MSNBC: Political Fringe Looks To Take Over The Party Of Eisenhower

Presidential historian John Meacham has a poor read of American history.

America’s political parties, political coalitions and governing ideologies have always had a shelf life. The implosion of mainstream conservatism and mainstream liberalism was actually long overdue and inevitable. We’re simply going through another transition between party systems.

The political establishment has always responded like this to the rise of every populist movement in American history. It was true of Andrew Jackson who the Whigs demonized as a tyrant and coalesced to oppose. Jackson’s presidency ended the Era of Good Feelings. It was especially true of William Jennings Bryan in the 1896, 1900 and 1908 elections. The rise of Bryan marked the end of the Gilded Age. Why wouldn’t it be true again today when the ruling class has once again lost its legitimacy?

Modern liberalism was built out of populism and progressivism. It is collapsing because these two camps are now at odds. The progressives have finally taken over full control of the Democratic Party and have alienated and driven out the populists. The Democratic Party is now the party of the professional managerial class. It is defined by antiracism, modernism and cosmopolitanism which is holy trinity of social liberalism. It has added on political correctness or wokeness over the past thirty years. White working class voters are deserting liberalism over mass immigration and political correctness all over the West. They are fully aware that woke progressive elites hold them in contempt and want to attack their rights.

Modern conservatism was built out of libertarianism and social conservatism. It is similarly collapsing because these two ideas are deeply at odds and only found common ground during the Cold War. Libertarianism is a solvent that dissolves the social bonds that social conservatives care about. The people who are deeply alienated from the Trump coalition are the “moderates” who are social liberals and fiscal conservatives who live in the wealthy suburbs. The other moderates who were happier with Trump are social conservatives and economic populists and tend to be working class voters.

The rise of rightwing populism and “far right domestic extremism” and a populist-conservative coalition and a partisan press is also what we used to call the Democratic Party throughout most of American history before Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt attracted Eastern elites. Populists hate the plutocrats, warmongers and country club elites who used to rule the Republican Party for obvious reasons. We still dislike those people now that they have become new Democrats.

Note: The old Democratic Party before the progressives invaded was a Southern-based party of farmers, workers and small businessmen and, of course, the straight out unapologetic White man. The old Republican Party which used to be the home of the progressives was an Eastern-based party which was the home of Big Business, Wall Street, professionals and utopian social reformers.

About Hunter Wallace 12387 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

20 Comments

  1. @ “party of eisenhower”, eh!? They have nobody, except a couple of congress women, no agenda, same ole, same ole, desperately trying to rehabilitate thee image of the “party of lincoln”, thee republican establishment left d.trump hangin, didnt matter what their constituents wanted, didnt matter that their constituents, were taking it on the chin economically, while they thru money at everybody , but american working people, no thanks.

  2. As I’ve said many times, I would take the old Dixiecrat’s over the modern and old Republicans any day.

    As far As Eisenhower goes, he should have been charged with war crimes for what he did to the German POW’s.

  3. I wonder what people here think about the validity that Libertarianism, at the end of the day, being a manifestation of white flight and white resentment? Not the diehard ideologues, of course. But some who simply wanted to retreat and surrender control of the public schools and institutions like the State, etc; and so, found an ideology that could both comfort their white grievance about the downward mobility of society (“bad schools”), while also wanting to surrender/secede/escape from what was taken over by other racial groups/enemy factions (while not thinking themselves racist. which acts as a form of denialism to still air their grievance. and still not be totally ostracized after much territory was conquered); retreatism. I don’t know to what degree this is true. Interesting nonetheless.

    • 100% Agree but I would also add it has an element of mal-adjusted teenager “how dare you tell me what to do.” Libertarianism is an ideology that appeals to socially mal-adjusted people and cowards coping with ‘white fragility.”

      • Totally agree. That’s all Liberalism tbh. It’s the teenager “Don’t tell me what to do. It’s about my freedom and my rights and my individualism.” But Libertarianism takes it to whole new level (which is a feat).

        They don’t even believe in a community like Nationalists (one plus for Nationalists) do. They believe in a giant shopping mall for a country. A society is nothing more than an economic zone where capital just flows (countries are nothing more than vendors to bribe capitalists). Their goal is to make everything as cheap as possible (goods, etc). Everything is reduced to materialism and economic exchange. I even seen Libertarians reduce relationships to an exchange with constant make analogies with a buyer and seller. “You provide sex and I provide you safety.” Doing something for someone because you love them without any expectation of anything in return is an alien concept to them. Sacrifice is truly an alien concept because of their worship of individual. It’s truly a repulsive ideology.

        “Don’t oppress me bro. I want to smoke weed and shoot guns down a range and yell freedom. I have no discipline and higher purpose. I can’t be an adult.”

  4. We are called the “political fringe” precisely because we support the same things Eisenhower did:

    Honor the memory of Robert E. Lee
    Deport the illegals immigrants
    A quota-based immigration system designed to maintain America’s traditional ethnic balance
    Traditional patriotism, Christianity and family values
    90% income tax for the very rich
    End the pointless wars, stop supporting Israel
    Reigning in the military-industrial complex
    Infrastructure spending
    Balanced trade

    Eisenhower’s only serious mistake was appointing Warren to the Supreme Court, and then enforcing Warren’s unconstitutional Brown vs. Board of Education ruling – and he himself admitted that appointing Warren was his worst mistake!

  5. Funny how the corporate establishment media doesn’t talk about how radicalized the DemonKKKrap party has become, only how “fringe elements” are taking over the GOP. Of course by fringe they mean putting America first, not Israel, the Atlantic Alliance or Wall Street.

      • I saw a couple of Proud Boys at that free speech rally in Palm Beach Gardens two weeks ago. I don’t know if they were there as observers or to provide security for the event. They were all covered up with masks, sunglasses and bandanas. I couldn’t help but suspect that some of them might be working for the Feds or the SPLC. But what do I know?

  6. Eisenhower was a POS general and president, so today’s GOP are the rightful heirs of his philosemitism and race mixing.

    • According to Robert Welch, founder of the John Birch Society, Eisenhower was conscious tool of the “communist conspiracy”. Senator Robert Taft was rightful GOP presidential candidate in 1952 but I suspect his outspoken criticism of the Nuremberg Trials “disqualified” him.

  7. Am I the only one who thinks Trumpism is just as bad – if not worse – than the standard GOP? I mean the only real difference between the two is the rhetoric and flag waving. The policy is exactly the same.

    Can you imagine if 9/11 occurred on Trump’s watch? He would’ve been worse than Bush without a doubt.

    • There isn’t really any “trumpism.” The political shifts that are referred to as “trumpism” were already occurring before Trump. He just took advantage of the trends and shifted the focus to himself.

  8. “Political Fringe Looks To Take Over The Party Of Eisenhower” MSNBC

    Given that you regard anything but your own views various forms of lunacy, ignorance, and or devilry, why would anyone regard your appraisal of their views?

  9. Liberalism and the left survive because the Republican Party provides fake opposition against them. The usual suspects are scared to death real opposition is at hand and I don’t mean Donald Trump.

Comments are closed.