#kennedy-isms | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

rdng1230 · 2 months

Text

Breaking down that "which actor/singer are you" scene from chapter 4

I was gonna write this after I was done with the whole thing but fuck it. I'm damn proud of it and I want to let all of you in on the layers:

"“I’m just tryna figure out which member of the rat pack you are.” Tommy ponders, using his spoon to gesture in his direction. Sal poses jokingly, before eventually just giving up and pointing at his eyes. “Mmm, too obvious.” Tommy says with a quirk of his eyebrow. “Even ole Blue Eyes has got nothin’ on you in that department.”"

Ok so this is when the options are limited to just the members of the Rat Pack, There's no universally agreed upon list of who was in the Rat Pack, but generally it includes the likes of Dean Martin, Peter Lawford, Sammy Davis Jr., and most famously Frank Sinatra, whose nickname was 'Ol' Blue Eyes'. So he's saying Sal's eyes are prettier than the man who is famous for having gorgeous blue eyes. More down bad-ism on display from our dear Tommy Kinard.

So Tommy broadens his sights to classic Hollywood in general.

""Sal knows whatever he’s about to say is gonna be equal parts bitchy and adorable. “Brando.” Tommy nods, sure of himself. “Definitely Brando.” Sal brings one hand under his chin, doing his best smolder.""

So Brando is one of Hollywood's most famous Hound dogs and he was an equal opportunity hound dog. his affairs included Rita Moreno, James Dean (apparently they were like SUPER kinky), Jackie Kennedy, and indeed, legendary comedian Richard Pryor. He was also known for his cocky smoldery attitude. Tommy making this comparison is an indicator that he likes Sal and is super attracted to him, but doesn't really take him seriously as a long term romantic prospect. That list of affairs I mentioned? He was married during most of them.

Another layer to this is that Sal compared himself to Sinatra and Tommy compared him to Brando who notoriously HATED each other. Brando stole the role Sinatra wanted in the movie version of Guys and Dolls. Now funny enough, the role Sinatra ended up having was as a kind of lovable goofy guy who is actually deeply in love with the woman he's with but has strung her along for 14 years because he's too afraid to come out and commit to his own feelings. She ends up pushing him away and breaking up with him because she doesn't believe he's ever going to actually choose her (hmmm now what couple does that remind us of?)

As an aside, I actually think Sal and Tommy have a lot more in common with Brando's character Sky and his love interest Sarah. Sky, like Sal, is a hound dog who is really surprised to find himself in love. Sarah, like Tommy, is a romantic who is really surprised to find herself SUPER turned on and attracted to this guy she knows is wrong for her. But that's not really relevant, so moving on.

So Sal gets all up in his feelings and doesn't object to the Brando comparison. Which could mean nothing....

He turns his thoughts to picking out a comparison for Tommy. His first thought is Cary Grant, but he puts a caveat that it will make more sense when Tommy is older. He specifically singles out the North by Northwest Suit, which is widely considered to be the most perfect suit that has ever been created. This is basically him saying "I think Tommy will age so gracefully he will turn into the epitome of Suaveness."

He also eliminates the idea of Bogart, who was known for his very moody/broody personality. It's a little bit ironic, because back in Chapter 1 when they ran into each other at the wedding, Tommy's mind went immediately to Bogart's most famous broody line. This is Sal not realizing the sheer negativity happening in Tommy's subconscious. He registers Tommy's tenseness, but not necessarily the sadness its masking.

He also disqualifies Clark Gable for being too smarmy. This is honestly just him saying he thinks Tommy's coolness comes from being kind and not from being a cocky asshole.

"He throws out “Peter Lorre.” to buy himself more time. “You dick.” Tommy huffs, tossing a few more pieces of cereal for good measure."

Now this truly broke my heart when I wrote it. So Peter Lorre was famous for playing kind of effeminate gremliny little dudes. He also tends to play characters that kind of cling to the hero of the movie, like an unwanted hanger on. Now for Sal, he says it specifically because the idea of Tommy being like that is so ridiculous. but for Tommy, who has all these hang ups about being the lonely "not anybody's first choice" kind of guy, I think Tommy thinks Sal is being serious on some level.

