Republicans and Their Imaginary Truths

Republicans in the United States have never been more radical and irrational than they presently are. The fragmentation we see in their media debates is a reflection of the societal split in the nation itself and reinforces their tendency to believe their world view is somehow realistic.

Anyone seeking to judge just how disjointed the United States is these days needs only watch the presidential debates of both parties. For the Democrats, serious candidates discuss the minimum wage, the health care system, social justice issues, immigration and foreign policy. All of them have good arguments and all of them avoid personal attacks. Vermont’s Senator Bernie Sanders, considered Hillary Clinton’s strongest challenger, even comes to her defense should anyone attack her without justification.

The Republican candidates, on the other hand, vilify one another and broadcast their baseless political allegations to everyone. Their positions scarcely differ from one candidate to the next: They are against raising the minimum wage and unalterably opposed to Obama’s health care reforms; they don’t believe in climate change nor that ethnic minorities are in any way disadvantaged. They don’t understand that the U.S. economy is damaged by a lack of public infrastructure. They want no illegal immigration nor do they want regulation of financial markets. Actually, they want no regulations at all because they believe government is to blame for all their woes. They want it to stay out of people’s lives, the economy and everything in between.

What such an anti-government sentiment would mean when applied to natural disasters in the way the anti-government faction wants it applied to banks and the auto industry is something they don’t consider. Their attitude is determined by what comedian Stephen Colbert calls “truthiness,” which in turn could be translated as “imaginary truth.” It no longer matters to them what the truth really is. They ignore the fact that a state without institutions is a failed state, comparable to South Sudan or Somalia. While the “anti-state-ism” of today’s Republicans has tradition, it has never been as radical and irrational as it is today.

Ted Cruz Got the Biggest Round of Applause

In addition, their candidates have all zeroed in on the media. Fundamentalist Christian Mike Huckabee called the questions asked by moderators on the most recent debate ridiculous, while billionaire Donald Trump called them aggressive. Ted Cruz got the biggest hand when he cited the debate moderators as the reason the public didn’t trust the media. Just for the record: That was his answer to what he thought of raising the debt limit. Florida’s Senator Marco Rubio got straight to the heart of Republican paranoia when he characterized the main stream media as “the ultimate super-PAC.”

Now, it might be said that criticism of the supposedly liberal media has tradition as well. Ever since the three major networks ABC, CBS and NBC expanded their political coverage in the 1960s, conservative politicians have complained about their political bias. Alabama’s Governor George Wallace, the vehement proponent of racial segregation, could be considered the father of yellow television journalism since he accused the famous moderators Chet Huntley and Walter Cronkite of slandering his struggle to give Alabama a constitutional government.

Worlds Away from Social Reality

Wallace was wrong then and today’s Republicans are wrong now, principally because the major television broadcasters are mindful of neutrality. Plus the fact that they no longer play as prominent a role as before. The many cable programs and talk radio, the Internet, Twitter and the social networks are at least as important for political mobilization as the usual forms of broadcasting. And the new — inexpensive — media channels are a considerable reason why even radical candidates with little financial backing can remain in the presidential race. They need no television spots and debate appearances to get their message out to the world.

This media fragmentation mirrors the social division and reinforces the Republican tendency to believe their vision of the world is based in reality. Fox News and right wing talk hosts encourage them in their truthiness. This phenomenon is a greater danger to the United States than any conflict with Russia because if one party is that far removed from social reality, it is incapable of governing.

It’s possible that a respectable presidential candidate like — yes, Jeb Bush — could get nominated and then renege on his positions. But that seems highly unlikely at present. For the first time since 1964 the Republicans could send a radical candidate into the race. Back then, Barry Goldwater suffered a debacle. If the Republicans had a repeat of that catastrophe, it would be the best thing that could happen to the U.S. right now.