Wayne Swan’s remark last month that the US Republican Party had been taken over by “cranks and crazies” is notable in two respects.
First, it is true.
Second, it marks a further move towards a globalised politics, in which political arguments routinely transcend national boundaries.
The truth of Swan’s claim is so obvious that few, even in Australia, have bothered to dispute it. The following are just a sample of the lunatic beliefs held by much of the Republican Party base, propounded on its news outlets such as Fox News, and put forward by leading Republican politicians:
- That President Obama is a foreign-born Muslim, a rabid socialist and more sympathetic to jihadists than to the United States.
- That scientific evidence on climate change is the product of a global conspiracy aimed at imposing a UN-dominated world government.
- That opinion polls showing Republican candidate Mitt Romney trailing President Obama have been rigged in the hope of depressing the turnout of Republican voters.
While not all Republicans believe all of these things, few, if any, have been willing to repudiate these conspiracy theories and their advocates. Mitt Romney, for example, has equivocated on climate change, embraced “birthers” such as Donald Trump and, through his campaign organisation, promoted opinion poll denialism.
The view that the Republican Party has been captured by cranks and crazies is not confined to Democrats or even centrists. Leading conservatives such as David Frum, speechwriter for George W. Bush and Bruce Bartlett, domestic policy adviser to President Ronald Reagan have said the same thing, in equally blunt terms.
Even the remaining conservative intellectuals who deny the “crazy” claim do so in a half-hearted fashion. New York Times columnist Ross Douthat argues that Romney’s success in claiming the Republican Presidential nomination, after half a dozen manifestly crazy candidates had held the lead at one time or another, proves that the Republican base is not entirely crazy. Others, such as Stephen Bainbridge, engage in tu quoque, picking isolated instance of Democratic silliness to suggest that both sides are crazy. Both approaches have proved unconvincing.
Accurate as Swan’s remarks are, it would have been surprising, until relatively recently to see an Australian leader make such comments about US politics. The etiquette that “politics stops at the water’s edge” precluded both comments on domestic politics while travelling overseas, and on the domestic politics of other countries.
Such niceties have ceased to be relevant in a world of massive and instantaneous communication. For practical purposes, any comment, wherever it is made, is addressed to the world as a whole. More significantly, political debate has been globalised. In particular, the “cranks and crazies” who dominate the US Republican Party, along with the right wing of the Tory party in the UK, inform the thinking of much of the Australian right-wing commentariat.
The Republican conspiracy theory about opinion polls was only days old when it appeared on Australian right-wing blog sites. Writing in Quadrant, once the voice of high-toned intellectual conservatism, Steve Kates called President Obama “a socialist of the most radical leftist kind”, an absurd description of a centrist Democrat who wasted much of his first term seeking a “grand bargain” with the Republican party to reduce social welfare expenditures while modestly increasing taxes.
And of course, climate conspiracy theories, recycling material derived from the US, are run of the mill material for the Australian right. Some on the Australian right are more circumspect, in a manner that might be described as “cafeteria crazy”. That is, they accept a full-blown conspiracy theory regarding climate change, in which Obama (along with most other world leaders, scientific organisations and so on) are embroiled in a plot to enslave the free peoples of the world. On the other hand, they indignantly reject birtherism, and get uncomfortable when the list of climate change plotters is extended to include the Rothschilds, the Royal Family and so on.
It’s fair to observe that the globalised Republican brand of craziness is not the only one in the market. Most obviously, there is the mirror-image brand of militant Islamism, circulating on websites and mailing lists out of the view of most Australians. At a much lower level, there are silly ideas propagated in some leftwing circles, from 9/11 “trutherism” to the wilder fringes of the environmental movement. But, unlike the case with the Republicans, neither of these brands of crazy has a significant presence in mainstream politics, either here or in the US.
A globalised world produces globalised politics. At one time, criticism from “overseas” (the very term recalls an long-vanished world of sea voyages), would have been largely counterproductive, producing a united reaction against outside interference.
But the US reaction to Swan’s remarks has been on predictably partisan lines. Democratic-leaning bloggers such as Paula Gordon on The Huffington Post have endorsed Swan. The fact that Australian politicians rarely make such remarks has been cited, not as a criticism of Swan, but as evidence that Republican extremism has gone beyond any normal bounds.
Conversely, right-wing US sites have attacked Swan in much the same terms as they do their domestic opponents. Exactly the same responses, with sides reversed, greeted Israeli PM Netanyahu’s attack on Obama, and, going back a few years, George Bush’s criticism of Mark Latham.
In practical terms, the re-election of the Obama Administration, which now seems highly likely, would constitute a substantial win for the Australian Labor Party. And a surprise victory for the Republicans would be a win for Tony Abbott and his Republican-style politics of culture war.
In a globalised world, there is no meaningful “water’s edge” and politics no longer respects national boundaries.
Paul Richards
strategic foresight
Thanks for the article.
"... US Republican Party had been taken over by “cranks and crazies” Could not agree more, having commented frequently as an Australian on the WSJ community forum, these 'red necks' bible bashers' 'creationist' and 'bigots' attack me frequently not understanding just rudimentary issue. Completely missing I am an outsider with a Australian Kangaroo Avatar!
