by Tortured_Genius wrote:I got pointed at this opinion piece in the US "conservative" National Review, about "why not fewer voters", from Professor Heather Cox Richardson's letters (can't link to the original because arsebook is being a face). As expected, she dissects it with reference to the Southern slave states, etc. but I found it weirdly refreshing.
Here's a guy openly rejecting democracy in favour of oligarchy without the usual hiding behind "the other people are all communists" bullshit. Whilst it's not explicit there's no other conclusion based on what he's written and his complete and utter failure to address the elephant in the room (no pun intended) in regard to limited enfranchisement of "Who decides?".
The question I have for our US friends is how mainstream is this opinion? Formerly it's the sort of thing which would have been consigned to the lunatic fringe (at least publicly) - but here it is in a mainstream publication.
From over here it's tricky to tell since I'm in something of a liberal echo-chamber (not least because most conservative sources leave me shouting at the telly/PC, throwing things and play havoc with my blood pressure).
Whilst I suspect it'll never be adopted as formal GOP policy, how much of the electorate would perceive this is as the actual party aims? (With all that would imply)
And how many would care?
(Asking for me, because the concept of an openly oligarchical authoritarian USA is terrifying, although some would contend that it is already, albeit with a veneer of democracy).
I really can't answer this because I just don't know WTF people are thinking anymore.
.
