and acquiring power. If you were a democrat you worked your way up into seniority and got whatever you could get with whoever was in the white house. If you were a Republican you tried to work with moderate democrats to rein in the worse excesses and get stuff for your district. > > In 1996 Clinton’s blundering and the overall tilt of the country led to the GOP taking over congress for the first time in 40 years. However in contrast to the huge majorities enjoyed by the Democrats the Republican majorities were small and fragile. This meant Republicans had to be united to get anything done and obstruction was easy. At the same time the rise of first cable news and then the internet meant that the partys’ bases to monitor everything happening and gave congressmen less flexibility in their votes. > > Since then both parties understand that the only way to get stuff done is to wait until you have both houses and the presidency and pass as much stuff as fast as possible. Because the party in power always loses power in the congress after the first two years of a presidency. Adding to this is the fact that the last two presidents have been callow newcomers to the national political scene and didn’t know how things worked when elected. > > Thus there is no support for compromise only opprobrium from the partisan masses who run the parties. Jesus Fucking Christ. Obama tried to compromise constantly. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-did-politics-become-more-about-power-and-less-the-people/833229.md?page=3)