The recent Republican National convention in Milwaukee,
seemed to many like a kind of
victory lab for the Republican party. Donald Trump
was
celebrated as a hero for surviving it. Assassination
attempt.
His rival,
joe Joe Biden decline has... Both
cognitive and in popularity has been visible to
all Trump picked a new vice president Jd
Vance, exciting conservatives.
And both he and Vance
pledged to defend the country from the left?
Which prompts the question.
Why is it that there are certain prominent
socialists
who envy
the Gop 20 24 platform in a recent
article,
came out in the last few weeks.
In the guardian,
the Republicans new party platform is scary because
it can win.
2 prominent
democratic socialists, Dust
And Ba Sun,
argued that it could and expressed their fear
that it would.
These socialists say that the new Republican party
platform rejects
the small government Republican tradition.
And as they formulated it common sense policies
that are more reflective of the governing practice
of today's democratic, party from defending the social
safety net to the to growing manufacturing jobs
have become rebranded
as the bread and butter of the Republican
party. They say that Trump is campaigning to
win in a dangerously
coherent way.
So what are the platform policies
that the Republicans have adopted that have led
socialists
to envy
the policy statements of the Republican party, and
what are the cultural
trends, and the Philosophical ideas that are at
the root of such a curious development. Well,
welcome to new ideal lives the podcast of
the ina Institute. I'm Ben Bae. I'm a
fellow with the Institute with me is my
colleague,
Nico to your cop Hi nico
Hi, everyone.
So we're gonna dive into this
Republican party 20 24
platform.
Analyze it, compare it to other platforms, I
should say right now, I promise to you
that when the democratic
convention happens next month, we will do the
same thing
for the Democrats. So the reason we're doing
this this week is because the convention in
Milwaukee.
Wrapped up,
and this is the national time to comment
on it. But
I think you can tell from the way
that I introduced things that we're gonna be
somewhat critical. Just of the Republican party's platform,
but
to give
to give them their due, Niko, we should
probably start by at least saying a few
things about what was in the platform that
was not worthy of criticism.
Yeah. So the good things in the platform.
The most important positive thing that I found
in the platform is the promise to unleash
the energy potential of the United States. So
we read in the platform that
the commitment needs to make United States the
number 1 producer of oil and natural gas
in the world.
And at some other points, they promised to
end market distort distort restrictions on oil natural
and natural gas. Also they promise more nuclear
energy and they promise an end to the
green new deal. Now why is this important?
Because
energy is the
industry in the economy that makes possible every
other
industry. You bring down energy price also, this
will make the life of
people affordable.
I in, Europe, we have a... We've been
having a heat wave and we are scared
to turn on the air condition because of
the energy prices, this is not a way
to live. So this is a very welcome
development.
Also,
energy, more energy production is important for geopolitical
reasons. Remember Ben,
think it was a year ago when we
saw the very weird and depressing
spectacle,
United States considering importing
energy from Venezuela.
So leasing this energy production is important also
for
international politics reasons, but also, it is
important in terms of, in terms of kickstart
starting
the
boosting the rest of the American economy. So
most important thing,
a committed and looks like a principle stance
on the need for cheap energy for
for
for for more energy production.
Something else which was very important in the
program,
the Vision for
the... For the national defense. So we read
the that there there will be temp towards
an iron dome missile defense sealed.
So the iron dome is the defense, the
missile defense seal that Israel has. It has
protected bit from attacks. From its neighbors. Now
the United States is envisioning a similar system
against ballistic missiles.
And the United States already
tried to build such a system once. It
was in the 19 eighties. The star wars
as many people might know it project of
Reagan
Some people claim it was a project that
was decisive
for the United States winning the called war
so this is also something very positive.
Also positive in the prod in the program
in in the platform,
and moral clarity in terms of Israel's says,
Israel is an ally,
and particularly Ben, having seen yesterday,
the scenes with many democrats and how they
dealt with Netanyahu in his
in his visit in the United States, I
think it's important that in the Gop platform,
we see this explicit reference to Israel. We
don't see a an explicit reference to Ukraine,
but
that's for another time.
Another positive point, we see more than once
in the platform, a promise to eliminate
costly and
unnecessary
regulations. Now this is a move to the
right direction, but notice, this is a bit
vague.
