Summary
With Donald Trump’s 2024 election win, young Gen Z voters like Kate, Holly, and Rachel are grappling with deepening divides with their Trump-supporting parents.
For many, these conflicts go beyond policy disagreements, touching on core values and morality. Parents once focused on fiscal conservatism have, in some cases, embraced conspiracy theories, creating painful rifts.
Studies suggest political divisions are increasingly seen as moral judgments, fostering a “mega-identity” where political views signify personal decency.
For these young adults, maintaining family connections amidst such ideological fractures has become challenging.
Trumps “platform” was by any measure or definition less fiscally conservative than kamala. Pretty sure the reps left fiscal conservatism in the wasteland with Romney.
The new bullshit dogma for the right wing is “growth”. But I don’t think the Trump parade really even tried to explain that was the goal, or really any coherent economic policy.
Edit: the article seems to make the same point. That previously at least outwardly normal people have gone off the deep end.
You’re missing my point, at least partially. Even going back all the way to Reagan years (and certainly for Romney) “fiscal conservatism” was not actually about the economy or saving money; it was always about cutting social safety net programs that help minorities while enriching the elites (especially defense contractors and banks).
It’s a convenient piece of fiction that allows people to vote for conservatives who pass hateful legislation while claiming to be “not a racist,” but fiscal conservatism in the US is and always has been racist. If we want to see any change, we need to start forcing the media outlets and “fiscal conservatives” to say the quiet part out loud instead of getting away with claiming they are “not racist but…”
Agreed, de facto, budget cuts have been and would be racist.
Fiscal conservatism actually does mean something though. Like you could imagine a left leaning fiscally conservative government that maintained a balanced budget by raising taxes on corps and the wealthy. That would be basically fine (though I think on balance not as good as running a modest deficit to fund nice policy). If you just go, yeah no those words are henceforth no-bueno, aren’t you just buying into their doublespeak?
I’ll tell you what; when I see the term used by an elected official or GOP voter to mean something besides a dog-whistle, I’ll be on your side here.
Until then, when someone uses “fiscal conservatism” to tell me they’re voting Republican, I’m going to continue to believe that they’re ok with the rest of the GOP’s racist, homophobic, misogynistic platform, too.
When people tell you who they are, believe them. And don’t let them off the hook when they claim they’re “fiscally conservative”