The Republican Party’s role in accelerating Factionalism in U.S. Politics

The Republican Party, while named after this tradition, and founded in 1854 with roots in anti-slavery and republican ideals, has evolved into a broader and delineating coalition with priorities that sometimes diverge from CLASSICAL REPUBLICANISM. However, we cannot say, that this merely began with Trump or even Bush. Trump is just a worst unpolished liar than previous administrations. The U.S. since its very inception has had a very hypocritical relationship to the heritage it claims.

Many people use these terms democratic and republican. We should just focus on the word “REPUBLICAN” here. Words have meanings. Words have consequences. Words affect people, and people’s attachment to words cause different emotional reactions. Our current problem is undeniably with the Republican Party.

CLASSICAL REPUBLICANISM prioritizes deliberative governance and institutional stability over mob rule. However, we have observed the decades long trends in the Republican Party, particularly since the rise of figures like Donald Trump toward populism, emphasizing direct appeals (mere manipulations) to “the people” and distrust of elites, universities and institutions. This immediately begins to conflict with republicanism’s focus on checks and balances and civic deliberation, such as advocating bypass of institutional norms, e.g., challenging electoral processes or pressuring courts, which contrasts with republicanism’s emphasis on rule of law. This administration is aware of this and has studied the trajectory of this country particularly since the Patriot Act, and expanded powers the chief executive or President can do and get away with, especially with complicit courts and spineless frightened law firms.

An important concept that has become lost in modern culture in general, is that in Republicanism it stresses “civic duty” and the common good, but the modern Republican Party often prioritizes individual liberty (often appearing and acting as a front) for oligarchic capitalist ideals, though again to the public, they portray themselves as prioritizing market-driven policies (e.g., tax cuts, deregulation) and connecting with their voters through libertarian or capitalist ideals. While individual liberty is part of republicanism, the neglect of true solidarity and collective responsibility on issues like public health or infrastructure sharply diverge from its civic focus.

Republicanism values consensus and the common good, but the Republican Party’s current infantile polarization through culture wars and co-opting Third Positionism often prioritizes partisan loyalty over national civic unity. Civic nationalism is categorically rejected by the ethno-nationalists. The factionalism that comes from this can undermine the deliberative spirit of republican governance. Gerrymandering or voter suppression tactics, sometimes supported by party strategies, may prioritize power over equal representation, clashing with republican principles.

RINOS AND THE INFLUENCE OF SPECIAL INTERESTS AND ACCELERATED FACTIONALISM

The U.S. political system demands representatives and leaders that serve the public good, not private interests or manipulate and exploit the public for the gain of a few. However, the influence of corporate lobbying, super PACs, and donor-driven habits within the Republican Party, as in much of modern politics, conflicts with this ideal. Policies favoring specific industries like fossil fuels do often reflect donor priorities more than the broader public interest, and this has become increasingly evident.

The Republican Party’s founding was tied to republican ideals such as opposing the “tyranny” of slavery, but its modern platform is shaped by twentieth and twenty-first century concerns: conservatism, free markets, social issues, believing their political adversaries are literally demonic then whine about being demonized is a deliberate tactic of misdirection on the political stage. These priorities do not embody the things I have learned historically about Republicanism and its focus on civic virtue and moderation or institutional balance.

When Trump took control of the GOP suddenly everyone not with Trumpism became associated with the term RINO (Republican in Name Only). The RINOS label is typically used by more conservative or populist Republicans to criticize moderates or those seen as insufficiently loyal to the party’s current ideological bent of Trump-aligned policies. Those labeled RINOS, e.g., Mitt Romney often support traditional conservative principles like fiscal restraint, strong defense, or institutional integrity but diverge from the party’s populist or nationalist wing. Romney understands classical republicanism’s emphasis on rule of law and checks on power, but when he speaks of this to his party, he is met with criticism. The populist wing, which often drives the RINO label, deviates from republicanism by prioritizing loyalty to a single leader or undermining institutions. This can resemble the “tyranny of the majority” or cult of personality that republicanism historically guards against.

