RE: A Reversal of the Parties

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
From: iaamoac [mailto:jxg9@xxxxxxxxxxx] 

>There is an interesting editorial in today's Wall St. Journal.  
>Going beyond the short-term nailing of Kerry for flip-flopping on the
>primacy of democracy or stability in Iraq, a much bigger case is
>made.  Namely that we may be experiencing a historic reversal of the
>parties.   Students of American history know that there have been
>several times in history in which the parties of exchanged
>positions.   This column argues that the party of "realpolitik" is
>switching from the Republicans to the Democrats....
>
>This is interesting as "realpolitik" has long been associated with
>Republicans - and particularly Democrat criticisms for the way
>Republican administrations cooperated with a great many extremely
>unsavory regimes during the Cold War.   Nevertheless, I wonder if we
>didn't see the beginning of this shift in the Clinton
>Administration's very non-idealistic refusal to intervene in the
>Rwandan genocide.  The reversal may now be complete as the
>intervention in Iraq is one of the most idealistic-minded US foreign
>policy actions in history, which is overwhelming favored by
>Republicans and opposed (still!) by Democrats.
>
>
>JDG
>
>  http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110004987 
> <http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110004987> 

Yes it is interesting. Not being a student of American politics, I base my 
opinions on limited knowledge,
but it has swapped back and forth a few times hasn't it? I am often intrigued 
by American history in regard 
to Isolationist positions over the World Wars, and who adopted them and why.
 
In relation to the current situation, I can see where the article is coming 
from. I would make one observation
and that is in the form of a question. Why didn't anyone trumpet this new 
caring and sharing approach of the Republicans in advance of invading Iraq? 
They seemed to present it as realpolitik at the time. Is this cos they hadn't 
got the hang of it yet? I think the analogy extends further, into some of GWB's 
domestic policy too.
I have been surprised how Non-Rebublican some of them seemed. Or at least how 
the spin seemed.
 
Do you think its cos they have cottoned onto the fact that people want some 
vision, some idealism, some passion? Politics seems to have become so 
single-threaded, both sides so similiar, that you need to find something 
special to catch peoples minds. And I guess the religious right does add some 
kind of moral underpinning to it too. I may not agree with it, but at least it 
is a position. I just wish I could believe that GWB actually believed any of 
it. 
 
My feeling is that the definition of realpolitik may have moved instead, into 
the realm of spin. If it takes faked idealism to get re-elected, then  hell, 
lets give it a go! I know this is cynical, but how it plays out down here. And 
I am not a Democrat, although I guess you would define me on the left of 
middle. I am just not sure how much space there is for idealism in politics 
anymore. Its way too dangerous for most !
 
Andrew