Cracked

Townhall.com ^ | March 30, 2005 | Jonah Goldberg

[Molly Pitcher]

Here we go again. Suddenly, conservatives, libertarians and other souls of a rightish bent are pondering whether a "conservative crack-up" is nigh.

In their book, "The Right Nation: Conservative Power in America," John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge offered some insight into what could stop the conservatives from prospering: if they became "too Southern, too greedy and too contradictory."

Libertarian law professor and influential blogger Glenn Reynolds says the conservatives are "aiming for two out of three" of these opportunities to yank defeat from the jaws of success. (Reynolds, a Southerner, isn't too worried about the third.)

Elsewhere, the New York Post's Ryan Sager, another libertarian, laments that the Republican Party is shedding the "last vestiges" of its small-government philosophy by participating in such grandstanding spectacles as the baseball steroid hearings.

Andrew Sullivan, a self-described sane-moderate-libertarian-pro-life-conservative-hawk, is convinced that conservatism is simply over. He is now convinced that the GOP is really a Bismarckian enterprise run by a "crew of zealots and charlatans" who are "immune to calls to restraint or moderation or limits on power."

Meanwhile, in private conversations, e-mail exchanges and the like, there's a level of chatter - often egged on by wishful liberals - that the USS Conservatism is about to founder on the rocks and that maybe it'd be wise to make our way to the life rafts before it's too late.

Take a deep breath, everybody.

First, keep in mind that what has prompted the most recent bout of panic is the passionate - and legitimate - differences over the Terri Schiavo case. Just as hard cases make bad law, they also tend to make for bad analysis. Lots of people are pointing to the fact that the polls do not support Congress' decision to intervene on Ms. Schiavo's behalf (even as the nature of that involvement has been often wildly exaggerated). The Republican Party has exposed itself, if these pessimists are to be believed, with a dangerous overreach that will haunt it for years.

Uh, not likely. Whatever you think of the legislative branch's involvement, it's doubtful the issue will be a political albatross for the GOP any more than, say, the Elian Gonzales scandal permanently tarnished the Democrats. Indeed, recall that the Clinton impeachment drive was far more deleterious for the GOP's standing in the polls over a far longer period of time, and if that effort did permanent damage to the Republican Party, it's hard to find today. The federal government is run by Republicans for as far as the eye can see.

True, the conservative coalition has its share of contradictions, but that's to be expected of any growing ideological movement or political party. Franklin Roosevelt's coalition included racist Southerners, progressive blacks and Jews, liberal reformers, grafters and machine bosses. These people fought a lot. They fought over policy, and they debated who really had Roosevelt's support. From the 1920s to the 1950s, a debate raged around the question, "Whither liberalism?" Was it over? When did it die? What does it mean now?

Something similar has been going on with conservatism ever since William F. Buckley launched National Review. From the 1950s onward, various conservatives - mostly, but not entirely, of a libertarian bent - have predicted the movement must come a cropper from its internal contradictions. Buckley was constantly fending off assaults from ideological brigands trying to commandeer the ship of conservatism and steer it toward purer waters of religious, libertarian or anti-Communist hues. Buckley stood firm and said, no! There be monsters there. Buckley was aided by the conservative theorist Frank Meyer, who fashioned the doctrine of "fusionism," which held that freedom and virtue were inextricably entwined; virtue not freely chosen is not virtuous.

As conservatism blossomed in the 1980s under Ronald Reagan, some conservatives jumped ship, unwilling to accept the compromises and responsibilities of power. The late "paleocon" Samuel Francis bemoaned the Reaganites as "hapless" sell-outs. Others among his confreres banged their spoons on their highchairs because "neocons" got jobs in the administration they felt were rightly theirs. On foreign policy, realists, neoconservatives and traditional anti-Communists tussled in an endless mosh pit.

In 1992, R. Emmett Tyrrell proclaimed that a great "conservative crack-up" was taking place before our eyes. Throughout the 1990s other conservatives made similar pronouncements, even as conservative ideas won under a Democratic president and Republican politicians inexorably claimed majority party status in this country.

Personally, I dislike much of Bush's "compassionate conservatism." Indeed, I find it astounding that even as Bush has moved the Republican agenda leftward in many key respects, the left has screamed all the louder about how "right wing" he is. But simply because I think Bush is wrong about, say, Medicare, it doesn't mean I think it's a sign the conservative movement is falling apart. Lots of folks thought FDR's New Deal was a disaster at the time, and look how that turned out.

