Mandeville, LA – Exclusive Transcript – That is precisely the question that we ought to be having. I never voted. I never got a vote on whether or not I wanted to be a citizen of the world or a citizen of the global market. I’m perfectly happy just eating my Louisiana shrimp, drinking and consuming my imported coffee sweetened with Louisiana sugarcane. Check out today’s transcript for the rest….
FOLKS, a message from Mike – The Audio Clip of The Day files, Project 76 feature presentations, Church Doctrine audio & video clips and everything else on this site are supported by YOU. We have over 70, of my personally designed, written, produced and directed products for sale in the Founders Tradin’ Post, 24/7, here. You can also support our efforts with a Founders Pass membership granting total access to years of My work for just .17 cents per day. Not convinced? Take the tour! Thanks for 18 years of mike church.com! – Mike
HERE’S YOUR FREE AUDIO PREVIEW OF THIS CLIP OF THE DAY – TO HEAR THE ENTIRE EPISODE JOIN FOUNDERS PASS NOW! FOR HUNDREDS MORE CLIPS, VISIT THE CLIP OF THE DAY ARCHIVE HERE
[private |FP-Monthly|FP-Yearly|FP-Yearly-WLK|FP-Yearly-So76|Founding Brother|Founding Father|FP-Lifetime]
Begin Mike Church Show Transcript
Mike: Matt Lewis says:
Could it be that the paradigm has shifted? Could it be that the three-winged movement has been replaced by Trump’s “three-ringed circus”? Could it be that the conservative movement is no longer driven by a coalition of fiscal conservatives, people of faith, and those concerned about foreign policy, but instead is driven by a coalition consisting of working class whites, blue collar populists, and anti-immigration hawks?
It is possible that the world has changed, and the Old Right (which is more similar to what we see in Europe) has returned. As Michael Brendan Dougherty argues over at The Week (where I serve as a contributing editor):
“Trump may turn out to be a blip in this election cycle. But some days Trumpism looks like the future. Instead of parties divided by questions of political economy — crudely speaking, socialism or capitalism — we may be having debates between the globalized economy and actual communities: market or nation.“
Mike: Let’s stop right there. You don’t have to take it any further than that. That is precisely the question that we ought to be having. I never voted. I never got a vote on whether or not I wanted to be a citizen of the world or a citizen of the global market. I’m perfectly happy just eating my Louisiana shrimp, drinking and consuming my imported coffee sweetened with Louisiana sugarcane. We have Louisiana cotton here to make clothes and everything else. We’ve got Louisiana oil and natural gas. I don’t need to be a citizen of the world. I think that Dougherty and Lewis are both onto something. What’s happening here is that people in locales are now giving up. They’re giving up because they keep doing the right thing. They keep doing what they’re told to do. They join the Tea Party. They join the local executive council on the Republican Party. They are activists. They go to meetings. They get ordinances passed where they live and where they work and where they love and where they have families. Then they’re told: That was nice. Sorry, but you’re not going to have your way.
Jordan Bloom: Right, and I think it needs to be pointed out that this three-legged stool of conservatism, there’s social conservatism, fiscal conservatism, and hawkishness. It was never an especially stable coalition. For the people you’re talking about, it doesn’t really speak to their needs. I think most of these people probably are not that enthusiastic about building democracy in Iraq with bombs. They’ve been completely routed on the social issue. These are people that do care about the social issue but they’ve been routed and they’ve got a party that doesn’t stand up for them. For the foreseeable future, I don’t think anyone in the Republican leadership has any interest in fighting on that issue. The three-legged stool is, as far as I see it, just doesn’t really exist anymore. All you have is fiscal conservatives, and to the extent that fiscal conservatism means tax cuts for rich people.
Mike: That’s what it means. You’ve got to refresh this, because there are many people that don’t even know where the three-legged stool came from. That’s Reagan’s stool. That’s what they said. Reagan didn’t come up with it, but Reaganism and the revolution of ‘76, 1976, which, of course, Ronald Reagan was thwarted at the convention but he ultimately won out, was this alleged three-legged stool that Jordan is talking about. I always thought about it in terms of three-legged stools aren’t very stable. You probably shouldn’t sit on them. Don’t lean one way or the other because you’re going to fall over.
Bloom: So what they’re trying to do — what Reagan was doing — the national security leg of the stool meant anticommunism. There are a whole lot of people, Reagan Democrats and those sorts of people, blue-collar workers in the Midwest, those kinds of people that were pretty anti-communist. It’s kind of a heavy lift to get them to care as much about Islamic terrorism, and to treat it as something other than kind of a police problem, which I think we ought to do.
Mike: I think one of the things that is happening out there — I am blessed to be able to talk to a lot of people from a very wide, diverse calling of life, if you will, geographic circumstance, etc. And I think one of those things that is occurring out there — you see this manifested in the popularity of Trumpzilla and the popularity of Carly Fiorina. If we had Fiorina in, now we’re over 50 percent rejection of the party — is that your person that calls, your average guy or gal that calls themselves conservative, they still call themselves conservatives. But the amount of people that they believe they can identify with, that they have assisted in attaining elected position . . .
End Mike Church Show Transcript