A Modcon Nation
By Aquillius
Part 1: Our fractious family
Recently, we received the latest in a series of emails asking us the same question: what is a modern conservative?
Essentially, this question is a probe, carrying implicit within it one or more of a set of questions:
Are we RINOs?
Are we soft on social issues?
Are we wing-nuts?
Are we libertarians in disguise?
In many ways, this probe is entirely reasonable. After all, if I were going to sign up with an organization or otherwise participate in their program or activities, I would want to know if they were, for example, RINOs.
On the other hand—and forgive the bluntness—but while we check each other's ideological purity, the left is planning for our ultimate destruction!
And yet here we are, often squabbling like fractious siblings . . .
Moderate and "RINO" Republicans seem think that if only conservatives would stop being conservatives, we could all start winning some great conservative victories.
Yeah, that makes sense.
Some libertarians and purists are so obsessed with their ideological asceticism that they have failed to notice that, short of an alliance with the larger conservative movement, they will never be anything more than a fringe.
Yet they seem content to stay that way.
Upscale urban conservatives sometimes start to forget about the salt of the earth that makes up our real base.
Risky.
Some childless conservatives forget that there are more than just fiscal and national security issues—that parents also have to beat back the left's constant attempts to indoctrinate our our children and undermine the sovereignty of the family.
Not helpful.
Because of the Bush DUI bomb that the left dropped the Friday before the 2000 election, four million evangelicals stayed home in an ill-considered act of protest. Four million! As a result, we only avoided a president Al Gore—who represented interests far less friendly to an evangelical agenda—by 536 votes!
(Consider how the last eight years might have been different if Bush had won a mandate rather than a bitterly close election.)
All because of anger over a sin from long, long ago.
A half-dozen squabbling factions, barely cooperating, each ready to pick up its marbles and go home at any moment. What the heck are we doing?
The left is gunning for ALL of us, and if we don't get it together, we're finished.
Of course, it is also necessary to say a few words in defense of each of these groups:
Social conservatives get a bad rap.
The anti-religious left portrays each of their actions as being proof of a coming theocracy . . . even though that theocracy has yet to materialize after 220 years! The left—who are largely the aggressors in the culture war—have managed to project that image onto religious conservatives in the minds of many Americans. Unfortunately, this view exists even among some non- or less religious conservatives. It is, for the most part, an unfair characterization.
Most of what social and religious conservatives are doing is playing defense. They are not trying to impose their world-view on others, they are trying to preserve it, and to push back against the left using the power of the state to enforce its program of collective values.
Libertarians are understandably annoyed.
In their view, they are the keepers of the flame. The ideology to which they cleave is the core conservative ideology we all share. It is the classical liberalism of our Founders, the belief in individual human sovereignty, in limited republican governance, in property rights, in personal responsibility. They see the larger conservative movement as weakening in its adherence to these principles . . . and in some ways, they are right.
Social moderates have an understandable stance.
These conservatives aren't anything like the libertines and nihilists of the left. They live decent, ethical lives, but they also aren't primarily concerned with the social issues. They are conservatives more for fiscal or national security reasons. Sometimes, they are childless, and since most of us are far more conservative when it comes to our children than we necessarily feel we need to be when it comes to ourselves, all of this is understandable.
Indeed, in his book "Liberal Fascism," Jonah Goldberg says something like this: "Take children and foreign policy out of the equation, and libertarianism becomes a much more attractive idea." They may be social moderates, but they are hardcore when it comes to core conservative principles.
Urban/elite conservatives do much of the heavy lifting.
For lack of a better term, many of our conservative "elite" work very hard—to keep the ideological flame alight, to create new institutions and infrastructure, and to pass the torch to the next generation. Among them we find many of our greatest thinkers, most active donors, and hardest-working operatives.
RINOS and moderates . . . . hmmmmm
It's hard to find something to say in defense of RINOs, other than that they mean well and apparently don't realize that walking down the middle of the road is the worst place to be. But we have to remember that they're at least partially on our side (and perhaps, over time, can be won over), and that depending on the electoral circumstances, they may be the only choice.
