@blatham,
blatham wrote:
If there is any single marker for this movement, it would be the notion that any form of governance other than what they espouse is axiomatically illegitimate. Liberalism is illegitimate. The Dem party is illegitimate. These folks do commonly believe that single party rule with them in charge is not merely desirable but necessary for the continuation of liberty and Americanness as they define it.
Something like it on the left? Liberals have or include different communities and traditions, of course. Differing notions of proper governance, of course. But over the last four or five decades, the left has not been marked by a passionate inside group dedicated to gaining power within the party and managing to do so, as is the case with movement conservatives. The closest analogy would be the emerging Bernie Sanders/Elizabeth Warren populist impulse.
I agree there are elements of what folks commonly call conservatism that fit your description. However, I don't know of any time over the past five decades in which they held any significant polical power. I also believe their counterparts on the left could fit the same descriptoir, though I suspect they would deny that.
I think the attributes you listed are fairly commonly seen by many, across the political spectrum, as applying to their political opponents, whomever they may be. Probably a little projection involved in that on both sides.
I believe the Democrats during the first two years of the current Administration, when they controlled the Presidency and both houses of Congress, behaved in a manner that came close to fitting your description. They voted in the key elements of their political agenda with zero accomodation with, or support from, Republicans. Evidence is also accumulating that suggests they exhibited considerable contempt for the intelligence and understanding of the electorate in the many deceptions implicit in the ACA and their statements in support of it.
I'll agree that Elizabeth Warren and perhaps Senator Bernie Sanders represent the extreme left wing of the party, and are more or less the counterpart of the tea party (though I suspect both would resent the comparison, based on their empty but lofty - and hypocritical - pretensions of superior intelligence and ability). Elizabeth is an unusually blonde Cherokee (albeit denied by the Cherokees themselves). She appears unashamed of her undeserved long term exploitation of a fictitious minority status, even as she loudly proclaims the social and economic game in this country is "rigged" in favor of a distant priviledged class.