A typical issue is verified sources for data, when challenged they actually think it is "ok" "legitimate" and "credible" to use known conservative lobbyist 'think tanks' as sources of legitimate political truth. But on the other had the contrast in intelligent and concise lines of argument form others is refreshing.
America is a land of contrasting views from West to East, State to State and County to County view range incredibly. I just love they don't get sarcasm, unlike Europeans and the UK public.
Susie Savage
Policy Researcher and Futurist
Paul replied - "A typical issue is verified sources for data, when challenged they actually think it is "ok" "legitimate" and "credible" to use known conservative lobbyist 'think tanks' as sources of legitimate political truth."
That happens here in Australia, many quote vested interest sites, papers and deliberately make a case based around vested interests. In my work I write professionally in the public policy area and it is common, the misguided often cannot see the through the media blanket on some issues. It is an occupational hazard.
Paul Richards
strategic foresight
Susie Savage said; " That happens here in Australia, many quote vested interest sites, papers and deliberately make a case based around vested interests .."
Yes could not agree more some are even arrogant enough to attack academics in their specialist field, unable to drill down through the context. Even outright consultancy work handed out government agencies is used and quoted as verifiable a source, even thought it is paid for to support public policy decisions. Amazing some do so little critical thinking.
Thankfully we are not as gullible as some of the American public.
Robert Tony Brklje
retired
The core of the problem is this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine. During the Reagan era the constraint upon news organisation to report the truth was eliminated, hence the growth of right wing news commentators for whom the truth has no meaning and who a driven simply by corporate sponsors.
Read moreNow for right wing slanted news to appear reasonable, even when it is basically corporate marketing appearing as news, the news commentators must take a more extreme view, so in contrast corporate…
Sean Lamb
Science Denier
There are too many errors and the non-sequiturs in this article to list them all. The few that jump out immediately are
Read more1. Swann didn't say the Republican Party was taken over by cranks and crazies, he said the extreme right wing of the Republican party or the Tea Party was composed of cranks and crazies. A rather significant difference.
2. Romney is probably the most moderate Republican candidate since Ford or maybe Bob Dole. He brought in Obamacare when he was State governor. When Obama…
John Quiggin
Professor, School of Economics at University of Queensland
Most of your response seems intent on proving the points made in the article, from "cafeteria crazy" to "Tu quoque" to "not all crazy". On your factual claim about Trump, 5 seconds with Google would have pointed you to:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/03/us/politics/trump-endorses-romney-in-las-vegas.html
Sean Lamb
Science Denier
Well, quite. No embrace
"By remarks’ end, the big question remaining was whether the Mane Men would consummate their alliance with a hug. Nope, no hug. Instead, they locked in a long and showy handshake that — by the looks of Mr. Romney’s slight cringe and pulling-away posture — seemed like it might have hurt a little."
How much clearer can you get?
Geoffrey Edwards
logged in via email @gmail.com
"How much clearer can you get?"
Quite a lot.
Not accepting Trump's "endorsement" and a simple "I reject birtherism" would be rather unequivocal. Some strained body language is hardly the clearest signal.
You could, of course, argue it would not be politically expedient to do so. But this would lend support to the article's position - ie that the Republican Party is in the thrall of cranks and crazies.
Which it is.
Sean Lamb
Science Denier
Mr Edwards, you are free to believe anything about the Republican party you like, but you and the article author are not free to mischaracterise Wayne Swann's position which said that the Tea Party was composed of cranks and crazies, not the Republican party.
Romney as stated on a number of occasions that he has no doubt that Obama was born in the US, so he has rejected birtherism. Why that should be a grounds for refusing to shake someone's hand or accepting political donations is beyond me.
After all, Americans were quite happy to elect a president who cheerfully sat through sermons about God Damn America - so clearly they are a more tolerant nation than we give them credit for.
Geoffrey Edwards
logged in via email @gmail.com
Sean,
I said "in the thrall of" - I made no statement as to the actual composition of the Republican Party. The actaul numbers of cranks, crazies, and those who are both, is not a figure I have to hand.
"Why that should be a grounds for refusing to shake someone's hand or accepting political donations is beyond me."
I didn't say he shouldn't, I just disagree with your position that Mr Romney's body language is as a clear as one can get.
"Americans were quite happy to elect a president who..."
Yes, but we are talking about the Republican Party, not the United States of America. The two, quite obviously, are not identical. I am quite sure that those within the Republican Party were not exactly thrilled about Obama's election, what with being the oposition and all. The GOP congress has not exactly been keen to let him govern.
Geoffrey Edwards
logged in via email @gmail.com
And let's just put Mr Swan's original remark up so we can agree with what he said:
"Let's be blunt, the biggest threat to the world's biggest economy are the cranks and crazies that have taken over parts of the Republican Party,..."
AND
"Despite President Obama's goodwill and strong efforts, the national interest was held hostage by the rise of the extreme Tea Party wing of the Republican party,..."
Now, the Tea Party is a wing of the Republican Party - i.e., T is a subset or R.
T is holding R hostage. Which is where my remark "in the thrall of" is positioned. These are both metaphorical - not literal - descriptions.
