Partisan struggles have replaced constructive political dialogue about national interests. Past proposals have been made to convert Democrats and Republicans into liberal and conservative parties. These came to naught, however, because the parties historically encompassed ideological differences.

The Democrat’s conservative base included southern Dixiecrats (until they defected to the GOP), plentiful moderates (still today), some progressives, and a small left-wing oriented toward social democracy and democratic socialism. Today, this emerging faction follows the lead of Bernie Sanders.

The Republicans had four ideological orientations: (1) progressives, (2) moderates, (3) “stalwarts” (traditionalists favoring the GOP’s legacy) and (4) conservatives. There also were some centrist-bipartisans, the Ripon Society; and a radical right-wing fringe, the John Birch Society. Today, the alt-right Tea Party and Freedom Caucus ideologies are emergent.

The “moderates” in each party should not be confused with centrists. They were centermost in their own parties but were not the center overlapping Democrats and Republicans.

The 1964 election was a turning point for Republicans. Barry Goldwater’s nomination stimulated a conservative ideological streak in the GOP and promoted a foundation for conservative ideological growth over the next 50-plus years. Goldwater was swamped by LBJ, but the 1964 convention speech by Ronald Reagan resulted in his promoting an ever-stronger conservative role in the GOP.

This new impetus created a widening gap within the GOP between conservative insurgents and mainstream Republicans. Numerous Republicans had always actively supported civil rights (e.g., starting with Lincoln). However, following 1966 a conservative (mainly southern) white backlash denounced the Civil Right Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965. This backlash loudly opposed, in part, government assistance for blacks, and black people’s rights generally. However, the GOP leadership continued to support civil liberties for minorities.

Progressives leaned toward bipartisanship (or nonpartisanship), blending the contrary positions of elitism (i.e., wealth) and populism. Their decision-making utilized the research of experts whose findings corrected sometimes under-informed opinions of populist masses. On the other hand, Progressives had confidence in the overall good sense of typical voters. Therefore many were politically independent enough to be incorruptible and charismatic in appeal. Today some historians call them “Rockefeller Republicans.”

Moderates rejected foreign policies of nation building; supported decentralization of government into a smaller more effective size; encouraged outside institutions (business, scholars, foundations, think-tanks, etc.) to address problems, rather than just government; transparency rather than secretive political ‘machines’; free market rather than government controls and tariffs; internationalization not interventionism; revenue sharing; and even (for some) a negative income tax. Early in Nixon’s presidency, these values (and more) were associated with moderate “New Federalism” and overlapped progressives and conservatives on key issues.

However, in his last term (well before Watergate), Nixon opened fire at moderates in the GOP. The resulting war of ideologies dividing the party eventually was won by conservative activists using unorthodox (even undemocratic) strategies. Among other maneuvers was the “southern strategy” of attracting conservative southern Democrats to the GOP. Political scientist Andrew Hacker described the tactic as attracting voters “in terms of their lowest common denominator: white fear of the black presence” (*277).

Nixon’s antipathy to moderates in 1970 effectively silenced them in party deliberations and reversed previous Republican outreach to blacks and cities. (This killing-off of GOP moderates takes a book to thoroughly cover.*) The outcome has been political dysfunction, with conservatives in virtual control and moderation now an oxymoron-despite plentiful registered GOP members who remain progressives, moderates, or stalwarts.

Based on Goldwater’s precedent for “extremism” and against “moderation” regarding liberty and justice, conservatives in the party refused to compromise or cooperate within the party. By Reagan’s presidency in 1980, party moderates were effectively eliminated by conservative hostility within the GOP! Conservatives, thus, have since created a uniform ideological block; however, one thoroughly cut off from GOP historical and traditional roots. There is still a war within Republicanism with its alt-right ultra-conservatives, but it has lost the ability to govern that formerly was made possible by productive relations within the party and with Democrats. This inability is prominently on display today in Washington.

Former president Eisenhower once complained, “in recent times [1964] it has become fashionable to deride such words as conciliation, composition, compromise and coordination. By the unthinking these are seemingly used to define indecision, fence straddling and wish-washy action. Yet without them constructive progress is impossible.” (*412) What was already true then, is even more so today. “Much of the current conservative movement is characterized by this sort of historical amnesia and symbolic parricide, which seeks to undo key aspects of the Republican legacy such as Regan’s elimination of corporate tax loopholes, Nixon’s environmental and labor safety programs, and a variety of GOP achievements in civil rights, civil liberties, and good government reforms. In the long view of history, it is really today’s conservatives who are ‘Republicans in name only’ “ (*391).

*Geoffrey Kabaservice, Rule and Ruin: The Downfall of Moderation and the Destruction of the Republican Party, from Eisenhower to the Tea Party (Oxford, 2012). See also, H.C. Richardson, To Make Men Free: A History of the Republican Party (Basic Books, 2014). Concerned Republicans might well consult these histories.

Thomas A. Regelski is an emeritus distinguished professor at the State University of New York at Fredonia.