From a classical republicanism perspective, those accusing others of being RINOS may themselves be “RINOS” if their actions prioritize factionalism or personal loyalty over civic virtue and institutional integrity. However, within the modern Republican Party’s context, the RINO label is an ideological purity test and has nothing to do with any adherence to philosophical republicanism.

The term “RINOS” is used to define party orthodoxy rather than fidelity to REPUBLICANISM as a philosophy. Both populists and moderates claim to embody aspects or fragments of the party’s heritage, but neither collectively nor actually capture the republican and democratic tradition. It is even more diluted in quality than it was envisioned by the founders and those that inspired them.

THE U.S. REPUBLIC’S VULNERABILITY THROUGH COMPROMISED PARTIES AND A DISTRACTED PUBLIC

Many Republicans still uphold republicanism’s core tenets, like representative government (res-publica meaning government “owned by the people”) and checks on executive power, through support for constitutional frameworks, but there is a deep philosophical misalignment. The name “Republican” was chosen for the party to evoke anti-monarchical, anti-slavery and anti-despotic governance, but today’s party often prioritizes ideological battles over civic unity. the party’s name suggests a commitment to republican principles that doesn’t consistently uphold, especially when partisan loyalty or special interests such as corporate lobbying overshadow the common good. The name is misleading, but it remains important when influencing the public to vote for their representatives.

I am told, changing the name would be impractical, given its entrenched brand and voter recognition; and that no party perfectly embodies its philosophical namesake in practice.

Also, it is true that some of these representatives do in a sense still maintain some historical continuity with the term, and the party still has mechanisms that adhere to republican principles. This is the basics, but this is eroding and as cyclic as the nature of republics itself.

The party’s name reflects its nineteenth-century origins, when it championed republican ideals like liberty and opposition to concentrated power as with slavery. Retaining the name honors this legacy, even if priorities have shifted, and the name can serve as a reminder for reform and course-correction. There are few Republicans who still uphold republicanism’s core tenets, like representative government and checks on executive power, through support for constitutional frameworks. The Democratic Party, for instance, doesn’t fully embody classical DEMOCRACY either, yet its name persists. The name “Republican” is a historical and cultural touchstone tied to the party’s role in shaping the U.S.

Every day that Americans get trapped in despair about the things this administration does, the more their hopes, aspirations and creative spark dwindle. I know there are people interested in this history, but I know there is some apathy, even in the face of your predicament against your political foe. To win against your political foe will require a grand vision that can capture the hearts and intellect of the people in whatever daze or haze they may appear to be in. At the time, we are in the fog of Trump, Vance, Miller, Vought and the harbingers of increasing AI totalitarian surveillance systems and oligarchic religious feudal technocracy.

The country cannot truly function or be a truly healthy Republic on the back of one singular party, or any compromised party. I think these men and their accomplices know this. It is the voters that need to become wiser, because your politicians come from among you and your classes. Yes, the Republican Party will need to be reformed. Someone would have to clean house, just like Trumpism cleaned house. If it is replaced, simply the next iteration will be a tool of even more rich and powerful interests. The U.S. is weak and vulnerable, even as this administration portray the illusion of strength. This is not a Republic, as say Cicero envisioned. These are the old habits and flaws developed within White European culture and Anglosphere notions about nature, its machinations and ideas of force in the world. This administration claims an idealistic White heritage for example, and yet reveals the most immature aspects, more larpy and pseudo-intellectual than anything, with complete ignorance of the spirit of the system, its tradition and progress to be made.

It serves the interest of several people that perspectives like mine remain hidden in some niche corner of digital space. If the people carried the true flame of its civilizational, scientific and philosophical roots, it would become the most powerful tide against the corrupt leaders with their money, tech and plans in the night while we sleep and labor and break our backs for this economy, hiding as our country’s salvation for years to come, not merely for the next general election. We must continue to plant the seeds for future causes and generations.