Sometimes there are words we assume we understand, but that
aren’t clearly or easily defined. Establishment
and grassroots are two of these. They
are supposedly opposite, but lately establishment
has been used as an epithet to silence disagreement from elsewhere in the
grassroots, which is the exact opposite of what grassroots is about. So, let’s
define and examine for clarity.
The term Establishment
identifies an amorphous controlling elite. Lately this refers to those in the
Republican Party, particularly in Washington, DC, who have a different agenda
than the rank-and-file Republican citizen. Assumed to belong are the party
leadership and leadership in the US Congress and Senate. Sometimes Paul Ryan,
recently chosen to replace John Boehner as House Majority Leader, is included,
and sometimes he’s exempted. He was chosen because he was acceptable to both
the establishment and the
non-establishment.
But it can’t be that being in a particular position
automatically makes someone establishment.
That would require, instead, some beliefs and attitudes in addition to
position. Otherwise it would be pointless to try to elect people who share
grassroots ideas into positions of leadership.
So, for our purposes, maybe we need to identify the beliefs
and attitudes. There’s not an overriding authority, so this is from my
observations.
The GOP Establishment consists of House and Senate members,
sometimes including leadership, who focus on party power more than on party
purpose—plus some lobbyists, crony capitalists, and various opinion makers who
share an agenda with the rest of the establishment. Sometimes the difference in
beliefs is as slight as wanting to go the right direction, but wanting to do it
slowly and incrementally rather than suddenly. In other words, change slowly
rather than radically.
But sometimes it’s more a matter of wanting to keep the
status quo—quite a lot of power in Washington, DC, regardless of authority from
the Constitution. And sometimes it’s a matter of going along with Democrat
ideas because the media makes it seem that is what the public wants, so, to maintain power, going
that direction but slower than the Democrats go there.
Staying where we are or going further the wrong direction
are not acceptable to the grassroots.
Came across this on Facebook; can't locate origin, but found here |
Grassroots ideas,
or political movements or campaigns, start and grow from the local community. This
includes the grassroots of a party. I need to repeat that: the grassroots include ideas, movements, and campaigns within a
party. The definition includes where the movement comes from: from local people
in communities. They share the idea—or word about a candidate—with friends.
This could look like local clubs and meetings, like my local Tea Party, where
we hear from candidates and speakers, plus share ideas with each other. Or it
could be what we do at precinct meetings, when we elect delegates for the next level up and propose ideas that
we’d like to have included in the party platform. It might also include sharing
our opinions on social media, or going around to people in our precinct to get
them educated and registered to vote.
Grassroots ideas tend to come from people dissatisfied with
the status quo. So they’re likely to disagree with any establishment in the “maintain our own power” camp of keeping the
status quo.
Grassroots in the Republican Party is conservative in ways
outside the status quo box. The Grassroots
want smaller government—like you’d get if you actually followed the
Constitution. Grassroots want lower taxes and less government spending. And
less regulation interfering with innovation and entrepreneurship. Or
interference with personal beliefs and opinions—like those listed in the First
Amendment and the other Bill of Rights amendments.
It’s possible for grassroots movements to be extreme. Most
associated with Democrats are. But it is not extreme to value the basic law of
our country—the Constitution.
Grassroots tend to be made up of people committed to their
communities, and to taking action to make things better. So, at the local
level—precinct chairs, for example—you’re likely to find conservative
grassroots ideas being shared around.
At least that has been my experience everywhere I’ve been
involved. I started going to precinct conventions (by another name in a
different state) as soon as I was old enough to vote. I first became a delegate
to a county convention in 1984. Then we lived briefly in a couple of states
where I never figured out how to get involved. Then, in yet another state, Mr. Spherical Model became a precinct chair. Both of us were delegates at the county
convention. He went to the state convention several times. In Texas I started
attending precinct conventions—and district and state conventions—as soon as I
figured out how. And now I’m a precinct chair.
So I’m involved in my party. And I have been for decades.
When the Tea Party showed up in 2010, I started attending, to make connections
and to educate myself as a voter. But it has turned out that I also get to
express my opinions quite a lot. During the past three legislative sessions
I’ve led a group of us in following legislation and expressing our opinions to
Texas lawmakers as citizen lobbyists.
Not all Tea Party people have been involved as long as I
have. Some just woke up after Obama’s election and imposition of atrocities
like Obamacare. And we have a range of opinions, although I’d say they’re nearly
all in the Republican-to-Libertarian range, with not much (if any) overlap with
the Democrat-to-Socialist range.
But the reason for my post today comes from a
misunderstanding—or misrepresentation being exploited—by some newer to politics
who think anyone involved with parties is corrupt establishment.
Some of this misrepresentation comes directly from the Trump
campaign, which might indicate whether it’s actually grassroots or not. But
they’re trying to convince the relatively new “activist” followers of Trump
that no one who disagrees can be trusted.
About a contested convention, which happens if no candidate gets over 50% of the total delegates before the convention, there are no “brokers,” or establishment powers who get
to override all those delegates and the voters who sent them to the convention.
On the first ballot, the delegates from most states are
required to vote for the candidate they’re assigned to as a result of primary
voting. Some states require the delegate to remain with that candidate for more
than one ballot.
But when no candidate wins a majority of delegates on the
first ballot, many—probably most—are free to vote their personal choice on the
next ballot. And the next. Until a candidate wins a majority. There’s no
stealing involved. The delegate was elected because of his/her leanings.
Elected by delegates at lower levels, reaching to the most local grassroots.
Of the remaining candidates, longtime grassroots Republicans
are much more likely to choose Ted Cruz, because he is a Constitutional
conservative. He has reached out to those delegates and their grassroots support—in
every state—and has given them his message and asked for their vote. And he has
worked to find like-minded grassroots workers to run to become delegates.
It’s not a game. But it is a process. And he has shown
respect for the grassroots through this process. Whereas Donald Trump has
carried out a mostly-free-media top-down campaign with little attention offered
to grassroots politics.
It wouldn’t matter whether Washington insiders actually
wanted Trump to be their candidate; if a majority of the delegates do not want
him (and he hasn’t won a majority coming in to the convention), he doesn’t get
to be the nominee.
It is a grassroots decision.
It’s informative that some of those who are just recently
awake to the dire condition of the country, who haven’t been participating in
the grassroots for very long, might be skeptical and cynical about everyone and
everything that disagrees with them.
But people involved for quite a while—people who are
familiar with the Constitution, and are fully engaged in searching for leaders
committed to lower taxes, less government interference in our lives, and
protection of our God-given rights—are not inclined to support a candidate who
blusters about some of those things but has no coherent plan to get us there.
And no record of believing in the things that will get us there. And lacking
the character that would show any actual change of heart.
In summary, I’ve been involved a long time—at the grassroots
level only. I do not support Trump, specifically because I am a grassroots conservative who loves the Constitution. Calling
people like me establishment because I
have participated with the party and do not support Trump is ignorant both of
the process of growing ideas, and of the strength of the grassroots desire to
return to the Constitution.
And I support Ted Cruz because I am a grassroots
conservative who loves the Constitution. We grassroots have been praying and
watching for such a consistent Constitutional conservative for lifetimes.
I know and trust the grassroots around me here in Texas. We’re
somewhat dependent on the grassroots elsewhere. But I have watched Ted Cruz
reach out to others like me, and others respond to him as I have. So now it’s
time to spread that word in our own grassroots communities. And then trust that
what needs to happen for the sake of our beloved country will happen.
No comments:
Post a Comment