So I don't think that there's anyone who
you tell him, Do you want to keep
unnecessary and costly regulations, and they would say
yes. So they promise us some cuts to
regulations, but again, it's it doesn't get... Specific.
And 1 positive
surprise that I had reading the the platform
was
a commitment to allow more research and developments
in
artificial intelligence.
So I was afraid because many people in
the party. They have this prejudice to this
against big tech.
But
turns out the the official platform says, we
will we will allow more freedom for Ai
development. And also, it says that it will
keep bitcoin away from government's surveillance and government
interventions. So these are the good things that
1 can find
in the
in the platform of the Republican party for
the 20 24 elections.
Nicolas you moment... You mentioned a moment ago
you thought. That the
their statement about unleashing American energy was principled.
I would say it based on what it
says and what their policies have been in
the recent past that it's it's steadfast and
that they're they are digging their heels in
on it.
I...
Do seriously question whether it's actually principled in
a philosophical sense because as we're gonna see
when we look at the other things that
are in the platform that are
that are bad,
and the good things that are notably missing
from the platform,
it it it's principles,
especially that are missing from this platform. And
the the few good things that are in
there. I think are in there kind of
accidentally or by inertia, it's
if looking at the rest of it is
to be any judge, and we should look
at the rest of it.
So 1 of the points that the socialists
make,
aforementioned
socialists
by the names of,
And Sun.
1 of the points they make about this
platform is that it drops
any call to reduce
entitlement spending. And that had been a
steadfast position of the Republicans
for probably decade
In fact, this Republican platform calls for not
1 penny,
to be cut from social security. It's and
Medicare with no changes at all to be
made from
the retirement age. Now here, let me quote
directly from the platform.
What they want to do instead. Quote, Republicans
will support increased focus on chronic disease, prevention
and management, long term care and benefit flexibility
we will
expand
access to primary care and support policies that
help seniors remain in their homes and maintain
financial security. Now, this is this is the
language of the welfare state. The entitlement state,
which republicans have traditionally
tried to reduce, tried to oppose,
tried to stop the halt of and here
they are doubling down on expanding
on it. And so the reason that, socialists
appear to be afraid
of the Republicans here is because Republicans are
stealing
the socialist
most popular policies.
And the Democrats most popular policies.
Why exactly is a good question. This is
not the only thing, but Niko, I know
you wanted to say something about entitlements in
particular.
Yeah. First of, I was thinking ben the
other day,
I was in a flight, and I was
watching the Tv series house of cards.
And at some point, in the peak a
situation where the republicans,
and the democrats need to come into some
agreements,
So the democrats are thinking, okay. Which is
the 1 thing which is
which is a line in the sun for
Republicans.
Entitlement reform. Like, they've always spoof for entitlement
reform every time when we want something from
them, they want the in advance entitlement reform.
And now we see in their actual in
their actual Manifesto saying, no. We don't need
any entitlement reform. And why is entitlement reform
important,
Ben, it is for the simple reason that
if we put together medicaid.
Sorry Medicare and social security,
they are
they are responsible for a hundred percent, of
the un funded liabilities
of the United States. And we're talking about
numbers that I had to write them down
and I had to double check them because
I couldn't believe them. So by the end
of the century,
the cost from these un funded liabilities from
Medicare and Social security.
Apparently, it will be close to 70000000000000
dollars.
And if you put together the depth and
the un unwanted liabilities
They are close to the global Gdp. So
we're are talking about numbers that are difficult
even to fathom.
So we would expect that the Republicans should
say, look, something needs to change because we
are in a
course with reality. At some point, we need
to do something to deal with this
situation. And I come from a country that
gone bankrupt basically
because of this type of un liabilities.
But what the Republicans are doing, they're saying,
their they their clothes... They... They're something their
eyes to to reality here. And they're just
kicking the the the calm down the road,
and, yeah, The the future version of ourselves
will have to deal with it.
It reminds me niko of how during the
the tea party protests, which many people at
the time saw as
hope for a new free market focus on
the Republican party. There were some people at
these protests
walking around with signs saying government take your
hands off my social security.