"Sal smiles when he finds his answer. Sweet, kind, dark haired, beautiful. He runs his tongue over his lips, building up his nerves. “Rock,” He commits, “Rock Hudson.” Tommy tilts his head a little, he seems almost touched. Sal sees a cloud come over Tommy’s face that he wants to physically push away with his hands, but it's just as quickly replaced with a goading smile. “Is that a fucking gay joke?!” Tommy barks."

Ok so firstly, this answer comes to you courtesy of @mannafromtevan who provided the magic ingredient to this scene without even knowing it. Rock Hudson was a dark haired, very sweet, sort of boy next door-y type. This comparison is Sal seeing Tommy's big heart and kind demeanor and telling him so. It's probably the most honest Sal has been about how he feels about Tommy since their relationship began.

So why does Tommy get that dark cloud? Well as we've established if he can interpret things in a doomed/sad way, he will. Rock Hudson was closeted. Most of his fellow actors knew and protected him like Julie Andrews, Audrey Hepburn, Elizabeth Taylor etc. But when the AIDS crisis hit and he contracted the virus, he couldn't really hide it when he got sick.

He was essentially the first well known celebrity to publicly die of AIDS, and so again Tommy hears "doomed queer, never getting a happy ending" over all the other sweet things Sal is trying to say.

In summary, this scene is a big old red flag saying "Hey! you guys are ignoring/not seeing key facets of the other's personality!" and also that Tommy's doom spiral is very much in progress as he keeps latching on to the most negative possible meaning of Sal's words.

I think that's everything! Thank you for coming to my info dump/director audio commentary. And I'm sorry again for the trauma I have caused you all with that last scene. Never fear Saltommy friends, they'll get there eventually.

@sunnywithachanceofbi @ohlookitsthearkhamknight @racerchix21 @evansboyfriend @cliophilyra

#sal deluca #tommy kinard #saltommy

14 notes · View notes

struckd0wn · 1 year

Text

❝𝐘𝐎𝐔 𝐋𝐎𝐎𝐊 𝐋𝐎𝐍𝐄𝐋𝐘, 𝐈 𝐂𝐀𝐍 𝐅𝐈𝐗 𝐓��𝐀𝐓.❞

𝐖𝐇𝐀𝐓 𝐈 𝐖𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐄 𝐅𝐎𝐑

Overwatch

Cole Cassidy, Genji Shimada, Hanzo Shimada, Junker Queen "Odessa Stone", Junkrat "Jamison Fawkes", Ramattra, Reaper "Gabriel Rayes", Zenyatta

COD MWII

Ghost, Konig, John Price, Alejandro

Resident Evil

Leon Kennedy (re2 remake, re4 remake), Carlos Oliveira (re3 remake), Heisenberg

Valorant

Chamber, Harbor, Sova, Cypher, Gekko, Omen

Horror/Slasher

Michael Myers, Jason Voorhees, Ghostface (Billy Loomis, Stu Macher, Billy & Stu (poly), Ethan Landry), Johnny Slaughter, Bubba Slaughter, Hannibal Lester (tv series), Will Graham, Brahms, Pyramid head, Bo Sinclair, Vincent Sinclair

Spiderman

Miguel O'Hara, Harry Osborn

The Batman 2022

Bruce Wayne

MK1/MK11

Bi-Han, Kuai Liang, Smoke, Johnny Cage, Kenshi Takahashi, Raiden, Kung Lao, Syzoth, Havik, Shang Tsung

𝐃𝐎𝐬

ftm. gn. reader

smut, fluff, angst (I'm not very good at it tho)

sutual pining

bottom reader

𝐃𝐎𝐍'𝐓𝐬

female reader, fem aligned reader

character x character

minor characters

medical stuff (amputee, bad illnesses, ect. )

𝐖𝐈𝐋𝐋 𝐍𝐎𝐓 𝐖𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐄 𝐅𝐎𝐑 𝐒𝐌𝐔𝐓‼️‼️‼️

Any sorta incest, age play, sexual abuse, pedophilia, piss, scat, ddlg/ddlb, feeder, ect.

(ℙ𝕃𝔼𝔸𝕊𝔼 𝔸𝕊𝕂 𝕀𝔽 𝕐𝕆𝕌'ℝ𝔼 ℕ𝕆𝕋 𝕊𝕌ℝ𝔼 𝕆𝔽 𝕊𝕆𝕄𝔼𝕋ℍ𝕀ℕ𝔾)

𝐃𝐍𝐈

minors, any isms or ists

Female readers can interact with gn content, please DNI with trans/ftm reader content

#who i write for

52 notes · View notes

balladofbells · 2 years

Text

2022!

