I loved this book, to the point where I can't stop talking about it and will corner anyone who appears even mildly receptive and launch into a detailed description of some aspect of the book - for example, the differences between moderate Republican George Romney (who features prominently in this work) and his son, Mitt Romney, or the fact that Republicans Eisenhower and Nixon, if they were in office today, would be regarded by some conservatives as dangerously left-leaning. This book has given me a whole new level of insight into the way in which the Republican party has evolved over time. I think both Democrats and Republicans would enjoy this book and learn a great deal from it.
I struggled a little with the first chapter, which covers a lot of ground, providing an overview of moderate and conservative factions within the Republican party from 1854 to the present. However, from the second chapter onward the book has a wonderful narrative flow. Although this is a scholarly work it reads as easily as a novel, and author Geoffrey Kabaservice has an elegant style that incorporates both wit and depth. Most of the book focuses upon the 1960s. When you think about the anti-establishment protests of the `60s, you usually think of liberal college-age students dropping acid and protesting the Vietnam War. This book made me realize that another revolt was taking place during those years, on the opposite side of the political spectrum. An arch-conservative minority within the Republican party was fomenting rebellion, determined to bring down the moderate, progressive Republicans who had been in power since the days of Eisenhower.
There always had been a conservative element within the Republican party, of course, but Kabaservice argues that the rebellious conservatives of the `60s -- militant right-wingers who had been strongly influenced by Joe McCarthy -- were a different breed. Republicans of the time period considered them "a totally new element" in the party and regarded their value system as a "weird parody" of traditional Republican beliefs. Their appearance had coincided with McCarthy's rise to power, and they became a more vocal and determined group in the late `50s and early `60s. Like Joe McCarthy, these new conservatives believed that the US was run by "a traitorous elite"of wealthy Eastern intellectuals. In their minds, moderate Republicans, also known as progressive or liberal Republicans, were part of this hated elite. Since its founding, the Republican party had included liberal Republicans as well as conservatives, but the New Right believed that any kind of liberalism "led inexorably to socialism and Communism, and that the smallest government effort to provide for the general welfare constituted the first step on `The Road to Serfdom'..." Unlike previous generations of conservative Republicans, who had respected intellect, kept their religious views private, sought to preserve the existing political system, and were not bound by any particular ideology, the New Right was anti-intellectual, ideologically-driven, and ultimately came to be dominated by the religious right. Most importantly, the new conservatives wanted to overthrow the existing system, getting rid of the moderate Republicans even at the risk of damaging the Republican party irreparably.
Kabaservice says that the New Right was so intent upon ridding the party of its moderate members that it pursued a "rule or ruin" strategy, supporting the opponents of moderate Republican politicians even if they were liberal Democrats. Their efforts to destroy moderate Republicanism were successful, in part due to weaknesses inherent in the moderate stance - by its nature, moderation is less passionate and less driven than extremism, and its adherents are less likely to adopt a "take-no-prisoners, ends-justify-the-means" approach to politics. Kabaservice writes that in recent years, "movement conservatism finally succeeded in silencing, co-opting, repelling, or expelling nearly every competing strain of Republicanism from the party, to the extent that the terms `liberal Republican' or `moderate Republican' have practically become oxymorons."
This book provides a lot of historical perspective. I'm so accustomed to thinking of the Republican party as a mostly white, non-racially inclusive political organization that I often forget that this is the party of Lincoln, founded out of opposition to slavery. This book reminded me that Republicans have a strong civil rights heritage. It was interesting to learn that the vast majority of mid-`60s Republicans were infuriated by Goldwater's segregationist views and regarded him as a demagogue and dangerous zealot. It also was interesting to learn that a greater percentage of Republicans than Democrats supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. In 1960, way before the civil rights movement had really caught fire, GOP nominee Richard Nixon's civil rights plank was as strong as the Democrats', supporting sit-ins and promising federal intervention in securing job equality for African-Americans. In fact, African-Americans didn't start defecting to the Democratic Party in droves until 1964 -- Eisenhower received 39% of the black vote in 1956. All of this seems strange to me because it's so different from the Republican party I know.
Also strange, as mentioned earlier, is the fact that Eisenhower would have been considered liberal in many respects by today's standards. He invested heavily in education and public works. He decried unnecessary military spending, which he considered out of keeping with fiscal conservatism and which he felt often came at the expense of human needs. Here's a great Eisenhower quote from 1953: "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed." Can you imagine a Republican today saying that?
I could go on and on, but I'll stop now. Obviously, I'm enthusiastic about this book. It's an important historical work and the timing for its appearance could not be better. Five stars.
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Next 2 for you in this series
See full series
Total Price:
$32.05
More like Rule and Ruin: The Downfall of Moderation and the Destruction of the Republican Party, From Eisenhower to the Tea Party (Studies in Postwar American Political Development)
Page 1 of 1Start overPage 1 of 1
- When the Clock Broke: Con Men, Conspiracists, and How America Cracked Up in the Early 1990sJust releasedKindle Edition$14.99
- The Longest Con: How Grifters, Swindlers, and Frauds Hijacked American ConservatismJust releasedKindle Edition$14.99
- America's Cold Warrior: Paul Nitze and National Security from Roosevelt to ReaganJust releasedKindle Edition$11.99
Loading...
Customers who bought this item also bought
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
About the author
Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.
Top reviews from other countries
Thomas A. Regelski
Must reading for Republicans
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on October 28, 2018