Geoffrey Edwards
logged in via email @gmail.com
Sorry - the Tea Party alligned Rebuplicans are a wing of the Republican party.
alfred venison
records manager (public sector)
leave <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Honegger">; honegger</a>out of this. shirely you mean <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honecker">honecker</a>;. -a.v.
Sean Lamb
Science Denier
Thats the one
http://www.spiegel.de/pics/34/0,1020,1475234,00.jpg
Julian de Ross
Company Director
Sean, when you describe yourself as 'generally left wing' do you mean like the Jacobins of the French Rev? they sat on the 'left' while the monarchists sat on the right of the legislature. If you do see yourself as Left in that sense, I strongly recommend some research on exactly how that translated into real world behavior.
Read moreI'd be looking at the connection between Robispierre and Rousseau as well, and you might enquire why Robispierre began his 'long march' as a convinced anti capital punishment…
Dave McRae
logged in via Twitter
Opinion poll denialism has me .. wow. I am jealous. If only I could believe the polls were manufactured, I could put a few dollars on Romney at ~4 to 1 and clean up. As it is I'm happy to have gotten $50 at $1.35 before those odds fell away to $1.18
I'm jealous too of climate denialism for same reasons, they can get odds of many tens to 1 that any month in the future will be cooler than the 30year average. Although for them there's some group keeps rigging the thermometers each month to make the temps keep going up. Possibly that same group will rig the election. :)
It is crazy.
But I'm optimistic that after this election, crazy will be seen as saddle weight. The Republicans will jettison at least some of the crazy to become competitive. And when GOP dumps their crazy, I think the Coalition may also drop some of theirs. Same delusions. And the media may be braver in calling the crazy for what it is.
Paul Wittwer
Orchardist
Mark Colvin said today on Conversations that a republican strategist had been quoted as saying "we will not be dictated to by fact checking" and it was a republican during the Bush administration who said " you guys in the media live in the reality based community. We live in our own reality and we will make our own reality and you guys can just come along and analyse it, say what you like but that's the way it is".
That has to be some sort of group psychosis.
Kenneth Macaulay
Student/Designer
Perhaps we should clarify what is meant by 'globalisation' first, because the majority of what falls under the banner of 'globalisation' being discussed is simply the enormous export of US media, expectations, economic & institutional policies to the rest of the world, and personally I would not call something this one-sided as globalisation.
"The American Vision" perhaps, or "What the US wants & expects from the rest of the world, & why nothing else matters"...
The fact that what happens in the US does effect much of the rest of the world makes it a legitimate discussion in many aspects of local politics across the world, and this is simply a fact...
Michael Shand
Michael Shand is a Friend of The Conversation.
Software Tester
Great Article, thanks for posting.
A DVD is being distributed for free directly to all homes in Ohio at the moment, what is on thye DVD you ask? It is a documentary with an Obama voice actor narrating which explores the "Fact" that his mother was a lesbian pornstar and his father a communist......I'm not even making this up, shit be crazy
Paul Richards
strategic foresight
Michael Shand said " Obama voice actor narrating which explores the "Fact" that his mother was a lesbian pornstar and his father a communist......"
The general American community accepts sources of information from conservative 'think thanks' and known 'lobbyist' routinely as amazing as it may be to Australians.
This one sounds more like the strategy that is targeted to a certain demographic and very clever. It would never get up here, even if we are gullible, use cognitive bias and carry may 'team'voters like the US.
Tony Simons
Accountant
Our local toxic politics espoused by Abbott, Jones, Bolt etc draws directly on US hard right nasty tactics. Palin, Bachmann, Santorum and our Hanson are all run of the mill fascists.
Peter Redshaw
Retired
I agree, Abbott came out of the box very quickly defending the Republican Party after Swann's criticisms. I would also agree with many of the other comments that there are many Republican's that would agree with Swann's comments. Many of them see their party being taken over by the religious far right and find it hard to see it as being the Party they once believed in. As we have seen there has been an orchestrated attempt to replace many of existing Representatives with Tea Party Candidates…
Read moreJulian de Ross
Company Director
Tony, I find my brain banging on the sides of my cranium when reading your outrageous comments about 'fascists' and your very selective mention of "Bolt, Abbot, Jones etc"... I wonder how your general knowledge is going on hmm..let's say the Bolt kangaroo court? Imagine this.. a Jewish Lawyer (and former federal court judge Merkel) says to Jewish judge "Mordechai Bromberg" that "Your honour.. this is like the beginnings of the holocaust" in the same sentence where he declared emphatically that…
Read moreDr Graham Lovell
logged in via Twitter
Wow! This is quite an article and conversation.
The comment opening the article that it is true that the Republican Party has been taken over by "cranks and crazies" has been recently been put to the test.
In his first debate performance, the PBS commentators indicated that Romney had made an obvious move to the middle, which had surprised (and caught off-guard) President Obama, and furthermore, without provoking a Republican reaction.
Fortunately Wayne Swan is not the leader of the government, for it would not be pleasant to see Australia eating humble pie in the event (still unlikely) that the Republican candidate wins the presidential election.