Thanks to all my moots for making my first year on this blog be so relatable and such a fun experience; ranting about theories, bookish crack, absolutely worthless memes, and the list goes on. This is mainly for myself.

Top post: 2000ish notes

Top blogs: @ssardothien @rhysands-rightknee @helion-ism @incorrectfbaaquotes @evolving-dreamer @yazthebookish @castleshadows @f-cursebreaker @icedflames @silverlinedeyes @sydneymack @cassianandfenrysaremyboyos @gwyns @faeobsessed-cauldronblessed

Top 3. Authors: Jennifer Armentrout, Sjm, C.S Pacat

Favourite book/fanfics(s) read this yr (no order): Glow (Raven Kennedy), House of Sky and breath (sjm), a light in the flame (jla), manacled (re-read, @Sinlinyu), breath mints/battlescars (@Onyx_and_Elm), Kill Switch (Penelope Douglas)

Currently reading: The Last Hours & The dark artifices, Cassandra Clare.

Favourite colour: Green. The aesthetic kind.

Bookshelf count: 200 books (roughly)

Top song artists: weeknd, tay tay, Florence and the machines, Beyoncé, Lana Del Rey

Favourite tv show(s): Game of Thrones, A Discovery of Witches

Films I’m enjoying: suite française, HP/FB films

Book characters who r trending in my mind: (no order): BB Quinlan (Crescent City), Seraphena Mierel (flesh & fire), Helion (Acotar), Nyktos (Flesh & fire), Julian Blackthorn (tda), eris Vanserra (Acotar), Delano (fbaa), Malik Da’Neer (fbaa), Cormac Donnall (Crescent City), Cassian (Acotar, Azriel (Acotar), The Valkyries (Acosf), Matthew De Claremont (ADOW).

Qoute: “We are bound together, Emma, bound together—I breathe when you breathe, I bleed when you bleed, I’m yours and you’re mine, you’ve always been mine, and I have always, always belonged to you!”Cassandra Clare, Lady Midnight (The Dark Artifices)

Top 3. songs rn: “exile” - Taylor Swift, “forever young”- Alphaville, “Tulsa Jesus Freak” - Lana Del Rey

#2022 books #january 2023 #manonblackbeaksgf

7 notes · View notes

wandering-vulpes · 3 months

Text

Yo, name's Scott, pronouns are he/him but I don't rlly care, I'm a bi gay furry dude. I'm a headmate in a plural system. Mentally 30+ idk lol, technically centuries old.

The host's primary is @woodlandscab1n and his main is @nyctohyloph0bia

I'm what's called a "walk-in" and also a fictive.

Can't really talk about my source that much, but I'm an ooc AU version of Leon S. Kennedy. I don't care for the fandom, I'm my own person past my source, I belong to no one but my partners.

I block whoever I deem an idiot or just don't wanna interact with. Some people that are punt-able are: anti-endos, anti-metaphysical systems, queerphobes of any type (got myself two trans genderfucked spouses, so fuck off), proships or whatever, zionists, radqs (radinclus ur aight) and the common scum phobes and isms.

Stamps, blinkies, userboxes under the cut. I'm obsessed with these things. Warning for flashing.

#pinned post #endo friendly #endo safe #plural #fictive

0 notes

sailforvalinor · 1 year

Note

Okay, you want Gerda and Kay questions? Then please answer: 6, 12, 15, 29.

6. Which song off of your most recently played playlist are they?

For Gerda, I'm going to go with "Barefoot Kid" by The Arcadian Wild, and for Kay I'll go with "Dreamer" by Dermot Kennedy.

12. What do they most dislike about themselves?

Already answered for Kay, but for Gerda, probably her anxiety and fear about the outside world. It prevents her from being able to relate to Kay (and many of the other people her age on the island), as she doesn't have the same desire to leave, and the wedge this drives between her and Kay distresses her.

15. What superhero are they most like?

Already answered for Gerda--for Kay, perhaps Red Hood (Jason Todd). Their storylines are quite similar at least, though their personalities aren't quite the same. They both have an interest in literature, though.