Government take your hands off my Medicare, which,
of course, was noted
ironically,
because
social security and Medicare are major socialist inspired
government programs, and it seems like the the
seeds of that are now bearing fruition in
the 20 20 for Republican platform. I think
the the point about entitlement spending is is
the biggest and most dramatic turnaround.
There's others that are in this category that
are worth mentioning. So
there's no mention whatsoever of reducing deficits or
debt. There's only reference to reducing wasteful spending.
Well, who would oppose wasteful spending when you
qualify like that, just like costly as unnecessary
regulations nico
they want to rebuild our cities. They want
to an industrial policy, national federal industrial policy,
which will quote unquote bring our supply chains
back home.
Whatever that's supposed to be. And there is,
of course, and this part is
not too surprising given Donald Trump's history, but
outright opposition to free trade, which is the
the the 1 policy that all economists
or most economists agree about that's consistent with
free market economics free trade. They say, on
the the plot the party platform says unfair
trade deals,
and a blind faith in the siren song
of global
have led
politicians to adopt free trade deals
over the past few decades.
That speaking of the language of the siren
song of global ism. That is the same
language that socialists use when they talk about
the their critique of neo liberal economics. It
used to be
globalization. It's, sometimes called global.
Trump and the party want to end outsourcing.
They want to, of course, have the largest
deportation in American history of illegal immigrants. This
is a related issue with free trade because
that is a free trade in labor across
borders.
And most,
surprisingly, even for someone who, has been following
Trump's views on a free trade. There is
the proposal made for
cross the board, baseline tariffs on all
foreign made goods. The way they put it
is as tariffs on foreign producers go up,
taxes on American workers, families and businessmen can
come down. Now, of course, that's on the
face of it,
absurd because, of course, a tariff is a
tax on American consumers who are trying to
buy
foreign goods and massive...
Intrusion on free market economics and on the
liberties of Americans, not just
foreign governments. But I would also say this,
which is that,
Like, I can... I don't know if I
would agree with. But I can see a
semi plausible argument someone could give for why
we should have tariffs or trade barriers.
Maybe,
against
against,
authoritarian
like China.
I don't think there's to right that the
Chinese have to trade with us when, what
they're doing could support an authoritarian government. But
baseline tariffs on all foreign main goods is
not targeted to trade with
authoritarian. It is across the board, treating the
Chinese in exactly the same way as our
our trade free market allies
around the world. So that there's no longer
any kind of rationalization that this is,
just a a way of trying to deal
with foreign enemies,
it's it's pure protectionism,
and we'll have all of the usual consequences
that that does economically and of course,
for for causing further erosion of free market
principles.
Of Let me say 1 thing very quickly
here, Ben. They always start by mentioning China.
So I watched these days many talks by
Jay Vans, the vice president. We're gonna talk
about him in a second.
They start by talking about China, but noticed
that then they switched to
globalization, or they gonna talk... They they talk
about Nafta. They talk about
trade partners which are not China. So in
the same way that, for example, you'll see
they talk about
Jay Once again does this a lot. He
talks about. This policy is harmful for children.
And then they want to ban this policy
this this or something
something which is which has nothing do with
children. They use the same moral blackmail. They
say we cannot have trade with China, And
then they say, we cannot have trade with
something basically anyone. So be very... I want
to... I want the audience to be careful
with this. They start by using China, and
then they apply the same principle even to
countries, which have nothing to do with the
the the threat that China poses or with
an authoritarian regime like the Chinese regime.
Yeah. That is that is definitely
suspect.
Where is all of this coming from?
What are the values that seem to be
driving
this platform.
What is the moral compass with the platform?
Well, what's clear to me from reading it
several times now is at the very least,
it's not coming from any kind of
reverence
for American ideals.
1 way you can see this is by
looking at way
the platform deals with the concept of freedom.
And I divide
it's the few and far between
references to freedom
into the good, the weird and the bad.
There are a few places where they seem
to say
good things about freedom and connected to policies
that they're proposing.
But they're also few very few. I found
only 2 spots where there's kind of positive
mention of the right kind of freedom, and
they're also very ambiguous. So...
When they talk, about pub
regulations. They say Republicans will slash regulations that
s jobs, freedom, innovation and make everything.
