The poll numbers that explain why Republican office holders are loath to criticize Trump

One thing American liberals have to accept

At this point in time many self-described Republicans have simply withdrawn into their own alternative reality. This is “centrism” is untenable, we can’t drift any closer towards fantasy than we already have, and these folks aren’t going to move towards the left.

This trend has be obvious for a very long time and many Democrats have been in denial, but there you have it. The good news is that these Trump supporters are a clear minority, so even if congressional Republicans play to their “base”, that small base doesn’t have the numerical power to keep them in office for very long, as long as the Democrats don’t keep blowing it.

Kingstad and the “spectrum”

Mr. Kingstad wrote a nice comment a while back about the political spectrum being more circular than linear, thus explaining some similarities between the extremes on both “sides”.

However the circular spectrum misses the mark in the end because the whole idea of a “spectrum” circular or otherwise is an artificial construct. In reality we don’t have a “spectrum” of political thought ranging from left to right. Rather we have a political landscape that’s populated by a variety of participants that share more or less similarities. The “spectrum” was always a poor metaphor because it wasn’t based on the actual qualities of any ideology, it simply dropped participants on a line based on historical continuums that diverge rather than converge. So for instance, Stalin and Lenin end up on the left when they have few if any liberal credentials. The similarity between Stalin and Hitler isn’t based on their proximity on a circular spectrum, the similarity is the their totalitarianism which, it’s an intrinsic quality of their ideology and political mentality, not their orientation relative so some other place on an artificial spectrum.

As a general rule it’s more informative to simply describe an ideology rather than try to locate an actor on an artificial spectrum of some kind. The quality Stalin and other dictators share is their reactionary and dictatorial nature. On the other hand while Anarchist and Libertarians might share some ideas regarding the necessity of “government”, they are very different mentalities that simply cannot be compared or understood with the use of a “spectrum” of any kind, you just have to look at their qualities.

The illusion of “spectrums” by they way is one reason that “centrism” is incoherent. Obviously striving for the middle of a “spectrum” that doesn’t actually exist is project based on delusion. Centrism can’t find the “center” of anything, it can only mix and match different ideas and qualities drawn from other actors on the landscape. Those pretending to be “centrist” on the American political landscape aren’t in the middle of anything; since they draw more inspiration from conservative actors than liberal actors they simply end up being moderate Republicans. To the extent that moderate Republicans run the Democratic Party, we have to liberal representation on the American political landscape.

Libertarians, to the extent that they’ve adopted Ayn Rand mentalities, are simply incoherent. The problem with Libertarians is that their “ideology” is based on sooooo many fallacies that it simply cannot be converted into a sensible agenda. From human nature to the US Constitution Libertarians and Rand are submerged in fallacy and misunderstanding. Rand herself never managed to produce a legitimate “philosophy”. “Objectivism” is a stolen term, and it’s “principles” are a mish-mash of bad and misunderstood ideas stolen from a variety of unacknowledged sources. Libertarians exist on the American political landscape, but unfortunately their mostly useless, and they have little in common with Anarchist on an intellectual or historical level.

Two major actors on the political landscape have been “liberals” and “Conservatives”. Again, to understand these actors it make little sense to put them next to each other on a spectrum, you have to look at their actual qualities. One qualitative difference between liberals and conservatives is that conservatives tend to place more value on what they “believe” while liberals tend to value they “know”. The danger of liberalism is that sometimes you don’t know what you think you know, and you don’t know what you don’t know. The danger of Conservatives is that they frequently get confused regarding the difference between “knowledge” and “faith”. Conservative have a habit of assuming that what they “believe” and what is “known” are the same thing. We see this reflected in the conservative mentalities that claim to be: “Orginalist” or “Constitutionalists” who assume that their “beliefs” regarding the US Constitution, it’s history, and its authors, are historically reliable and infallible facts. The truth is that few people are as confused and misinformed as those claiming to be conservative champions of the US Constitution. That fact makes their claim to be the great defenders of “Freedom” in American a dangerous fantasy. In fact, “Constitutionalist” are actors most likely to tear up the “real” Constitution and replace it with a dictatorial authorization. We’ve seen this impulse clearly with Trump who obviously has not regard for rule of law yet claims to be acting on behalf of American freedom and liberty.