Life, Liberty, Politics and Policy in the Land of Enchantment!
Withering On The Right
Aaron Henry Diaz, in his recent post here opposing Steve Pearce as chairman of the NMGOP makes some interesting observations. He seems to be critical of the "very conservative" wing of the GOP, and their "advocating a return to our conservative roots." He then calls for candidates with "new ideas." He doesn't say whether those new ideas would take the GOP to the left or the right.
Was the national November GOP defeat because the candidates were "very conservative"?
Of more interest to me is what role will conservative and libertarian ideas play in the GOP, if any. Should the party return to it's Lincolnian roots of opposition to free trade and support for large domestic expenditures and the growth of the central government over the states? Seems to me that’s where the GOP has mostly been for the last eight years.
If conservatism is to have influence with the GOP, what brand will it be: Neo, Paleo or Traditional? If libertarian ideas are to have influence, what brand will it be: CATO, Reason or Liberty - Lew Rockwell?
Where have we been, where are we now and where should we be going?
This is being heatedly debated on the right. For those interested, there are some links at the end of this post.
I was lucky to be a part of the early conservative movement. I was chosen to meet with Wm. F. Buckley Jr. and drive him from a speech at UNM to a reception of committed conservatives. As a young legislative assistant in DC, I was part of a free market lunch group. This was a group of individuals who might disagree on abortion or foreign policy, but did agree on free markets. Through this group I met Murray Rothbard, F.A. Hayek, William Simon and others. I was also in another luncheon group, primarily centered around Senator Jesse Helms and his staff, which was most interested in foreign policy. I was there when the Heritage Foundation was just beginning, and knew and admired Paul Weyrich, who just passed away. I attended CATO functions when it was still headquartered in California. As a legislative assistant I was allowed on the Senate floor, and witnessed Barry Goldwater in action. And lastly, I was an appointted official to the Dept. of Interior during the Reagan Administration.
So, I have a feel for where we came from and where we've been. I'm concerned though, about the current state of the conservative/libertarian movement and it's proponents.
This may be bad timing for a post like this, but I'm going ahead before some of these links expire and anyway this is a time of the year to reflect back and to look forward.
I would welcome your thoughts.
Left and Right, Piling On...Bill Kristol calls for "Big Government" conservatism.
Big Government, Small Vote Totals...James Antle says Kristol is wrong.
The Strength of Compassionate Conservatism...Michael Gerson defends Big Government
The Old New Right...Richard Viguerie calls for a conservative movement outside the GOP
Limited Government, Expanded Popularity...Says Quinn Hillyer.
A RINO vs. El Rushbo...AWR takes on Colin Powell for saying R's should reject Limbaugh
The GOP needs a Colin-cleansing...So says Doug Powers
To rebuild the GOP...William Niskanen lays down 6 principles.
Five Hard Truths For RINOS John Hawkins says moderation has been tried before, and lost.
McCain Couldn't Compete With Obama's Money It's as simple as that says Karl Rove. Ideas aren't even mentioned.
Return to the Wilderness R Emmett Tyrrell Jr says modern conservatives have been in much worse shape than they are today.
Learning From the Bush Legacy Philip Klein on Bush and conservative mistakes.
Was the national November GOP defeat because the candidates were "very conservative"?
Of more interest to me is what role will conservative and libertarian ideas play in the GOP, if any. Should the party return to it's Lincolnian roots of opposition to free trade and support for large domestic expenditures and the growth of the central government over the states? Seems to me that’s where the GOP has mostly been for the last eight years.
If conservatism is to have influence with the GOP, what brand will it be: Neo, Paleo or Traditional? If libertarian ideas are to have influence, what brand will it be: CATO, Reason or Liberty - Lew Rockwell?
Where have we been, where are we now and where should we be going?
This is being heatedly debated on the right. For those interested, there are some links at the end of this post.