More expensive. Well, that's freedom on a laundry
list of other
alleged benefits. So it's it's ambiguous which 1
is in control there. But then... And there's
also reference to free speech,
but in the same breath as they talk
about protecting free speech, they talk about
protecting it online.
And while there are good things said about
the need to rest constrain government from
trying to threaten or control
companies from
from,
allowing certain information onto the Internet, We also
know that in the Republican party today, there's
pressure to use the power of government
to
force
social media. Companies to,
abide by certain policies that they might not
otherwise want to.
And there are several policy initiatives in Texas
and Florida, which were recently struck down by
the Supreme Court,
where
that the state governments were trying to do
just that. And so
It's ambiguous exactly what the Republican platform talking
about here. I suspect they mean something like
what happened in Texas and Florida and in
which case, that is not actually the protection
of free speech.
Even when it is cloaked in that language.
So that was
something I said about 1 of the 2
good examples
on the list, the the fact that free
speech speeches are right. But now we get
into the weird and the bad.
The weird is when there are freedoms,
that I think you can argue our freedoms,
freedoms that government should protect.
But the emphasis that they put on them
to the exclusion of others
is rather weird. There is much more attention
put, for example, on the freedom to pray,
then on, let's say, the freedom 2
engage in other kinds of
ideological activities. So we we see actually they
want to s,
the use of certain kinds of ideas and
and
public schools related to d, I Crt.
And, of course, I don't agree with those
ideas, and we've had plenty of negative things
to say about them, but it's unclear why
1 ideology religion.
Should get preference
over left wing ideologies in the public schools.
I I don't think either of them should,
and public schools are, always going to set
you up for a... Should dilemma like that.
You you get then
freedom to transact bitcoin without government surveillance,
a
new technology that obviously, many people are
enthusiastic about, But, what about, freedom to transact
everything else. No reference to that and as
we've discussed,
there are things that Republicans are proposing that
would be ana to that. And then the
very weird section, freedom, prosperity and safety in
space.
For those of us who are planning to
start businesses there. Yes, there are private American
companies who are making
innovative,
entrepreneurial steps into space for the first time,
and I think that they should be protected,
but it's it's it's again strange that,
the Republicans are more concerned with protecting freedom
there where almost nobody threatens it,
and not here on earth where many people
are.
And then we get to the bad,
there is
talk of the importance of the freedom of
states.
To protect, to pass laws against abortion,
which
viewers of this channel should not be surprised,
I would find bad,
Ina institute is a defender of abortion rights.
Rand was a vocal defender of abortion rights.
Saw it as a
reproductive freedom as a fundamental freedom. It's no
surprise of course, that republicans are against that.
But,
when the language is put in terms of
the freedom of states to, out well, abortion.
That is that is particularly,
particularly gall.
Overall,
the... There is very little reference to the
concept of freedom. Overall, there's very little to
the constitution,
and to the founding fathers of America.
And when you look to the key parts
of the platform for some kind of prince
a clue as to what the actual guiding
principles are.
I turned in particular to the dedication and
the pre am places where you would expect
there to be a statement of values.
That get the dedication of the platform says
to the forgotten
men and women of America,
the pre em
is entitled America first, a return to common
sense. And it begins with references to
the
men the forgotten men and women of America,
the ones who are supposed to have built
America,
and it's then described how the politicians sold
them out to the highest bidder overseas. These
were the global. This is again,
the language of
socialism ferment
revolution of the the of the proletariat.
Although it has its own distinctive flavor, it
puts it in terms of the needs return
to American greatness. This is not new language
for Trump's party.
But
when as soon as it's done with that
kind of opening statement of values,
this working for the forgotten men, the little
people,
and against the global lists.
It then immediately goes on to highlight its
top policy priorities. And
the first of these are stopping the so
called invasion at the border
and
the industrial policy, quote, the Republican party must
return to its roots as the party of
industry, manufacturing
infrastructure
and workers,
I thought that the roots of the Republican
party were standing up for freedom against slavery
and against the confederacy, but there doesn't seem
to be any desire to revisit that moment.
Instead, they are talking about
the manufacturing and the workers, which is again,
all
language that you would expect to be coming
from someone who wants a revolution on behalf
of
the proletariat?
Yeah.
