The political party which Abraham Lincoln carried to victory in 1860 was
a party with these moral objectives. The Whigs had disintegrated from
their own lack of principle, and the Republicans emerged with a program
capable of rallying men to effort and sacrifice—which are in the long
run psychologically more compelling than the stasis of security. But
after the war and the death of the party’s unique leader, all moral
idealism speedily fell away.[71] Of the passion of revenge there was
more than enough, so that some of the victor’s measures look like the
measures of a radical party. But the elevation of Grant to the presidency
and the party’s conduct during and after the Gilded Age show clearly
the declining interest in reform. Before the end of the century the
Republican Party had been reduced in its source of appeal to the Whig
argument from circumstance (or in the case of the tariff to a wholly
dishonest argument from consequences). For thirty or forty years its case
came to little more than this: we are the richest nation on earth with
the most widely distributed prosperity; therefore this party advocates
the _status quo_. The argument, whether embodied in the phrase “the full
dinner pail” or “two cars in every garage” has the same source. Murray’s
judgment of the Whig party in Georgia a hundred years ago: “Many facts in
the history of the party might impel one to say that its members regarded
the promotion of prosperity as the supreme aim of government,”[72] can
be applied without the slightest change to the Republican Party of the
1920’s. But when the circumstance of this _status quo_ disappeared about
1930, the party’s source of argument disappeared too, and no other has
been found since. It became the party of frustration and hatred, and like
the Whig Party earlier, it clung to personalities in the hope that they
would be sufficient to carry it to victory. First there was the grass
roots Middle Westerner Alf Landon; then the glamorous new convert to
internationalism Wendell Willkie; then the gang-buster and Empire State
governor Thomas Dewey. Finally, to make the parallel complete, there came
the military hero General Dwight Eisenhower. Eisenhower can be called the
William Henry Harrison of the Republican Party. He is “against” what the
Democrats are doing, and he is admired by the “best” people. All this
is well suited to take minds off real issues through an outpouring of
national vanity and the enjoyment of sensation.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account