American Conservatism, b. 1955, d. 2020?

[skews13]

Is the Republican party salvageable? Is it worth trying to save?

These questions have sparked an interesting discussion, one that raises important issues involving the relationship of principle and prudence, of compromise and accountability, of balancing the past with the future.

But what is the Republican party—or any political party? It is, in large measure, a vehicle for certain ideas.

For a couple of generations, the Republican party has been the vehicle for American conservatism. So saving the Republican party probably only makes sense if American conservatism is worth saving.

Is it?

That’s a big question. And it will have to be confronted after November 3. But it can’t hurt to at least turn it over in our minds now.

If modern American conservatism can be said to have been born in 1955, with the founding of National Review, it may be said to have effectively died—committed suicide?—in 2020.

Mod Edit for Copyright length..



Or perhaps from the ashes of a Trump defeat, the old American conservatism—suitably updated, of course—might be reborn?

That would be a pleasant thought. But conservatives know that in the real world it is rare for a phoenix to rise from the ashes. Most of the time, the aftermath of a conflagration is . . . just ashes.

American Conservatism, b. 1955, d. 2020?

Is American conservatism as we’ve known it dead?

thebulwark.com

The first time I've ever agreed with Bill Kristol.

 

[JakeStarkey]

True American conservatism died in 1981.

 

[Orangecat]

The two party system is largely corrupt and only serves the interests of the bloated federal bureaucracy it's established over time. Neither party is willing to make the hard choices over unsustainable debt and federal overreach. Every politician, rep or dem, always leaves far, far wealthier than when they entered.

 

[Rambunctious]

The GOP is quickly becoming the Trump party...live with it....if you dems would straighten out your freaked out party and bring it back down to earth you may be able to win a national election again one day.....but not with anti American communists and angry violent criminals leading the way....

 

[Mac1958]

Is the Republican party salvageable? Is it worth trying to save?

These questions have sparked an interesting discussion, one that raises important issues involving the relationship of principle and prudence, of compromise and accountability, of balancing the past with the future.

But what is the Republican party—or any political party? It is, in large measure, a vehicle for certain ideas.

For a couple of generations, the Republican party has been the vehicle for American conservatism. So saving the Republican party probably only makes sense if American conservatism is worth saving.

Is it?

That’s a big question. And it will have to be confronted after November 3. But it can’t hurt to at least turn it over in our minds now.

If modern American conservatism can be said to have been born in 1955, with the founding of National Review, it may be said to have effectively died—committed suicide?—in 2020.

Not in 2016. Four years ago, lots of conservatives opposed Donald Trump and viewed his primary and general election victories as a fluke.

Not in 2017 and 2018, when reasonable conservatives could still have believed that Trump might be hemmed in by “the guardrails of democracy.” After all, many of those guardrails were provided by conservative figures and ideas both inside and outside of the Trump administration.

Not even in 2019, when the Mueller report finally arrived and reasonable conservatives could have talked themselves into believing that it was imprudent to get all worked up about something that hadn’t quite delivered a proverbial smoking gun.

But in 2020 the question of how conservatives were to deal with Trump came to a head. The guardrails clearly had not held. The stakes were raised from abstract ideas and future threats to reckless mismanagement that cost the lives of 200,000 Americans. Judgment—real, definitive judgment—was finally demanded of conservatives.

But it turned out—it had already turned out, in the last half of 2019—that most conservatives—whether elected officials or political donors or commentators—had no interest in helping to find a conservative challenger to Trump for the Republican nomination.

It then turned out that—with very few honorable exceptions—there was no support for impeachment of the president for his renewed clear violations of the Constitution. Worse still, there was not even support for chastisement among Republican members of Congress or the people who make up the conservative movement. Instead of rebuking Trump, conservatives actively defended him.

And then, when the Democrats selected Joe Biden, the most moderate imaginable nominee, vanishingly few conservatives were willing to desert Trump. Even if only to sit out the election, let alone support Biden.

So perhaps we need to acknowledge that it has come to this: Real, existing conservatism as it exists in America in 2020 is an accomplice to, an apologist for, and an enabler of Trump’s nativist, populist, unconservative, and illiberal authoritarianism.

This authoritarianism is as far from Burke as from Hayek. As far from a concern for liberty as for virtue. As far from American greatness as from American decency. And “conservatism” now rides along with this authoritarianism in a nicely cushioned sidecar.

Maybe we shouldn’t be too surprised. After all, there were always elements in American conservatism which carried these traits. Many of us believed that they had been, over the decades, suppressed or expunged. But that turns out not to have been the case. Instead, they were merely dormant, ready to emerge and be exploited by an able demagogue in tune with the times.

And perhaps every political movement has a natural lifespan: Modern American conservatism was born in 1955, peaked in full flower in the 1980s, and then aged, mostly gracefully, for three decades. Until it could easily, if suddenly, be pushed aside in its dotage—forced, or induced, to surrender to its younger and stronger, if disreputable, distant relative.

