Rachel Alexander: projection at its finest, says the GOP is the intelligent party.

Rachel Alexander has an article up over at the Christian Post in which she bemoans the fact that the GOP, which she describes as the intelligent party, is suffering at the national level.

Conservatism is too cerebral for many Americans. Consequently, the right has to try twice as hard as the left to gain support for its policies. This means working smarter too, by using methods that are effective like emotional arguments. Although it may feel foreign to most on the right to use an emotional argument about something that is not terribly worthy of emotion, to continue down the same old path that no longer works is slowly making the Republican Party a minority. Republicans need to quit lamenting over the backwards fact that the most intelligent party is not the most successful.

Yes, the GOP is the party of the intelligent.  This is the party that rejects the conclusions of the world’s most perspicacious scientists on the subject of global warming; the party that rejects the position of the world’s psychological community on the subject of homosexuality and the ability of gay people to raise children; the party that constantly attacks public education science standards and has a long history of making public education the first target for budget cuts.

This is the party that largely supports the teaching of creationism.

This is the party which proudly claims a 2,000 year old man who rose from the dead speaks to them (and tells a bunch of them to run losing campaigns for the presidency) and that this 2,000 year old man should dictate our policies in the 21st century.

This is the party of appeal for racists.

I could go on, but to call the GOP the intelligent party is lunatic in the extreme.  The GOP is the one using the emotional tactic of comparing a baby to a fetus when talking about abortions.  The GOP is the group that uses all manner of emotional tactics and fear mongering when they’re saying that the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell will destroy our military, or that letting gay people marry will destroy marriage for others (or destroy the country).  When Bush wanted to go to war with Iraq but had no facts to move us?  Then it was emotion and fear all the way.

And the ultimate irony is that this article appears in the Christian Post.  If there was a proposition that was more emotion-based as a means to circumvent the lack of any evidence in its favor than a religion that threatens people with eternal torment for defying it, I’ve never heard of it.  People who believe in Christianity do so almost exclusively for emotional reasons: they don’t want to die or don’t want to go to hell.  There is no evidence whatsoever that a Canaanite Jew rose from the dead, and anybody who believes that, no matter how emotionally motivating their Sunday services are, doesn’t get to lecture other people on the shady nature of using emotional tactics to win.

If you’ve ever instilled the fear of hell into a child, you lose that right in the eyes of any fair-minded person.

About JT Eberhard

When not defending the planet from inevitable apocalypse at the rotting hands of the undead, JT is a writer and public speaker about atheism, gay rights, and more. He spent two and a half years with the Secular Student Alliance as their first high school organizer. During that time he built the SSA’s high school program and oversaw the development of groups nationwide. JT is also the co-founder of the popular Skepticon conference and served as the events lead organizer during its first three years.

  • baal

    “Conservatism is too cerebral for many Americans”


    Has she listened to the Rush Limbaugh or Hannity shows?

    • Loqi

      Worse than that, has she listened to the people who call into shows like that? Those are not the voices of intellectualism. These are the people who think Fascism and Communism are not only compatible ideologies, but *identical* ideologies.

      • Abram Larson

        I had a good chuckle at this. I just had to explain the difference between communism and fascism to someone a couple of days ago.

        • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd


          Sadly, I have had to do the same. And explain the difference between communism and socialism. And explain what capitalism actually is. And then go pound my head into a brick wall when people insist on ignoring it all in favor of “it’s socialism which is communism so it’s bad because Jesus”.

          • Zinc Avenger

            Knowing stuff is Communism.

  • unbound55

    When every one of your party’s philosophies and plans can fit on placards in large text, you really can’t be called the intelligent party and be taken seriously. GOP has about as much intellectual depth as a puddle.

    Although I do appreciate the laugh. Thanx Rachel.

  • Andrew G.

    As always, The Authoritarians is required reading on this point – especially chapter 3, and this notable telling point:

    And when I give feedback lectures to classes about my studies and describe right-wing authoritarians, it turns out the high RWAs in the room almost always think I am talking about someone else.

    • Mackinz

      Thank you exposing me to this. I will read it, beginning to end.

  • Loqi

    I understand conservativism. I am smart. Therefore conservativism is smart. The GOP is the conservative party. Therefore the GOP is smart.

    Checkmate, libruls.

  • iknklast

    Maybe if cerebral means “they have big heads”. I’m always having that old axiom thrown at me about how if you’re not a liberal when you’re young, you have no heart. If you’re not a conservative when you’re old, you have no brain. Not true. Sometimes intelligence can be channeled into long term thinking, instead of just the typical short term, make money now and don’t worry about later; we’ll buy a future – this is the program of the GOP.

    • smrnda

      Churchill was the source of that quote, though a British ‘conservative’ (or liberal) of the time wouldn’t quite match up with the political spectrum of the US, where loony far-right ideas that would be laughed at in a sensible nation are taken seriously by many here.

      • Stev84

        Even today the American political spectrum is skewed extremely far to the right. There is no real left in the US. The American Democrats aren’t social democrats in the European sense. They are a centrist party. Center left on some issues and center right on others. The Republicans are the equivalent to far-right nationalist parties.

        Support for universal healthcare is pretty much universal among European conservatives. And in the UK it was conservatives who passed a same-sex marriage bill.

  • Art_Vandelay

    And the ultimate irony is that this article appears in the Christian Post.

    That’s actually anything but ironic.