Russell Arben Fox has a thoughtful meditation on the prospects for his brand of “left conservatism” in a bluer America. Hard to believe that we were talking about a permanent Republican majority four years ago. All the more reason to be wary of overconfident (or dire, depending on your view) pronouncements about the triumph of liberalism. In politics there are no permanent victories; I fully expect a conservative resurgence at some point (though hopefully only after it’s had sufficient time to sit in the corner and think about what it’s done). In that vein, John has some thoughts on conservatism’s future that are worth checking out.
"Man is but a reed, the most feeble thing in nature, but he is a thinking reed" – Blaise Pascal
4 responses to “Prospects for conservatives, “left” and otherwise”
-
No matter how much it thinks, the aims and agenda of movement conservatism will always contain the same essential element of fiscal conservatism that has been hostile to all the accomplishments of progressivism since the beginning of the 20th Century.
The conscious servants of that core commitment to the advantage of the oligarchs and the corporations and the rich will remain uncomfortably allied to the more widespread sociocons in permanent reaction against the sexual revolution and the de-Christianization not only of the public square but also of the American moral consensus, and at the same time to the Randians and other libertarians who will continue to accept a social agenda they loathe in return for gun rights and a good effort to drown the government in the bathtub.
And it will retain that trace of racism that bought it the South and still appeals to lots of whites all over the country.
What could change?
-
Well, who knows? For one thing, social conservatives could decide their economic interests aren’t being served by the existing GOP and push for a Huckabee-style economic populism that would simultaneously seek to extend the base to blue-collar minorities. This could include a less-sectarian version of social conservatism. Alternatively, the economic cons could decide that social conservatism is a loser and opt for a fiscally conservative, but more secular and socially progressive party (maybe kind of a Schwarzenegger Republicanism). The Tories in Britain seem to have reinvented themselves after a long wilderness wandering into a party that attempts to address voters’ real concens; is it too much to hope that US conservatives could do the same? After all, it’s inevitable that the GOP will take power again and, insofar as the GOP is a vehicle for conservatism, we have to hope that a less crazy form of conservatism emerges (at a minimum: one with a less reckless foreign policy, a more nuanced approach to economics than “tax cut and spend,” and a non-head in the sand understanding of environmental problems).
-
As to the environment, when they get past the denial phase they are tied to by huge corporate investments in fossil fuels they move directly into fights with the Dems based on how the burdens and benefits of environmental action get distributed.
For example, they favor high gas taxes over higher CAFE standards.
Or they will favor squandering huge amounts of money on technologies to make their fossil fuel holding usable rather than lesser sums for entirely alternative energy sources.
And what, actually, was Hucks’ populism but the weirdness of the Fair Tax, a right wing scam to sucker us into getting rid of that engine of frank redistribution, the graduated income tax?
-
You may be right on all that – I’m not hear to defend an as-yet nonexistent conservatism of the future. My point is that we should hope for a better conservatism than what’s currently on offer because, in a two-party system, the conservative party is going to be back in power at some point. And, realistically, the GOP will be pushed to re-think at least some of their positions by sheer electoral necessity. The fossil fuel industires, for example, aren’t going to be around forever, so forward-thinking conservatives (assuming that’s not an oxymoron!) ought to be thinking of “conservative” ways of addressing energy issues (e.g. conservatives will, presumably, want to start pushing for more market-oriented reforms to counter the more regulatory approaches likely to be favored by liberals). I’m not saying those proposals will be superior, but surely there’s some common ground of reasonableness where smart conservatives will be able to offer distinctive solutions up for debate.
A Thinking Reed 
Leave a reply to Lee Cancel reply