In sum: 2020 was the year in which American conservatism as we have known it for three generations was weighed in the balance, and found wanting.

What next? A revived American liberalism that rescues and incorporates what was admirable in American conservatism? A new political vehicle—a new institution or set of institutions? A New Center or a New Party of Freedom, to step up to the task?

Or perhaps from the ashes of a Trump defeat, the old American conservatism—suitably updated, of course—might be reborn?

That would be a pleasant thought. But conservatives know that in the real world it is rare for a phoenix to rise from the ashes. Most of the time, the aftermath of a conflagration is . . . just ashes.

American Conservatism, b. 1955, d. 2020?

Is American conservatism as we’ve known it dead?

thebulwark.com

The first time I've ever agreed with Bill Kristol.

It turns out that traditional American Conservatism has been dead for quite a while, and the GOP (and most of the rest of us) didn't realize it.

Conservative "values", limited government? It was all a show, an act.

What these people have actually been pining for all this time, was a brash, arrogant, aggressive, authoritarian, white nationalist strongman. Now they've got him, even though he's just a pseudo-strongman, and they're in such adoration that they don't mind when he lies to their face, repeatedly, about a deadly global pandemic.

Now we know what they really wanted.

 

[Thunk]

Liberalism attempts to fool us into thunking that THEY are the majority...with the help of the lying news media. When infact leftists are only 10-20% of the population.

If democrats told you the truth they would never win an election (how's that "free" healthcare working out for ya)?

If democrats didn't cheat in elections they would never win (mass mail-in ballots anyone)?

If democrats didn't promise people free money stolen from their neighbors, they would never win an election!

The fake news media used to have firm control of our thoughts...but they've lost that & are melting down because of it. This is evident in Trumps first victory...and will be even more clear when Trump gets over 80% of the vote in 2 months.

So democrats are going scorched earth and murdering & burning cities to the ground while the dems in power allow it & encourage it. All the while threatening us that the mayhem will only get worse if Trump wins again.

Good luck with THAT strategy

 

[toobfreak]

Is the Republican party salvageable? Is it worth trying to save?

Ha. The Republican Party is going to kick the DNC's ass up and down Washington in 2020. Pretty good for a party you think is almost dead. All brought to you by Donald, Inc.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Beyond referring to Trump’s undoubted “incompetence” and “nativist, populist, unconservative, and illiberal authoritarianism,” Bill Kristol has nothing to say whatever about Trump’s policies.

He explains he himself supported McCain for his (“never saw a war he didn’t like”) foreign policy positions. Kristol, a long-term neo-conservative advocate of Bush’s Gulf War, Israel, and of American Empire, does not even discuss economics or taxation, debt or social policy. In truth, his particular version of intellectual conservatism is dead. He himself dates “modern conservatism” to William Buckley’s National Review magazine, whose more WASPish “intellectual” pretenses also gave camouflage to very unphilosophical philistinism.

Modern Republicanism had diverse roots, but they were rarely recognized or treated for the vastly different things they were. The early roots of the GOP, its Lincoln & Progressive roots, these were dead or dying. They were strongest back when industry and farming and businesses were still mostly local or regional. Kristol at least took a side in the real world, the side of open defense of American Empire. The evangelicals, libertarians, small business owners, propertied professionals, wealthy stockholders, Southern “Lost Cause” States Rights and “Original Intent” defenders of special interests, these all needed a populist Conman to hold them together. Not much need for theorists of “Conservatism” when you are mobilizing a hysterical population for war — civil war, trade war, Cold War, or international everybody-for-themselves mindless war.

Americans only need to be convinced they are defending themselves against terrible “un-American” threats. That is about all the theorizing needed for the new Republican Party.

 

[dblack]

He explains he himself supported McCain for his (“never saw a war he didn’t like”) foreign policy positions. Kristol, a long-term neo-conservative advocate of Bush’s Gulf War, Israel, and of American Empire, does not even discuss economics or taxation, debt or social policy. In truth, his particular version of intellectual conservatism is dead. He himself dates “modern conservatism” to William Buckley’s National Review magazine, whose more WASPish “intellectual” pretenses also gave camouflage to very unphilosophical philistinism.

Yep. As much as I despise Trump, I can't really cheer for neo-con criticism. The one thing I might actually appreciate about Trump, if he weren't such an utter embarrassment otherwise, is that he (nominally) rejects the nation building nonsense.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

The article mentions authoritarianism, yet it has been the Republican party that has been trying to maintain people's rights against the Democrat party's headlong rush to extinguish them.

just look at the fascist bitch Gretchen Whitmer, for example. She won't even allow people in her state to purchase vegetable seeds. Gavin Newsome in California has things shut down to a standstill, and seems to be taking delight from his power to ruin people's livelihoods.

in a political climate where cancel culture is on the rise and the only thing that drives the Democrat party is the desire to be elected so as to exercise control, only a complete idiot would try to claim that it is the Republican party that actually presents the danger of authoritarianism in our current political climate.

