Republicans and Democrats Reversed Their Roles

Democrats and Republicans Turned into Exact Opposites of Their Former Selves

It is well known that illiberal Wokesters evolved from classic liberal Left, so I connected this tendency to yet another transformation - of political party behind the liberal Left, American Democratic party - into the exact opposite of its former self - e.g., from freedom loving, peace seeking and human rights defending party into totalitarian warmongering entity colluding with Big Tech and FBI to censor and even suppress any dissent. American political right, mirroring this drastic transformation on the Left, had undergone similar change - from authoritarian and extremely conservative entity Republicans turned into actually freedom loving, peace seeking and human rights defending party. Subsequently, drastic change in Democratic and Republican voters' attitudes reflects the one of their respective parties. Now, WHY had this happened, and HOW SUCH ABRUPT TRANSFORMATION even possible?

Political science does actually explain this power dynamics. There is so-called 'attitude cycle' in political parties' stands. It works the best in two-party systems actually, like in US. When a certain political party (or one of the two major parties) doesn't have overwhelming support in society, doesn't have enough power and influence, it ALWAYS appears more liberal! Why? Because this party needs to protect its agenda which is at this point mostly unpopular and sometimes even underground, from being censored and suppressed by a dominant, ruling party. Hence, ofc, they stand for 'freedom of speech and expression', for 'individual human rights' and so on - because they need their agenda to be protected and heard! Simple, eh? Dominant, ruling party, in the contrary, is ALWAYS more conservative, more illiberal and tyrannical because they need to protect their status quo and to suppress opposing party's agenda. Again simple.

Now let's apply this power dynamics to Democrats and Republicans. Even back in 00s (and even MORE so back in 60s, 70s and 80s, with brief liberalization in 90s), when American society was much more conservative and rigid, Republicans had much more influence and power and could without any doubt be called a dominant party on American political space. Democrats, in the contrary, were an underdog back then. So is there ANY WONDER that Democrats stood for 'freedom and human rights' back then while Republicans were more authoritarian and not strangers to political censorship as well?

Last decade had changed it all, however. During eight years of Obama, American society had turned MUCH FURTHER to the Left than perhaps even Democrats themselves might have anticipated. Hence, ALL OF A SUDDEN, Democrats became the dominant, ruling party, and their agenda had turned from underground to mainstream one. Republicans, in the contrary, turned into unpopular, stigmatized and canceled pariahs.

So is there any wonder that Democratic and Republican stands on freedom and human rights had changed as well? When Democratic agenda became mainstream, it didn't need any protection any longer. Hence, Democrats DO NOT need any individual freedoms and human rights at this point - because they would serve to protect their political opponents and their agenda now, NOT Democratic ones! And Democrats do not need that. In the contrary, Democrats are interested in SUPPRESSING Republican agenda. Hence, they support tyranny and censorship now, is it that surprising? Republicans, in the contrary, need to protect mostly themselves and their agenda from being canceled and erased, and, hence, they began supporting individual human rights and freedoms. Simple.

But wait, some people would say. It is not only about freedom and human rights. In the past, Democrats were supporting much more GOOD CAUSES OVERALL - e.g., peace, poor, gays, women, etc. - while now they turned their backs on them all and turned into corporate and billionaire sycophants supporting some sick agenda like trans radicalism or vaccine fascism. Republicans, in the contrary, aim for example to defend women and women rights, CONTRARY to their past anti-feminist stands. How come?

This is a part of the SAME POWER dynamics described above. When a political party is unpopular, it needs to be VERY CAREFUL with its political stands in order to gain more public support. Hence, supporting GENUINELY GOOD CAUSES at THIS STAGE usually becomes the best and perhaps the ONLY viable strategy for an unpopular party. Because GOOD causes would be usually supported by people, and, hence, would help this party to increase its ratings. So, here are all genuinely good Democratic stands of the past.

Now, what happens when a certain political party becomes dominant and its agenda - mainstream? This party does NOT need to worry about public support that much any longer. They already have it. Hence, they do NOT need to pretend supporting genuinely good causes anymore, and might reveal their true colors and support ONLY THOSE CAUSES which give them more money and power. Simple as well, eh? Political party which had fallen from grace and turned unpopular, however, all of a sudden begins supporting genuinely good causes, and for the same reason - to regain lost public support.

So, it is not about Democrats being good guys and Republicans - bad ones, or vice versa. It is about power dynamics. When certain political party had lost, it supports good causes to regain public support. When it had won, it doesn't care of public support anymore and does only what is beneficial for it. See the trick of it? If you were not so engulfed in your infantile good vs evil dichotomy you might have seen this power dynamics much sooner.