[Molly Pitcher]

Thoughtful, history-minded column from Goldberg

[Molly Pitcher]

Corrected link:Townhall

[thoughtomator]

If you think we have differences over here, try reconciling militant homosexuals with black churchgoers.

[mountaineer]

I'm sure the Dems are sitting back and enjoying the show as conservatives and Republicans fight among themselves over the Schiavo case. They're in such a sorry condition themselves, however, that I doubt the current intra-GOP squabbling will be of much help to them.

[ALPAPilot]

If we as conservatives anchor their political aspirations to the following, we will not run aground:

We hold these truths to be self-evident:


That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed;

[poobear]

Just my two cents worth... I'm not seeing or feeling any crack up, just their wishful thinking along with inflated MSM polls about what the majority of Americans think or 'feel'. Maybe a few moderates have been on the slide, but I think the majority of voters on the right have not wavered.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Good column.

[Redbob]

Lots of wishful thinking amongst the Dims, but also a few grains of truth: how DID we get such huge spending increases?

How DID we get such anti-liberty travesties as "The Patriot Act?"

[ClearCase_guy]

Lots of folks thought FDR's New Deal was a disaster at the time, and look how that turned out.

I wasn't worried until I got to this point. Now I've got a bad feeling.

[Vor Lady]

As vehemently as I have been fighting in the FR trenches this past two weeks; I think the Dems are living in DeNile. We may be fighting like white trailer trash, but for them to try to exploit our divisions would be really a bad idea.

I come from white trailer trash stock and we had a saying, $%^& with me, $%^& with the whole trailer park. We will still have our differences after poor Teri is either rescued (I hope) or gone and buried; but hopefully everyone will calm down.

Everyone should write scathing letters to the President and the Governor for which ever side they were on, then everyone should take a deep breath and we should think through our options. I don't seriously believe that any of us Republicans (Paleocons, neocons, libertarians, liberaltrians, pro-life or pro-death) want Hillary in the White House.

[Milton Friedman]

I think that Bush does a lot of things like a big government liberal. It really makes me angry sometimes.

But if he can privatize social security and really promote an ownership society it will be a start.

I support Bush because of 9-11 and his strong and steady response. His vision, determination and steel in the face of criticism and chaos make me admire the man. He is a hero in that sense to me.

But that doesn't change the fact that he hasn't vetoed one piece of spending since taking office, and that the GOP in Congress like to eat the same pork and that the Democrats used to.

I would also agree with the sentiment that even while Bush has taken the party to the left, the left keeps screaming Hitler even louder. It is as if Bush could propose expanding welfare and the left would bitch and moan.

The GOP could crumble from within if Democrats presented a viable alternative. Don't look for that to happen. They seem to detest Lieberman, and when you have Pelosi, Reid, Kerry and Kennedy representing the party they have a "reality gap". I am still amazed that the Dems put all their cash in the 2002 mid term elections in an effort to defeat Jeb Bush. And whose bright idea was to run Janet Reno? Talk about a disconnect from reality.

[Just another Joe]

I may get flamed for this, but......

the Republican Party is shedding the "last vestiges" of its small-government philosophy

That was gone when President Reagan retired from office.
X41, at least, tried to keep the budding tax and spend politicians in check but with little success.

The federal government is run by Republicans for as far as the eye can see.

Which, at this point, is only the least bad of two evils.
I would rather have the Republicans go back to it's roots, which is "Classic Liberalism" but it ain't likely to happen.
Too many, "professional politicians".

Indeed, I find it astounding that even as Bush has moved the Republican agenda leftward in many key respects, the left has screamed all the louder about how "right wing" he is.

I disagree with some of President Bush's initiatives and agree with others.
The only one I find extremely distasteful is his stance on illegal immigration.

Lots of folks thought FDR's New Deal was a disaster at the time, and look how that turned out.

Yes, let's look at how that turned out.
Welfare
A start to huge public spending, high taxes, and centralization of power in the executive branch of government

You might say that FDR's "New Deal" programs brought America out of the Depression but everything I've read says we were still in the depression until we were in WWII.

FDR loved socialism and he was in the right place at the right time to institute it in the USA.