 

[dblack]

Is the Republican party salvageable? Is it worth trying to save?

Ha. The Republican Party is going to kick the DNC's ass up and down Washington in 2020. Pretty good for a party you think is almost dead. All brought to you by Donald, Inc.

Yep. Lesser of two evils has painted us into this really shitty corner: Decision 2020, Socialism vs Fascism.

 

[Mac1958]

Lesser of two evils has painted us into this really shitty corner: Decision 2020, Socialism vs Fascism.

The predictable result of shallow, narcissistic tribalism.

 

[norwegen]

American conservatism is as old as America. Maybe even a little older than the 1620s.

It goes through revival occasionally, such as with Thomas Jefferson, Calvin Coolidge, and William F. Buckley.

 

[toobfreak]

Is the Republican party salvageable? Is it worth trying to save?

Ha. The Republican Party is going to kick the DNC's ass up and down Washington in 2020. Pretty good for a party you think is almost dead. All brought to you by Donald, Inc.

Yep. Lesser of two evils has painted us into this really shitty corner: Decision 2020, Socialism vs Fascism.

Wow. I can see the socialism, you have democrats in every branch of government working for it.

But the fascism? All from ONE GUY in the White House? Apparently I have greatly underestimated Trump's power.

 

[dblack]

Is the Republican party salvageable? Is it worth trying to save?

Ha. The Republican Party is going to kick the DNC's ass up and down Washington in 2020. Pretty good for a party you think is almost dead. All brought to you by Donald, Inc.

Yep. Lesser of two evils has painted us into this really shitty corner: Decision 2020, Socialism vs Fascism.

Wow. I can see the socialism, you have democrats in every branch of government working for it.

But the fascism? All from ONE GUY in the White House? Apparently I have greatly underestimated Trump's power.

I'm more concerned with the Trump supporters. Even if we elect someone else, something far-too-close to half of our country supports Trump's "vision". So, no, it's not just "ONE GUY" in the White House. As this site shows, there are plenty of deplorables ready to push for more fascism.

 

[toobfreak]

I'm more concerned with the Trump supporters.

So you are more concerned with constitutionalists trying to preserve freedom of speech, freedom to defend oneself, law and order, religion and small government, than you are with a group fighting for socialism, defending criminals, perverts, and attacking the police.

 

[dblack]

I'm more concerned with the Trump supporters.

So you are more concerned with constitutionalists trying to preserve freedom of speech, freedom to defend oneself, law and order, religion and small government, than you are with a group fighting for socialism, defending criminals, perverts, and attacking the police.

LOL - Trumpsters are ANYTHING BUT "constitutionalists trying to preserve freedom..." You owe me a keyboard.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

American conservatism is as old as America. Maybe even a little older than the 1620s. It goes through revival occasionally, such as with Thomas Jefferson, Calvin Coolidge, and William F. Buckley.

This is what I mean when I say there is no need for “intellectual conservatism” today. Thomas Jefferson was NOT a “conservative” but a radical Republican. Despite being a slaveholder.

To talk about “conservatism” from the 1620s to William Buckley or Bill Kristol — without considering changing views about religion, changing economics and the totally changing societies we are dealing with ... is utterly senseless and anti-intellectual.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

American conservatism is as old as America. Maybe even a little older than the 1620s. It goes through revival occasionally, such as with Thomas Jefferson, Calvin Coolidge, and William F. Buckley.

This is what I mean when I say there is no need for “intellectual conservatism” today. Thomas Jefferson was NOT a “conservative” but a radical Republican. Despite being a slaveholder.

To talk about “conservatism” from the 1620s to William Buckley or Bill Kristol — without considering changing views about religion, changing economics and the totally changing societies we are dealing with ... is utterly senseless and anti-intellectual.

Kristol is a neocon. The early neocon movement was made up primarily of disaffected liberals and anti-Stalinist socialists who sought to use American power to democratize other areas of the world, especially middle eastern, as performed in a way as to bring about something of a Pax Americana.

Speaking of a neocon in the same breath as William Buckley is as anti-intellectual as that you decry.

You are simply trying to posit yourself as an intellectual by denigrating others here.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

True American conservatism died in 1981.

More like 1968 – with the advent of the Southern strategy and right’s tolerance of racism and bigotry, along with the rise of the social right and the politicization of Christian fundamentalism.

“What next? A revived American liberalism that rescues and incorporates what was admirable in American conservatism?”

During the 50s and 60s liberals and conservatives complemented one another – enhancing the best of both, safeguarding against the worst.

But when the right’s propensity for reactionaryism (an unwarranted fear of, and opposition to, positive, beneficial change) began to embrace racism and bigotry in a search for partisan hegemony, sought to demonize liberals, and worked to deny citizens their right to privacy, their right to equal protection of the law, and the right to vote, the balance between the two was lost, resulting in the culture wars and a 50 year battle against the authoritarian intolerance of conservatives seeking to advance their goal to compel conformity and silence dissent.