29. What do they consider to be their greatest strength? Is this actually their greatest strength, or is there something about themselves they don’t see?

Gerda doesn't really believe that she's particularly "gifted" in any way--she is just always willing to help, wherever and whenever she can. But I think it becomes evident during her journey how persevering she is--she won't stop trying to find Kay, even if her legs give out from exhaustion--and her unwillingness to give up on anyone, no matter how far they've fallen.

Kay probably believes that his greatest strength is his mind, or "scope for imagination," to use an Anne-ism, but what I think he's not quite aware of is that he's extremely inspiring and brings out the best in people. He can be a little unapproachable sometimes, but once you are friends with him, he is your BIGGEST fan.

#i'm so sorry this took so long! last week was so exhausting #also bucky also applies to kay for similar reasons although they aren't very alike personality-wise #oc gerda #oc kay #how to spell eternity

1 note · View note

scentofgenocide · 2 years

Text

a Silicon Valley rant

https://hplusmagazine.com/2009/09/02/virtual-life-actual-death/ I absolutely do not expect ham to read my weird rant but i'm mega stoned so it's happening anyway, i should be writing about media and the holocaust but I'm not so I'm writing about this because that woman in your panel set me off. Not because she's wrong about anything, it's not her fault, but the reason i left california is because the ground is polluted with some kind of westward expansion myth but san francisco is as far west as you can go, so they ran out of things to expand, and then they tried to retconn the whole thing by saying that hippies were good people but they actually weren't. Because if you didn't go to vietnam it meant you were rich enough for your parents to bail you out or you had done service already sans draft (early 60s, kennedy standby mode.) So you had all these rich bay area kids, and their parents in the berkeley hills with their huge mansions, and the kids would wander down to Telegraph avenue and hang out and do hippie shit. They didn't get drafted because their parents paid for them to not fail out of Cal. Anyway, out of a group of these people came a guy named Stewart Brand. He preached all kinds of great shit - DIY, eco-sustainability, peace, went to a lot of Grateful Dead shows. He started a magazine called the Whole Earth Catalogue, which became a bible for the hippies. It was an open forum magazine type thing, full of amazing information and stories. My dad had copies of them all, and he talked about how amazing the magazine was, even though he a hippie he didn't see the height of the Summer of Love because he was in a Da Nang jungle in Vietnam instead

[11:34 PM]So anyway this Brand guy, he was like the guru of this movement. And through the 60s and 70s, the movement grew, the true believer hippies clung to life. Then a weird fucking thing happened: he started preaching business, entrepreneurship, Reaganomics. He did talks for AT&T (who was under constant attack along with Pac Bell, for monopoly telecomm practices, actually a distant reason why we're in this mess,) became advisor to governor jerry brown. But then he did something really wild: he became obsessed with technology, and the importance of computers in creating an Ayn Randian libertarian utopia, free of government intervention and oversight. And this is how the civilian side of the internet was born. (edited)

Sick From Old Muffin Era — Today at 11:38 PMHe and the whole earth conglomerate at that point began running these very intense BBSes called THE WELL, basically where rich white college students and professionals with internet access could sit and talk to each other all day via message board. And a lot of people emerged from these boards with a dream for a utopian internet - Steve Jobs was one, the Oracle founder, a lot of major silicon valley billionares. They wanted to create a digital system that was specifically for "intelligent," "educated" "worldly people" (ie other rich white professionals and academics) and free of the confines of, essentially, the working class

[11:44 PM]So these silicon valley people started to see their parents die. WW2/silent generation who had amassed wealth in $$$$$ bay area property and old money, and oh guess what, the silicon valley guys now had an amazing nest egg to gamble their shiny new tech companies on. Back to Brand - by the late 80s, he had formed the Global Business Network to preach these values of libertarian fueled hippie-ism, why environmentalism can be solved with technological innovation. He was BFF with a ton of businessmen and politicians, super rich, etc. And people flocked and flocked to the WELL, which ofc had servers located in some of the earliest internet corporations. So these corporations were just filtering and storing all this stuff from people like humdog up there, until people like her figured out - hey, wait a minute - i'm pouring my heart and soul out here, and this Brand guy is making a fucking mint off me

