Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
Pretty simple, if you don’t exhibit fealty to Trump they’ll attempt to throw you out of the party.
Because Trump is the party and it is party first, country second
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
There is a land mass named the United States. When some people pledge allegiance to it, they have a vision of what it is, what their "country" is. What it is supposed to be according to whatever vision they've been taught, or have conjured on their own.
As individuals become members of groups and are cajoled into political parties, they either choose the party that seems to most closely align with the personal vision they experientially have grown into, or they simply inherit the party of their parents or of whatever societal tribe they belong to.
But the party they choose or inherit does not have the same vision of what the "country" is as does the other party (or parties). In the beginning, the vision of "our country" was pretty much, or at least fundamentally, the same for the two major parties. That original vision was informed by the Constitution the founders created.
As time passed with new generations of citizens with continuously changing visions of what the "country" is, or is supposed to be, the gap in vision between parties grew. Till today, the visions have become fundamentally opposed.
One party seems to prefer that we do not publicly make a formal pledge of allegiance to it, as that would offend some sensibilities. For that party, fealty to "country" verges on jingoistic nationalism. It supports kneeling in protest to what the flag represents. The borders separating our "country" from the rest of the world are more of an impediment than a protection. And for that party, the original uniting vision of what the country is politically, has also become an impediment. That binding, unifying document, must continually be evaded, overcome, while giving lip service to it with novel, contradictive interpretations. Rather, that party verges toward formal, legal, union with the rest of the world. Toward worldwide treaties that can bind us to world opinion and governance, and can be strong enough to supercede the limitations of the outdated U.S. constitution. That's all well and good if it's to your liking.
But it differs in so many ways from the vision of the "country" that the other party has which include opposition on things like our borders, the meaning of our Constitution, our view of exceptionalism, individual and religious liberty, right to bear arms, size and scope of government, marriage, life . . . even to the most fundamental division on what constitutes a man or a woman.
We live in the same land mass, but not in the same "country." The words country and nation are colloquially used interchangeably. But they have a formal distinct meaning. "Country" being a land mass, and "nation" being the political, social, cultural, etc., union. I put that word in quotes because expressions like "country first" usually are not merely referring to a land mass, but to a "nation." The intended meaning would more correctly be "nation first." We all live in the same defined land mass. But when we say "country first" we don't mean "land mass first."
On the other hand, maybe "country first" is appropriate to Progressives' vision of government. They have more affinity to the world, the global land mass, than merely being restricted to the U.S. "nation" which is too antiquated, provincial, and unfair according to their view of it..
Anyway, Trump is not the party. Hopefully, the party learned some important things from Trump--gained some political wisdom and know how that can appeal to Americans who are becoming aware of the stealth of this nation that progressivism has been covertly perpetrating for a century and is now more boldly and openly foisting on us. Politically, Trump is definitely "nation first." And that notion is horrific to Progressives. Understandably so. The Progressive doctrine is progressively morphing from its vision of administrated state power over this nation into the larger collective of administration over the Western world--and over the world eventually. And, of course, by experts who'll make it all good.