The Ideogap
The Overton Window is defined by what is inside it, the Smith Ideogap is defined by what is outside the Overton Window.
There is the Overton Window - the concept in political theory that describes the range of ideas considered acceptable or mainstream within public discourse at a given time. The Overton Window moves - it shifts over time based on cultural, social, economic, or political changes. For example, ideas like same-sex marriage or universal healthcare were once outside the Overton Window in many places but gradually moved into the realm of acceptable debate as public attitudes evolved. Conversely, ideas that were once mainstream can slip out of the window if they lose support.
The concept is often used to explain how activists, thinkers, or events can "shift the window" by introducing fringe ideas, normalizing them through discussion, and eventually making them palatable. It’s less about what’s objectively right or wrong and more about what’s politically viable at any given moment.
As we observe our current politics, and where the two major political parties plant their flag, I’m beginning to wonder if there is a fixed gap or space, like the Overton Window, that exists between the parties. The Overton Window is about what is inside the window, what I am theorizing is about what is outside the window and keeps ideologies separated, an ideological gap, if you will.
I checked with Grok and ChatGPT and there doesn’t seem to be a word for it, so with the help of Grok, I’m going to coin one – “ideogap” (id-e-o-gap)- and since this is my idea until someone tells me somebody already has thunk it up, I’m going to name it the “Smith Ideogap”.
Populism has altered my lifelong perception of conservatism. I am embarrassed to say that during the Reagan through the G.W. Bush years, I saw conservativism as one thing, when it was really neoconservativism, burdened with some “A-Team” militarism, globalism, and “Greed is good” Wall Street Gordon Gekkoism – it was the era of Cheers, Miami Vice, McGyver, Friends, ER, Seinfeld and the X-Files – that big Technicolor go-go career focused perspective was the ethos of the age.
I wanted to be a corporate lawyer and work on Wall Street. I really thought “making it” would be a write-up in the Wall Street Journal.
We do tend to define our political leanings in the context of the times in which we live.
What is interesting to me, and that is where the Smith Ideogap enters the chat, is that as the GOP moved to the center, the Democrats loaded up the bus and drove hell for leather toward the communist left – and that gap seems to be constant. When Newt and the GOP was pushing toward the right during the Clinton administration, Billy Jeff moved to the center – the same when the Obama administration began drifting left, the Tea Party moved the GOP right again, and the Democrats responded by moving toward the center.
I’m beginning to think that rather than it being principles that divide the parties, it is the reaction to each other that does it – when one moves one direction, the other moves that same direction to maintain the ideological distance between them.
That’s not to say that any party completely abandons any given principle, they just adopt a different twist on them, and I have no idea whether the forces that govern the ideogap are push or pull, or who moves first is the key, like gravity, it just seems to “be”.
Look at the current kerfuffle about tariffs – the leadership and majority of Democrats were for them (back in the 90’s) before they were against them (today), and the GOP was against them before they were for them. That’s not to say that there aren’t a staunch percentage of both parties that still stand where they originally stood, but there has been some movement on both sides – and yet the ideological gap, the ideogap, seems to be the same no matter how moderated or extreme views become.
Michael, when I read this, it reminded of magnets. That is - when two magnets with same pole facing each other will repel and the distance between them will remain constant regardless of what magnet does the pushing. If you push left, or push right, the gap between the magnets remains the same distance.
Could also show why we have Rino's and Dino's - they are standing with their opposite pole facing the pushing magnet. Now doesn't that conger up a vision!
Among my many conservative friends the very idea of trying to find “bipartisan” common ground is seen as a symptom of being a RINO (Republican in name only) - unforgivable apostasy! And conservatives no less than progressives (where does one find any true “liberals” any more?) sometimes give in to emotionalism in opting for counterproductive polices for which I will give some examples: “Effective death penalty” anti-terrorism laws pander to our desire for vengeance but in effect mean that few caught terrorists wanted in the U.S. will be extradited here since most nations have abolished their death penalties. It is more likely they will get bailed out and then flee to sanctuary countries. Congressional term limits: in the Iron Triangle of Deep State bureaucrats and their supporting lobbies against Congressional oversight committees it is only longevity of service in office that gives our elected officials the institutional smarts to counter the other two sides of the triangle. There is nothing the Deep Staters would love more than a Congress of forever greenhorns. Finally banning foreign ownership of land or other state-side investments. Should our adversaries have sizable deposits in our banks, or in investments in land or other tangible assets these become subject to sequestration or outrightnationalization in time of war. There are other ways of protecting our national security or preventing illicit transfer of intellectual property. But all of these awful policy preferences merely pander to our emotions rather than effectively protecting our interests. Whether emotionalism panders to the left or to the right it does not lead to good policy.