There has been a great deal of talk lately about the Republican Party's inability to make an appealing case for their policies. Worries abound that the Republican Party is on the precipice of extinction.
The solution that the Democrats would have the Republicans apply to remedy this problem is for the Republicans to change their views to match those of the Democrats; that way, the Democrats will no longer have any opposition and they could enjoy tyrannical one-party rule.
That is obviously the wrong solution.
What could work, however, is a name-change. The average liberal's mind does not usually think beyond the superficial. To wit:
One liberal wrote to me to tell me to look up the definition of liberalism. "It is for liberty and equality," he said, "so in being against liberals, wouldn't you be against liberty and equality?"
What he embarrassingly failed to realize, as I told him, was that while the word "liberalism" stems from "liberty," it is the opposite of what today's liberalism is about. He did not look any further than the name. Likewise, I replied to him, "Just because they give themselves the name 'Progressive' does not mean they are progressive in any true sense. They are regressive. I can say I’m part of the Holy Party, but that does not make me holy."
I think if it were not for the obsession with all things homosexual that today's young people have, the only other reason they would vote for Democrats is because Democrats call themselves liberal and progressive, and these sound like "liberty" and "progress." And how can you be against liberty? How can you be against progress by voting against progressives?
If Republicans do go the way of the Whigs, they would have to come up with a new name to appeal to today's voters. My suggestion?
The Civil Rights Party.
Besides the word "racist," there is not so amorphous and malleable a term as "civil rights." Young people love the idea of civil rights, applying that term to mean anything they want it to mean. If they want men to marry men, it is a civil right. If they want condoms, it is their civil right to force others to buy them for them.
But the Civil Rights Party as a rebranding of the Republican Party would not be a misnomer. After all, who freed the slaves? Republicans. Without what party would the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act not have passed? Republicans. What party is the party of equality among races, opposing affirmative-action laws, which favor some races over others? Republicans. What party is the party of equality under the tax laws, favoring everybody in America contributing to the country an equal percentage, a true fair share? Republicans. If these Republican policies are not civil rights, what is?
The Republicans have a nearly impossible task ahead of them in battling a corrupt media that, deadset on disbanding and destroying them, have attached a searing stigma to the mere label "Republican." So let's save ourselves any further battle wounds, cut to the chase, rename ourselves the Civil Rights Party, and let's see just how eager will be the liberals and their friends in the media to denounce us then.