A valuable if very troubling read from Michael Ledeen on the nature of government and America today. Via Instapundit with additional links - including cartoons!
The economics of the current expansion of state power in America are, as I said, “fascist,” but the politics are not. We are not witnessing “American Fascism on the march.”
The "confused conservative" is the one who lived through Reagan yet is puzzled by the sinking feeling that Big Government has never truly retreated. It has been on the march ever since, pulling America consistently toward the Big Government Left. That's a fact, as much as it is a protestation.
Ledeen basically articulates the reasons, mentality and methodology behind that, making it an important read. Reagan may have dinged the beast accomplishing all anyone one could in eight years, his Republican successors never kept up the march. To some extent, after that, the Moral Majority that Reagan empowered as much as it helped to empower him shifted the terms of conservative discussion from a discussion of government to a discussion weighted more toward culture and values.
I'm not meaning to insult that movement here, only point out that Reagan's smaller government agenda has suffered over the years. This past primary season was an example of that.
Arguably, Romney was the most competitive and conservative Republican candidate. And while there was reason to question his conservative bona fides, (was he a Bush, or a Reagan?) he didn't have the God box checked as neatly as did Huckabee. But make no mistake, Huckabee is a government guy, a liberalism empowered by his theology driving his economics. He's a govern-mentalist with populist appeal with a different agenda than the Left. And he had the God box fully colored in.
The two men knocked one another around just long enough for McCain to capture the nomination. I'll spare McCain a discussion of his politics here. But he was probably the weakest candidate of the three for many reasons.
Post-Reagan, Republicans have not effectively merged social and fiscal conservatives. And the small government agenda critical for mass appeal has gone away. Social cons must accept that government is not the mechanism for their agenda, adopting more anti-federalist arguments in their message, which I believe is happening btw. And fiscal conservatives must accept that a discussion of values and an embodiment of them in politics and government is a good thing.
Obama and a liberal Congress may prove to be the perfect foil for just what Republicans need right now if they can get their own party squared away. Short of that, nothing but an eventual collapse and near re-invention of American government offers conservatives much hope.
Again, Ledeen tells us why. And Glenn brings the cartoons!
Excellent essay, and food for thought. Thanks.
Posted by: Americaneocon | Sunday, February 15, 2009 at 10:39 PM
The problem for conservatives right now is that the popularity of both fiscal and social conservatism is on the wane. Fiscal conservatism may eventually make a comeback, although perhaps in an era of socialized health care. Social conservatism, though, is a goner -- the demographics and trends all point to a steady erosion of traditional values, and there are no signs of that situation reversing.
Posted by: Frank | Monday, February 16, 2009 at 03:12 AM
We need a new party. I will not be associated with all these chicken little republicans. These people breed selfishness. How about a polotician that could move all of us in the proper direction.Is General Patreus presidential material?
Posted by: MG | Monday, February 16, 2009 at 07:06 AM
We need a new party. I DO NOT WANT TO BE LUMPED IN WITH ALL THESE LOSERS ON THE RIGHT. Is General Petraeus Presidential material?
Posted by: MG | Monday, February 16, 2009 at 07:13 AM
I agree that Social Conservatism is a losing issue. We should concentrate our efforts on the fiscal / small government side.
And a note to MG: You're an ass.
Posted by: Lily | Monday, February 16, 2009 at 09:14 AM
"....social conservatism is on the wane".
Has been since the 1960s, was on the wane from the 1890s through the 1920s, but the Great Depression and WWII brought it back. Hard times bring people closer to the traditional values of God and family that help you survive, both physically and spiritually. I wouldn't write off either conservatism or social conservatism, at least not yet. Although I don't discount a Chavez-like takeover of the US by the Democrats given the collusion of the media and the corruption of the voting process.
Posted by: templar knight | Monday, February 16, 2009 at 09:36 AM
Social conservatism will be back when the Muslims take over.
Posted by: Lala | Monday, February 16, 2009 at 10:20 AM
The republican senate is a disgrace to all conservatives.
Posted by: MG | Monday, February 16, 2009 at 10:39 AM
Lala, I wouldn't equate the social conservatism we have historically had in the US to the Muslims and sharia law. That is a dangerous equation, one usually reserved for the moonbats of the far Left. I know you don't resemble them in any way. Much love and respect.
Temp.
Posted by: templar knight | Monday, February 16, 2009 at 11:34 AM