Sick From Old Muffin Era — Today at 11:45 PMshe was attacked viciously on the board, accused of biting the hand that feeds, of upsetting the digital balance of the community. Brand was off talking to George Bush and shit, he didnt care what his open internet forum had become. (edited)

[11:48 PM]So, I'll wrap up the most unhinged rant y'all will get from me for now, but basically, these absolute Boomer ghouls, who grew up in bay area privilege, who preached love and peace and morality and free love, built themselves a fortress online to keep out riff raff - the working class, poc, LGBTQ, whatever - and as they sat in their parents houses and their tech millionaire houses, growing in value by the minute, they walled themselves off from the world. Homeless people? Not my problem, I've got my whole earth BBS with my white friends from all over the world to support me where we comfort each other and i dont have to walk outside and see the junkies passed out on my block.

Sick From Old Muffin Era — Today at 11:54 PMBlack people? well, they should learn a trade, like computer programming, then they can be successful like me. Mentally ill? A shame, but they should have advocated for themselves more when Nixon kicked them out of state institutions. etc., etc. So - i promise i'm getting to the end here - people like that woman who was at your panel, i don't even need to hear her talk to know her story. That's why she started making sense at first - "money is fake, we need a better world," then all of a sudden starts twisting and turning into her bay area walled garden of "well I'm poor and I can barely support myself, why should I help these other people?" It's a fucking brain disease. These people have been led in two opposing directions and they bought it hook, line, and sinker, and they have ruined San Francisco and the Bay Area, the silicon valley ethic has essentially been and will be the downfall of the west, and this is why you get people in 6 million dollar homes overlooking the bay and people saying to your face, "well, we're all struggling."

[11:54 PM]I'm not going back to california. This is why this is my bunker channel.

0 notes

evenplayingfieldwis · 2 years

Text

Modern images of women in sport: Has much changed?

Images like the ones below have been circulating in the media throughout the 90s-00s. These images are vastly different to male athletes. But I want to investigate if this has changed and what do images of female look like today.

In recent years, equality in sport is changing, and with this there has been an increase in the viewing of female sporting events which is contributing to the overall participation of women in sport, not just elite sports people. Sport Ireland’s Women in Sport Policy document enlightens us on these positive changes and was established to monitor female participation rates in sport. The Irish Sports Monitor (ISM) has calculated ‘that 40.8% of females regularly participate in sport. This has increased from 39.3% in 2015. Since the introduction of the ISM in 2007 the gap between male and female sports participation has shifted from 15.7% to 4.5%’. Many governmental bodies like Sport Ireland have started Women in Sport campaigns, to raise awareness, increase funding and participation for female sport. National and global companies have also engaged with campaigns to stride towards a more equal playing field for women in sport.

In Ireland, we have seen many national movements to increase the awareness and participation of women in sport. 20x20 was a campaign to create a cultural shift in the perception of girls and women in sport. The target set by this movement was by the end of 2020 to have 20% more media coverage of women in sport, 20% more female participation as a player, coach, referee and/or administrative level, and 20% more attendance at female sports events. This campaign worked with Irish governing bodies to promote women in sport through advertising in the media and included elite female athletes to promote the campaign. It was a huge success with many people making the pledge for gender equality in sport within Ireland through the visual aid of 4 red stripes, a neutral yet vibrant mark symbolising the ‘X’ of the brand and two sets of parallel lines signifying equality.

Other Irish companies like Hersport, use their platform to raise awareness about female sporting news in Ireland and across the world, while also contributing to popular discussions and debates on female sports on an online platform. Founder Niamh Tallon found that there was a gap in the media for coverage of women’s sports, with only 6% of sports coverage going towards women. They challenge companies and governing bodies to promote women in sport. They also host an annual awards ceremony to celebrate the achievements of Irish female athletes. Their messaging is focused around empowering women in sport and changing the game in terms of equality within sports. Hersport also promotes inclusivity for athletes with disabilities and giving a voice to athletes who face discrimination in the sports world.