You you mentioned you mentioned the reaction to
global.
And
it's very important for anyone who wants to
takes Ds service. We to understand that, this
is... This was literally
the agenda of the left
20 years ago. The anti
globalization movement was
the big comeback
of the global left in the in the
international stage in the international arena. So if
you remember, they were following the g 8
or the the what people they call global
around General and Seattle, and they were doing
all these protests,
claiming that
globalization, is bad for the working class. And,
of course, people back then on the right.
It's 1 topic they got right. They were
saying you people are completely
economically literate.
Globalization is
protection is with bad protection is bad
for the... For the local working class, and
protection doesn't work and doesn't help anyone. And
in the year 20 24,
we see the Republican party adopting
the agenda of the
globalization left? I want the audience who is
gonna think, oh, why are these people criticizing
Trump, are they leftist? No. If you think
this, you are the leftist who have adopted
the agenda of the anti
globalization left.
Yeah. If I had to sum up the
the values that are...
Suggested by the pre am and by the
deck by the dedication and the values that
tie together all of the policy proposals we've
just been talking about.
I would say that they're essentially the values
not of America and individual freedom.
But the values of nationalism pop,
and the kind of pro proletariat
pop. There's there's
much more emphasis on so called national greatness
than there is on
individual freedom. And and so no wonder the
socialists
fear it.
They fear it because these are their values.
It's it's it's a Nash
version of their values. It's not the nationalist
version that you're usually
getting from, socialist. It's an American branded nationalist
version,
of the core values of socialism,
where we've seen that in history. I'll lead
to the reader to guess.
But
that is not these are not the values
of America,
And Niko, I think an elegant symbol
of this
transformation of the Republican party is is Trump's
choice
for Vp,
Jd Vance, and
what can you tell us about him?
Jay Ivan. So when did we first hear
about J Events? Around 2016
where he published
his book, Hill billy El.
And when I read that book, if you
told me that this guy would be the
vice would go for the vice presidents of
the United States, would be very happy because
it's a book that I found very good
and inspiring. It's actually book about... It's a
story of overcoming.
They stocks about his family and in his
community. They were born the,
Kentucky and then move to a small town.
In in Ohio.
And people there found themselves in a vicious
circle.
A vicious circle of 2 big problems. The
1 was
the economic problems, an economy, indeed industrialized economy,
which have not been able to adapt
to the new circumstances,
but also,
this aside from the economic problems, a culture
that was anti achievement, a cup sure that
incur many negative traits.
So J ivan says that people in this
environment have dealt
have been dealt a bad hunt.
People in this environment indeed start life facing
many difficulties
but he says,
at the end of the day,
each person holds their faith in their own
hands.
Yes, it is difficult.
Yes, you might need help from a
from inspiring people in your family in your
community.
We eating in his book that although he
comes from a chaotic family.
Has a sister figure and a grandmother and
a grandfather who helped him. So at the
end of the day, he says,
people have the agency to escape this difficult
background.
He and his his story is an example
of this. He could have been a statistic,
and yet he managed to succeed life.
And it's on not. It's not only that
he's telling us an inspiring story. He's also
drawing
the right conclusions.
So he says that, at some point in
the book, he uses the... This example. He
says that if you think that
your
difficult life is due to. At
the Chinese
or Obama, the White House or a big
business,
you're making a big mistake. At the very
end of the day, yes.
Politics can make our live worse At the
very end of the day, it's on us.
And looking jay advanced today, I wonder where
has the spirit gone?
Because this is not the views J vans
halls today. I encourage its people to go
to Youtube and find a talk he gave
in a national conservative confidence in 20 19.
The talk is called
beyond Ib libertarian is
and there, he
makes the opposite
point of view than he made in He.
He says that our social and cultural problems,
at the root have to do with political
choice. Such as, for example,
globalization. And also that they have
political
solutions.
So it looks at the end of the
day that it is
the mistake of Wall Street end of the
government or of the Chinese.
If some people's lives is not good.
And
recently, what did he say in the
in the Republican
convention about, for example, the crisis of 2008.
He said that Wall street barron
crossed the economy.
Now,
think about it this. Right? So these dis
rights supposedly.
They came out partly from their own poll
campaigns of the 2008 and 2012.