We understand their desire for cooperation and "getting along." However, we also submit that—contrary to rhetoric you hear from people across the ideological spectrum—partisanship is a GOOD thing. Factions mean that people are still free. When an entire nation is all doing and thinking the same thing, be afraid . . . be very afraid.
So okay, fine, we've all got reason to gripe.
Well, it's time to get over it. We're getting our clocks cleaned!
The left is taking taxpayer money—our money—and using it to destroy us through myriad schemes and proxy organizations. And they don't care what kind of conservative you are, either. If you are not in favor of creating the leftist God-State on earth, you're a target.
It's time to focus on what unites rather than divides us.
It's time to see our fellow conservatives as allies—because of the core beliefs we share—rather than as opponents or rivals because of our differences.
It's time to turn our efforts towards defeating the left.
Part 2: It's the freedom, stupid
So then what is it that unites us?
How do we claim it as our mantle, and how do we market it to the American people?
You often hear people on our side say that we have made the mistake of allowing the let to define us. That is very true—we have done a terrible job fighting back against that. We have also done a pretty ineffectual job of defining them.
One reason they are able to get away with it is because we have done such a poor job defining ourselves. Often, we make things much more difficult than they have to be. We see the complexities, the justifications, the reasons why our policies and ideas are superior—and why theirs will continue to fail—and we want to explain, in detail, why.
And indeed, there is a time and place for complexity, but honestly, when it comes to marketing who we are and who they are, things are actually quite simple:
We are the party of FREEDOM.
They . . . are NOT.
If you boil away all the identity politics and interest groups on both sides, and just look at the core philosophy on each side—that is exactly what you will find.
Nearly every question of human collective activity can be measured by the same yardstick:
At the far right end lies complete individual freedom. At the far left end lies complete government supremacy. Take just about any issue, and it comes down do one simple question: where do we want to be on this continuum?
We call this the Freedom Scale.
On issue after issue, the conservative position is (or ought to be) one that seeks to magnify human freedom at the expense of government.
On issue after issue, the left's position seeks to magnify the power of the state, which by definition always comes at the expense of individual human freedom.
The left can deny that all they want, but the historical record—in spite of their efforts at obfuscation—is clear.
Human beings love freedom.
The left preys on the human desire for community, slowing convincing them that larger, enforced collectives are superior to small, voluntary associations. They have to hammer for years, preying on our weaknesses and our compassion, to convince us to relinquish more and more of our individual sovereignty "for the good of everyone." THAT is why they need the media, the movies, and the schools. That is why the progressives of the 20th century created public schools, kindergarten, and pre-school. They said so themselves—they need to take children away from the influence of their families, so they can slowly beat the human nature out of them.
But they cannot, because human nature is human nature . . . and human beings love freedom! And . . . as much as the desire for freedom beats in every human heart, it beats just a little bit stronger in the American heart. It's part of our psyche, our sense of who we are.
You want to market conservatism? THAT is how you do it. One simple concept. Say it over and over again. Say it to everyone you meet . . .
We are the party of freedom.
They are not.
If you want to see just how true this is, check out the Freedom Scale. Again and again, on issue after issue, the desirable place to be is on the right side of that scale. Again and again, that's where we conservatives are.
In addition to the Freedom Scale, you can also check out The Freedom Scale: An Introduction.
It's the freedom, stupid.
Part 3: Towards a new fusionism
During the second half of the 20th century, the concept of "fusionism" arose. It was the "fusion" of libertarians and traditional/social conservatives into a single movement, and with prominent fusionists like William F. Buckley and Ronald Reagan as standard-bearers, it has thrived and become what is today called modern conservatism.
It is time to renew and expand that fusion.
Social conservatives . . .
libertarians . . .
social moderates . . .
urban/elite conservatives . . .
Think of what we have in common!
Limited government. Free markets. Preferring the sovereignty of the individual over the supremacy of the state. Believing that the family unit should have more say in the raising of children than the government should. Preferring voluntary associations to enforced collectivity.
The principles of conservatism (what was once called classical liberalism, before the left co-opted the term) do not change. These were the principles of our Founders, and they are our principles too. We are just today's modern adherents to them.
So what's it going to take? How can we get us all together?