On a global scale, we see many companies advocating for women in sport in advertisements. Examples of these sports companies include Nike, Under Armour and Adidas are working with elite female athletes to give them a platform to brand themselves and gain sponsorship. Nike have directed their advertising towards women with feminist values to establish their brand equity to relate to both women and men. They have expanded their marketing to appeal to female consumers which in hindsight creates the perception they are advocates for female in sport awareness. Nike created mass media support for the 1999’s Women’s Soccer World Cup with the Nike logo becoming the unofficial symbol of the tournament, the brand’s visibility among female athletes grew .Prior to this, Nike’s brand image reflected one that was masculine and aggressive which failed to connect to women in the early 1980s. Nike hired marketing and design studio Wieden and Kennedy, a marketing agency, to consider Nike’s visibility as a brand and its patriarchal positioning in the market. This change in advertising launched by Widen and Kennedy created a sub-brand of Nike that related to women in its branding and narrative. This success stemmed from the exclusively female creative team at Widen and Kennedy, who created advertisements that challenged the social constructs of gender and sports through inspiring dialogue, increasing their brand equity and exploring the untapped market.

Many images have now spread across the digital platforms of strong female athletes and there seems to be an embracing of the female athlete. Many sport companies mentioned above have used female athletes for their sporting campaigns such as Serena William for Nike.

These photos by Howard Schatz, from his 2002 book, Athlete. These images showcase a variety of female athletes and their different body types. The human body is for sure a thing of fascination and beauty. And there’s something awe-inspiring about a body that can perform the way the bodies of professional athletes can - and these images do just that. Their real power, I think, is in the impact of the group shot. We know there’s diversity among human bodies–different shapes, sizes, proportions, colors and abilities. Most of us default to a standard stereotype of “the female athlete.” But what that mental picture usually amounts to is an image of a fitness model–slender with visible muscles and a six-pack. The range of bodies depicted in the series is a great reminder of the range of types even among professional athletes. There’s no one shape that is “athletic.” I also like these images that there is no sexualisation of these athletes. This photoshoot is one of empowerment and embracing diversity in the female body. These images are very powerful and I wish this type of empowerment could be seen more in the images of athletes on media platforms. These images also empower young girls to be proud of the capabilities of their bodies and that all body types are beautiful.

As female athletes get more media attention, we also see the rise in these athletes speaking out on instagram about body positivity and we see them posting photos of them training hard, sweating and not curating these photoshopped idealistic images of the male gaze. They are reaching an audience of fans for their sporting achievements and not their looks. I believe this is also changing how we see female athletes in the media, although this could be argued in contrast with fitness influencers that promote a certain body type and create a falseness and expectation of the female body.

“I think people used to view female athletes as very butch, masculine—you kind of had to disregard your femininity to excel at an elite sport," Gray told ESPN in July 2016. "Now it’s just a different world...You are allowed to be a female and be considered beautiful and still be an athlete and still be badass in that realm.” - Adeline Gray, World Champion Wrestler

0 notes

uboat53 · 2 years

Text

Who's in the mood for some history? We all know that the Republican Party, led by Trump and those who've come after him, has gone around the bend, but how in the world did it get to that point?

Well, the history of that goes longer than I've been alive, so settle in for a LONG RANT (TM) that may or may not be entertaining and educational.

WHY DOES THIS MATTER?

Before I start, a quick word on why this matters. The Trump craziness can sometimes feel like it sprung up out of nowhere which makes it a particularly frightening phenomenon. What I'm hoping to do is show that it didn't come out of nowhere, the heart of this movement has long roots both in American history and in the Republican Party as a whole.

In doing so, I hope to show not only how we got to where we are now but also expose the ways in which people who are not themselves a part of an extremist group enable and support it in order to better equip people to prevent any similar issue from happening in the future with their own group.

IN THE BEGINNING...

The Republican Party as we know it emerged from the ashes of the Great Depression and World War 2. You see, during the Roosevelt years, the Republican Party was decimated. In 1936 Republicans held just over 16% of the Senate (1), just over 20% of the House (2), and wouldn't win the Presidency again for 16 years. It wasn't until 1952 that they would win a majority in either house again (along with the Presidency) and both of those majorities were short-lived.

During this wilderness period, two visions of the Republican Party emerged. One of them, represented largely by Dwight D. Eisenhower, was internationalist and largely pro-free market for the time while the other one, represented by Robert A. Taft, represented a much more aggressive pro-business, anti-government, isolationist, and nationalist vision. It wasn't quite Trump-ism, but it definitely bears a familial resemblance.