This was the first
anti establishment, let's say, movement within the Republican
party.
2 and big part of that campaign was
a criticism of the federal reserve,
free market criticism
to the 2008
financial crisis. And now you have the vice...
The the nominee for the vice presidency,
telling you that the crisis
was the result, of the big banks, which
has been the rhetoric of the left.
But there's a second
point in which. They advanced today of is
different from J Vance of the Hill bill
reality. Of the guy who... When I was
reading the book, I was thinking I want
to give a hug to this guy. He's
he so
he saw inspiring his struggle.
So in the book, he says, how he
has this respect
for things like objectivity and truth.
And he gives us an example. He says,
what a pt is that we live in
a country that such a big part of
the population.
Believes crazy theories, such that
Obama maybe is not really an American citizen.
This has... Is the whole discussion that took
place back then about
whether he has a legitimate birth certificate.
By the way, who was a major Antagonist
is in this conspiracy a theory, Trump.
And here we see some years later, the
same guy Who in 20 16 says, what
a pity that we live in a culture
that has no respect for truth and objectivity,
joining sides in the most
institutional and official way becoming vice president of
the guy
who was a big a major contributor to
that conspiracy theory. So unfortunately,
j Demands of
today is not the same guy.
Is not a guy with the same beliefs,
as the guy who wrote that
inspirational book about
individual agency and about overcoming.
Yes. And and nick nico because another
really telling
symbol of this vance own life
is something that anybody in our audience can
read straight from him
if they look up his article, how I
joined the resistance.
Which was published in magazine called the lamp
magazine. It's a Catholic magazine,
Vance is a recent Catholic convert,
convert from atheism,
and not just a convert from atheism is
atheism, but a convert from Iron rand,
And in this article,
he talks about how he was an Amber
divine Rand and her free market individual principles.
And was also an atheist,
and but how he abandoned rand in favor
of Saint Augustine and Catholicism and here's... Here's
explicitly what he says. My... About his conversion,
my randy arrogance,
about my own ability,
melted away when con... Confronted with the realization
that an obsessive an obsession with achievement would
fail to produce the achievement that mattered most
for so much of my life, a happy
fronted thriving family. So it's not about individual
achievement and individual rights for vance. It's about
family values
and
God and religion.
These are his own words look up how
I joined the resistance on the lamp magazine
if if you don't believe me.
By the way, why why is that achievement
incompatible with family values? That's...
So it's not... So on the 1 hand,
j vans is an ideological choice for trump.
Trump is not an ideal look, but vance.
Wants to be an idea, look. And and
then we see him making some tip points
or points that
we've heard the many times from people who
have no idea what rand was about or
what this going after achievement and going after
values means anyway.
Yeah. So the
it's true of course that,
individual can
choose to make family part of their life
when they choose...
Their spouse when they choose to have kids.
These are, of course,
choices that today's republicans don't always want you
to be able to make, especially with regard
to having kids in their an abortion.
But their idea of family values is a
package deal
between
the
legitimate chosen aspects of family that can be
part of the values of an individual's life,
and the chosen ones, and they use they
use the part that's legitimate to give credence
to the illegitimate part, which gives credence to
the the whole notion of chosen duty, which
of course comes from religion.
Niko
last thing I I think we should talk
about today is
just how much of a shift this is.
There's been things to criticize about the Republican
party from an individual perspective for a long
time.
But
you don't have to go back that far
in history
to see when the Republicans had a still
ob
dramatically different policy stance.
And I decided to go back
into the ancient history of 20 12,
you know, just 12 years ago, during the
Romney Ryan campaign,
And I I read most of the 20
12 platform
to see what was there
that isn't there anymore.
And 1 thing to notice about it is
just that it is an actual serious document,
62 pages versus 28
written in
English for literate readers
as opposed to the weird
cap... Weirdly capitalized
Twitter style writing,
in the style of Donald Trump that you
see in the 20 24 platform, but leave
aside the matter of style,
which I think is nonetheless significant,
the the content
of the 20 12 platform,
whatever there is to criticize it about it,
is is coming from a different universe
than what you see in 20 24.
And I'll start just by
noting
the moral compass issue. I mentioned the lack
of a moral compass in the 20 24
platform or where 1 was visible, it sounded
more like social them.