First, we need to look at our friends in the movement and understand a bit more of where they're coming from:
Libertarians and social moderates . . .
Can you see the social conservatives' point? The left isn't looking to create a religion-neutral society where the constitutional principles of Establishment and Free Exercise are in perfect balance. They claim only to be interested in the "public square," but if the history of leftism is any guide, it won't stop there.
Furthermore, no matter how you may feel about abortion, do you not see something a little creepy in just how far the left seems to be willing to take its fascination with death? Embryos . . . fetuses . . . partially born babies . . . babies who survived botched abortions . . . the infirm . . . those in comas . . . the elderly . . . where will it stop?
Perhaps you don't share every aspect of social conservative beliefs, but is it not best to join together against a far greater threat?
Social conservatives . . .
You have been unfairly painted as moralizing crypto-theocrats who would impose a religious dictatorship the first chance you get.
We know that isn't true. We know of your reverence for the Constitution, for the First Amendment—indeed, the desire for religious liberty is what established our first Colonies.
We also know that there is a difference between trying to expand government power to impose your beliefs on others and fighting back against the left's attempts to impose their collectivist values on us all. And we know that the vast majority of social conservatives seek the latter, not the former.
Unfortunately, the left has managed to define you in the minds of many Americans, and it's not going to be easy to overcome. This depiction has had an effect not only on some Americans on the left and in the center, but also on some libertarians and conservatives for whom social matters are not paramount.
Can you understand their concerns? Our core principles are what make us conservatives, and an expansion of government for any reason is still an expansion of government. Rightly or wrongly, this is their fear.
Because this impression is so strong, it will require hard work—in both word and deed—to overcome. But it needn't require any retreat at all!
Indeed, a rededication to the use of private institutions and local networks to spread the message will change the heart of American culture far more than anything government can ever do!
Moderates and centrists . . .
We appreciate having you with us. A movement needs all the people it can get. That said, please do not expect us to stop being conservatives. This is a conservative movement, and we believe strongly in our core principles.
Please stay with us—we'll keep talking, we'll keep trying to convince each other, and we'll keep working together!
So what's it going to be, ladies and gentlemen? Do we see each other as rivals, or as fellow warriors in a greater cause?
Let us rededicate ourselves to this alliance!
Let us join together in one force. We'll have the debates internally. We'll have fun. We'll work together to stop our common foe.
Then, after the ideology of the left is defeated utterly, we can fight it out for the ultimate prize!
Part 4: The GOP—The Party of Freedom?
We've talked about our differences and how to overcome them. And we've talked about how, for us conservatives, it all boils down to one thing: freedom.
But what about the GOP?
Political parties are not ideologies—they are vehicles for ideologies. And by and large, the Republican Party has championed the ideology of freedom.
Born as the party of Abolition, the GOP can look to its history with pride and honor. Opposition to slavery, to segregation, and to the serial denial of human rights and liberties of blacks by the Democratic Party. Over a century of promotion of civil rights . . . for blacks, for women, for people of all races.
In more recent years, the GOP has supported the notion that even people in foreign lands have a right to be liberated from tyranny.
And, for much of its history, the GOP has also been a vehicle for the classical principles of liberty we conservatives hold dear.
So why then does the GOP not shout, from every hill and every rooftop . . .
"We are the Party of Freedom!"
Why, when it is so clear that the desire for and love of liberty beats in every human heart, does the GOP not champion this philosophy, loud and proud?
The short answer? Terrible marketing.
They simply don't know how to market conservative ideas.
As we've discussed, we're all somewhat to blame for this. However, that ends here, now. Conservatives will begin to carry a single message forward, a simple concept through which all other concepts can be explained and understood:
It's the freedom, stupid.
If the GOP wants to expand beyond its current parameters, if the GOP wants to find new voters, it has to reach out to the human heart at a fundamental level.
They don't need a clever strategy. They don't need a team of marketing gurus. They just need to understand the Freedom Scale. From there, all issues can be explained, but there is where they need to start.
All they need to do is establish as a motto, and keep repeating, over and over:
We are the Party of Freedom.
We are the Party of Freedom.
We are the Party of Freedom, and the Democrats are . . . NOT.
Part 5: A New Label?
being written now . . .