The two competed in 1952 for the Republican nomination for President which was won by Eisenhower, but it's important to note that this did not reflect the result of the actual primary contests. In the 13 states that had contests, Taft won with a plurality or majority in 6 of them and led Eisenhower by over 10% in the popular vote. In other words, Eisenhower won at the convention, but the primary showed strong support for Taft and his ideas within the party. (3)

This is the Republican Party that emerged from its time in the wilderness during the Great Depression and the Second World War.

TWO TUMULTUOUS DECADES

The Republican Party held the Presidency during Eisenhower's two terms and then lost an extremely close contest in 1960 when Eisenhower's Vice-President, Richard Nixon, lost to John F. Kennedy. This defeat weakened the Eisenhower/Nixon faction within the party and, by the time the next primary came around in 1964, the Republican Party nominated Sen. Barry Goldwater (R-AZ) for President.

Goldwater's campaign, though he lost by a landslide to President Lyndon B. Johnson, sparked a massive shift within the Republican Party, bringing the Taft wing of the party again to the fore. More importantly, he created grassroots organizations that helped his wing of the party maintain control and influence even after his loss. By 1968, even with Nixon again as the nominee, the Republican Party represented more of the ideas of Taft and Goldwater and less of Eisenhower.

Another major shift was the Civil Rights Act of 1964. After pushing for its passage, President Johnson, a Texan/Southerner himself, is alleged to have remarked to an aide, "We have lost the South for a generation" (4). You can see evidence of this in presidential results, the core confederate states (Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Texas) had voted overwhelmingly for Democratic candidates since the end of Reconstruction but, beginning 1964, began to swing toward Republicans with the exception of Carter and Clinton's elections. (5)

Part of this was antipathy toward the Democrat's position on civil rights, but some of it was also a deliberate shift in strategy by Republicans. Starting with Goldwater the Republican party began to deliberately drop its appeals to black voters in the north (this was the Party of Lincoln after all) and work on messages to better appeal to white voters in the South. This was known as the "Southern Strategy" (6).

A NEW PARTY

By the time we get to 1980 and the Reagan Revolution the Goldwater/Taft movement is now a dominant movement within the Republican party and Reagan's outreach to religious conservatives, particularly represented by the Moral Majority (7), expanded on the gains that the Southern Strategy had made with conservative whites in the South and expanded into the Plains and Mountain states.

The change was slow as many former "blue dog" Democrats in the South ("I'll vote for a dog as long as it's blue") continued to vote for their historical Democratic representatives at the local level even as they shifted to Republican at the higher levels. Over time, though, these voters died out and the legacy Democrats they had voted for retired. This shift eventually culminated in the 1994 election when Republicans took control of both houses of Congress for the first time since 1952 while also capturing many southern governorships that had been Democratic until then (8).

Over time we've seen overtly racist candidates like David Duke and more subtly racist candidates like Pat Buchanan gain substantial support within the party and even as more "establishment" candidates like the Bushes, Romney, or McCain have defeated them, it has always been their ideas that have gained more and more of a foothold as the establishment is forced to co-opt some of them in order to fend off the challenge.

These changes have largely created the party we see today; a party strong in the South and the rural Plains and Mountain states, largely pro-big business and anti-government, with a growing faction hostile to immigration, free trade, and internationalism, and in line with a very conservative interpretation of Christianity on social issues.

A SHIFT OF IDENTITY

When the party shifted the base of voters it was trying to appeal to, it empowered a different group of candidates and elected officials. Moderate Republicans had a hard time winning without the base of moderate voters they used to have while staunchly conservative Republicans won more often with the new conservative voter base. Over time this has led to a shift in the identity of the party and their overall positions on various issues.

It is important to note that this isn't just about individual Republicans changing their minds about ideas or just about old people dying and young people replacing them, though that did happen too, this is about a group of people who used to largely be Democrats, independents, or even disconnected from politics entirely switching their identification to Republican and bringing with them the same ideas they always believed while Republicans with the ideas of the Eisenhower or other factions have been slowly leaving the party. If one were to be glib about it, one could describe it as a factual version of the racist "replacement theory".

MEDIA

Along with the political change, the Reagan and post-Reagan era has seen a realignment of information. With the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine (9) talk radio proliferated. In 1996, FOX News, the first explicitly partisan cable news network, debuted, and we've seen an explosion of conservative TV channels and web sites since then.