But 1 thing to note is just how
reverence
for the wisdom of the founding fathers and
the constitutes
is all over the 20 12 platform.
Franklin is quote is quoted and the front
piece, jefferson in Madison Washington are alluded to
from time to time.
And they begin, then the platform
by saying, and I don't agree with every
phrase in this, but we are the party
of the constitution, the solemn compact which confirms
are god given individual rights and assures that
all Americans stand
equal before the law. And then
little bit later the same page Page 9.
In a free society, the primary role of
government is to protect the god given an
ina inherent rights of its citizens, including the
rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of
happiness. This is right at the beginning. This
is how they are announcing their value
orientation, and they immediately go on to Cha
Democrats,
for not
using the same standards for not justifying their
legislation by the
constitution by failing to uphold the rule of
law.
There is then an enormous amount of emphasis.
On the issue of economic freedom in the
20 12 platform. They explicitly say,
we are the party of maximum
economic freedom. It's the topic of the very
first chapter in the platform.
They say, quote, Republicans will pursue. Free market
policies that are the sure way to boost
employment and create job out a job growth
and economic prosperity for all. They free prompts
to, quote, return government to its proper role,
making it smaller and smarter, and they justify
it by reference to the value of
success and entrepreneurship. They want to encourage and
protect energetic and entrepreneurial Americans.
That's a completely different
outlook,
from what you see in 20 24
with the emphasis instead being put on the
forgotten people who've been,
is screwed over by the evil nefarious gl.
And, yeah, I could go on for a
while en
the policy proposals that they make in 20
20... In 20 12 that follow through on
this kind of value
orientation is they say taxes by their very
nature, reduces a citizens freedom. They call for
a flatter tax. They wanna reduce the corporate
tax.
They wanna end tax policies that promote class
welfare. They call for constitutional require a super
majority for any tax increases. They wanna rep
appeal Obamacare.
And Dodd Frank, there's not a single reference
to Obamacare let alone rep repeating it in
the 20 24 platform.
There's of course,
celebration of free trade. There's talk talk of
protecting internet freedom removing
regulations on the Internet opposition to net neutrality,
there's the recognition that inflation isn't caused by
immigrants,
but by the federal Reserve that inflation is
a monetary,
phenomenon as economists
generally know.
And so they propose
transparency for the Fed. They propose auditing the
Fed
They even suggest revisiting the idea of the
gold standard in the 20 12
platform.
Again, night and day versus 20 24.
Whole set of proposals for more
privatization. They wanna eliminate Amtrak and privatized the
postal service,
They call for reducing government spending. They critique
deficits. They critique entitlement society.
Now it's not like everything in this platform
is good.
There are seeds,
I think, small seeds.
Of what would eventually turn into 20 24.
There is the idea of more infrastructure spending.
There's the 10 commandments in the classroom. There's
the rights of the un onboard, which you
would expect from the Republicans at that time.
There's even talk of saving Medicare and Medicaid
for future generations in and social security, but
not in the way that involves not
taking a penny from it. They wanted us
to transition away from it so that those
who had planned to depend on Medicare Medicaid
and Social security would be able to in
the immediate future, but others would be we
off.
The most interesting thing that I found in
the 20 12 platform
was the following
statement.
Quote,
when the constitution is evade, trans or ignored,
so are the freedoms at guarantees?
In that context, the elections of 20 12
will be much more than a contest between
parties. They are a referendum on the future
of Liberty in America.
Well, of course, we know that the Republicans
lost
the election in 20 12. And it seems
like they have They took that
that promise at the end of their platform
seriously. They they viewed it as a referendum
on the future of Liberty in America, And
so because
the American people voted for Obama and not
for Romney,
Republicans seem to have decided well, I guess
that referendum on the future of liberty lost.
And
therefore, if you can't beat them, the Join
them.
Join the left, join the socialist
move towards state and collect activism.
They said that it's it it almost seems
like this is what they were promising to
do by thinking of it as a referendum
in that way.
Now, I think a party that had a
moral backbone that had leadership would not have
said such a thing. And and certainly, even
if they had lost such a referendum, they
would have continued to fight for principles of
freedom on principle.
