The GOP Attack On Ted Cruz
The recent attacks on Ted Cruz by leaders of his own Party represent one of the clearest indications that Caroll Quigley was correct: there is only one Party in America, it merely pretend to be two. Many of my friends strongly disagree with my acceptance of Quigley’s claim, but I have accepted it because the preponderance of the evidence supports his assertion. In fact, had I never heard of Quigley or his claim, it is very likely I would still have arrived at the same conclusion all on my own. This is because Quigley’s argument offers the simplest, most consistent and coherent explanation for the behavior we see in the leadership of our two political Parties.
For those who are not familiar with Caroll Quigley, he was a professor of history at Georgetown University. He wrote a book, “Tragedy and Hope,” in which he claimed that, as part of a plan to prevent another global war, our two political Parties merged. This was to insure that our national policy would remain largely consistent, and thus, predictable. It was also to centralize control over that policy. This new, one-Party system continued to pretend to be two Parties to divert the energies of the American people. By giving us the impression that we can “vote the bums out,” the Party provides the illusion that the people still matter. It also allows the Party leaders to blame each other, Democrat and Republican, for the anger they knew their centralized policies would create among the American Public, which further serves to re-direct the public backlash.
On the surface, this would appear to be the thing of which conspiracy theories are made. However, when it is seriously considered, it explains many things. If one looks at American political policy since WW II, one finds that we have followed what is generally a consistent direction – no matter which Party controlled Congress or the White House. It also explains why supposed political enemies can come nearly to blows on the floor of the House or Senate, yet be seen enjoying a game of golf or an intimate dinner together just hours later. And it explains why, when someone who is truly outside of this one-party-pretending-to-be-two cabal manages to win an election, both “Parties” attacks that person (or movement). The leadership of both Parties regularly attacked Ronald Reagan. And, when the grass roots sent large numbers of TEA Party candidates to the House, the Republican Party leadership boldly announced the TEA Party agenda was DOA when it got to Capital Hill.
So, now that the polls show that some 58% of the American people oppose Obamacare, and a vast majority of that 58% are GOP voters, you would think that the Republican Party leadership would be doing everything it could to repeal and/or defund Obamacare. You would expect the Republican Party to be supporting people like Ted Cruz. But, instead of supporting the leaders of the push to end Obamacare, the GOP leadership has attacked them:
John McCain Rips Ted Cruz on Senate Floor, Says the ‘People Spoke’ on Obamacare
But take this one step further. Note what Sen. McCain said:
“We fought as hard as we could in a fair and honest manner and we lost. One of the reasons was because we were in the minority, and in democracies, almost always the majority governs and passes legislation,” he added.
This is an excuse. It also shows a profound ignorance of the Constitution, how it was constructed and why. The Constitution was constructed expressly to allow a minority to still influence the direction of the nation – so that the tyranny of the majority could not easily trample the rights of that minority. What’s more, McCain’s claim ignores the peoples’ will when they sent the TEA Party to Capital Hill for the expressed purpose of stopping Obamacare. In this light, his argument actually works in the opposite direction he and Obama are claiming. In this sense, as in many others, the Republican Party leadership is acting to support the Democrat Party agenda and not the will of their own voters. So, let me ask you: if you support the same agendas, but you call yourself by a different name, are you really two Parties?
Have you ever read any of my posts about how Progressives believe you can change the essence of a thing simply by changing the word by which you call it? Well, this is an example of how it works. You can still believe everything you once believed, argue as you have always argued, and vote as you have always voted, but by calling yourself a Republican, Progressive believe you can suddenly turn yourself into a “Right-Wing extremist.” But, if nothing else has changed by what you call yourself, have you really changed? No, because words do not define, form and function do. Therefore, if the Republican Party leadership is constantly supporting or caving to the Democrat Party agenda, are they really an opposition Party? Or are they part of a one-Party system that just pretends to be two Parties so the people won’t figure out what is happening and truly throw them out of power?
The Oil for Your Lamp 