This collection of media forms what is known as an echo-chamber (10). If a person hears a story from one source, they may wonder about its validity, but if they hear the same thing from multiple sources they become more sure of it. In conservative media one can observe this in action as numerous sources report the same information; this makes it seem as if that information has multiple sources even though there is only truly one source that all of the others are referencing.

What this does is reinforce ideas and make it seem as if those ideas are universal. Increasingly it is difficult to convince people who consume information in this way that any of their ideas may not be true or actually enjoy majority support.

THE MISSING PIECE

At this point I think I've given a decent explanation of how the Republican Party got to the points of view that it has, but there's one more piece that explains how it got the point of outright dysfunction and conspiracy theories.

It has to do with that shift toward nativism and the deliberate courting of racist southern (and other racist) voters. You see, what those voters want isn't possible. At this point, even if we completely closed off immigration, white voters would no longer be a majority of the American electorate within the next few decades. The only way to maintain the power of the conservative, white, Christian voters who used to compose a reasonable majority of the electorate would be to end democracy, something that is completely unpalatable to the vast majority of voters, even white voters.

(I should note that many in this movement claim that they are not trying to end democracy but to "prevent fraud" as they believe that their movement is genuinely more popular and would win in a fair election. They are incorrect in this belief as there is no evidence either of fraud or of the widespread popularity of their beliefs. Though they do not believe they are trying to end democracy, they are operating under false information and that is the end result their demands will have if allowed to be put into action.)

When a party's voters demand something that isn't possible, there are two ways that it can go. In a functional party the leaders will recognize that it is impossible and communicate that to the voters. Either they will convince them to give up on that demand or they will guide them to a compromise position that is possible.

If a party is not functional, if the link of trust between the voters and the party leaders has been broken as it has in the Republican Party where leaders for decades have pandered to an extremist faction without following through on their demands once in office, then a demagogue can convince the voters that they have been betrayed by their leaders and that the demand is, in fact, possible.

If those demagogues achieve power in this way, they will need to demonstrate to those voters that they are fighting for that demand. However, since the demand is not one that's possible to meet, they will be forced to go to increasingly destructive lengths in order to show that they are trying to achieve that demand.

THE BYSTANDERS

I think at this point it's worth saying a word about the Republicans who weren't a part of this but who, through their pursuit of their own goals, enabled and benefited it. As I think I've shown, this part of the party has existed since long before most of us have been alive and has increasingly gained power and influence over that period. Those who strategized the Republican Party's way to victory by taking advantage of the fervor of this wing of the party are complicit in its rise even if that rise was not their intent.

At every step of the way, more mainstream or establishment Republicans were well aware of the extremism of this group and chose to appeal to it or use it in order to advance their own goals regardless. There is no one of these choices that led us to the current moment, but a slow build-up of individual choices to do and to not do any number of things that may have reduced the influence of this movement or prevented it from gaining more.

It's also worth pointing out that many Republican leaders pandered to this movement by promising things that were not possible and then not following through on those promises while in office or validating parts of the worldview while acting in a completely different manner. What this has done is create a massive gap in trust between Republican elected officials/leaders and their own voters such that it is easy to convince those voters that even their own leaders are lying to them as Trump did.

In other words, there are a lot of Republicans or people who were at one point Republicans who did not believe in the Taft descended vision of the party or the country and yet who were willing to grant that movement power and influence in order to achieve their own goals; power and influence that it eventually used to take over the party in its entirety. As much as some of us may respect or agree with the ideas or goals of such people, we have to acknowledge that they played a significant part in bringing the Republican Party to where it is now.

CONCLUSION

So there it is, the current condition of the Republican Party is not necessarily a new thing, but something that has been building slowly since at least the immediate post-war (WWII) period as part of a struggle of ideas within the party and those ideas are ones that have been present to varying degrees through pretty much all of American history.

If there's one thing that I would like people to take from this it's that extremism flourishes when it is humored. There were a lot of people who gave this movement power and influence in exchange for advancing their own interests, firm in the belief that it could not gain enough power and influence to take over. Until it did.

I hope you found this useful or at least interesting.

SOURCES

(1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9), (10)

#politics #history #us politics #us history #republicans #gop #the gop #trumpism #robert taft #barry goldwater #ronald reagan #donald trump #extremism #maga #long rant (tm)

0 notes