But Niko, this is why I think,
at least today Republican party has no such
principle. They have no for real reverence for
the ideas of individual freedom
of the type they were talking about in
20 12 of the type that the founding
fathers actually articulated.
And somebody could argue, I think Well, the
kind of
economic proposals, the 20 12 party was arguing
for were too sophisticated to intellectual 2 esoteric,
you had to dumb things down to make
change happen
in America.
But
I think you don't improve politics by pan
to stupid people,
wherever such may be,
you... That just empowers the stupid, but more
importantly,
to and with greater destructive effect, it empowers
the evil people who want to cater
to them. And I think that is what
we are beginning to see,
not just on the left, but now
increasingly on the right.
So here's the last word from me before
we we we end today, related to what
you said.
1 of our friends in the chat many
thanks to to Stephen and many things to
Ryan for their contribution. 1 of our friends
as imagine if we had an Alex... Epstein
on free trade. That would be something.
Now, of course, Alex Epstein has almost single
handedly
switched the completely changed the discussion on en
and this is a major success.
The thing is,
I don't think that the choice of the
republicans to tea sweet sides on free trade
has to do with
lack of knowledge or it has to do
with... They don't understand that issue very well.
Am I wrong the tucker cars at someone
point was working in ke or, I think
or something like that, or many people in
the new right, they cite
Roth
hope particular Hans german Hop. So they must
have heard somewhere
the marriage of free trade. So it's not
that they don't know,
It is a conscious
decision.
It is a conscious decision to go for
authority authoritarian. It is a conscious
decision they want to be central planners. How
do I know? Again, go and watch
the... That's the only Bert
talk by j demands. And see how at
some point,
he he he says that if I have
to choose between
this
abstract idea of freedom in the common good.
I know I'm going for the common good.
And again, people
who created this dichotomy, freedom more common good.
This is a this is a
trademark of the left. A trademark of the
list. This this fall common good,
or freedom.
And the conservatives have chosen
to go down that that way, the way
of the central planner.
And notice again, how Vantage all the time,
the term we.
Says, we have allowed the globalization to happen.
Who we?
This is the central planner speaking. This is
the person saying. It I want to have
a say on your
decisions.
And again, if you if you care 1
iota about freedom,
At least you should be troubled about that.
Maybe in the ballot box, you make that
says again
lesser of to evils whatever. But at least
you should be very conscious that this is
something very, very worrying. Here we're dealing with
people who proudly
want to be central planners. And don't even
hide it.
Yeah. I agree with Nico.
So
we should wrap up. I'd like to share
just 1 resource with our audience you'd like
to know more about some of the ideas
that we discussed today. There's a article
We recently posted to repo to social media
from 20 21, which our colleague Journal wrote,
meet the conservative
authoritarian.
It is a survey of ideas coming out
of the recent
national conservative movement. I think a lot of
those ideas
are
filtering their way into the Republican party platform.
I think many of the ones that we
talked about today are coming straight from the
nat cons,
and Jd Vance has been instrumental in elevating
the
the the the visibility of the National conservatives.
And he's now
going to represent that in any future Republican
administration.
So check out that
article by. Jordan, you can see it online
if you go to bit dot l y
slash
meet Khan auth,
MEETC0N
au UTH.
If you Enjoyed this podcast. I would encourage
you to
follow us
on Youtube subscribe subscribe to channel, click to
the bell to get... Notifications when we go
live or post new recordings If you're watching
recording, please be sure to comment on it,
like it, share it. Same thing if you're
watching on Facebook.
If you have questions or comments about today's
episode or suggestions for future episodes, please be
sure to send us an email to new
ideal at ina rand dot org we read
all of your emails and reply to as
many of them as we can.
Niko, thanks for
joining me to
just... We we we read the documents so
our audience, doesn't have to. I think this
is another example of that today.
And we promise to do the same when
the d see has their convention next 1.
Thanks, Thanks.
You've elicit to new ideal, a podcast from
the Ina rand Institute.
If you like what you hear, leave us
a review, share with a friend named and
subscribe to our other podcasts.
This podcast was made possible by donors to
the Ai Rand Institute.
Help support this podcast by becoming an Ari
member Go to ina rand dot org forward
slash membership.