I was lucky to be a part of the early conservative movement. I was chosen to meet with Wm. F. Buckley Jr. and drive him from a speech at UNM to a reception of committed conservatives. As a young legislative assistant in DC, I was part of a free market lunch group. This was a group of individuals who might disagree on abortion or foreign policy, but did agree on free markets. Through this group I met Murray Rothbard, F.A. Hayek, William Simon and others. I was also in another luncheon group, primarily centered around Senator Jesse Helms and his staff, which was most interested in foreign policy. I was there when the Heritage Foundation was just beginning, and knew and admired Paul Weyrich, who just passed away. I attended CATO functions when it was still headquartered in California. As a legislative assistant I was allowed on the Senate floor, and witnessed Barry Goldwater in action. And lastly, I was an appointted official to the Dept. of Interior during the Reagan Administration.
So, I have a feel for where we came from and where we've been. I'm concerned though, about the current state of the conservative/libertarian movement and it's proponents.
This may be bad timing for a post like this, but I'm going ahead before some of these links expire and anyway this is a time of the year to reflect back and to look forward.
I would welcome your thoughts.
Left and Right, Piling On...Bill Kristol calls for "Big Government" conservatism.
Big Government, Small Vote Totals...James Antle says Kristol is wrong.
The Strength of Compassionate Conservatism...Michael Gerson defends Big Government
The Old New Right...Richard Viguerie calls for a conservative movement outside the GOP
Limited Government, Expanded Popularity...Says Quinn Hillyer.
A RINO vs. El Rushbo...AWR takes on Colin Powell for saying R's should reject Limbaugh
The GOP needs a Colin-cleansing...So says Doug Powers
To rebuild the GOP...William Niskanen lays down 6 principles.
Five Hard Truths For RINOS John Hawkins says moderation has been tried before, and lost.
McCain Couldn't Compete With Obama's Money It's as simple as that says Karl Rove. Ideas aren't even mentioned.
Return to the Wilderness R Emmett Tyrrell Jr says modern conservatives have been in much worse shape than they are today.
Learning From the Bush Legacy Philip Klein on Bush and conservative mistakes.
Views: 16
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Jim Scarantino on -
Awesome post, Frank. You pose precise questions, stripped of the usual vagueness about "far" right, "hard core" conservative, etc. It's something I've been asking for eight years: what exactly does the GOP stand for? It lost its compass completely under Bush and Cheney. I am going to take some time to ponder this then post my thoughts in more detail. Please, other readers, join in this important conversation. As administrator of this site, I will try to keep this post at the top of the page for much longer than usual so it gets the attention it merits.
-
Permalink Reply by A Lawyer for Cowboys on -
JMHO...But the neocons have completely succeeded the NMGOP and the National GOP are DOA.
-
Permalink Reply by Frank DuBois on -
I must admit, I was one of those who initially welcomed the neoconservatives.
This was the early 70's. Richard Nixon was the President (the man who brought us the Endangered Species Act, the Council on Environmental Quality, the first Earth Day, Wage & Price Controls, EEO Guidelines, etc.). This was the context in which I and other conservative-libertarians were working.
I remember how much I looked forward to Irving Kristol's column in the Wall Street Journal. He was an excellent writer, brought some credibility to conservatism in certain important quarters where it had not existed, and had some positive impacts on rightward thought.
Their publications at the time, Commentary and The Public Interest [also this], were quality stuff and very helpful to those seeking conservative solutions.
Their foreign policy was anti-communist so easily fit within the conservative mantra.
That was a different neoconservatism than we see today.
It always bothered me that the neo's accepted the welfare state and only provided policy prescriptions to better "manage" the programs and make them more "efficient."
James Watt, former Secretary of Interior, probably expressed this the best. In our weekly meetings with him, he always drove home the message that the Reagan Revolution was not about better management of government, but about bringing change to government. No "business as usual" Republican was he, and you saw the price he paid.
The debate on the right at the time (early eighties) was between the gradualists and the abolitionists. The gradualists argued it had taken 40 plus years to create the federal monstrosity, and it would take a rational, gradual approach to dissemble it. The abolitionists had more faith in the markets ability to adjust and felt you should strike while the iron was hot.
This was my second foray in DC. I entered as a gradualist, and left as an abolitionist.
I finally realized you can't slowly pull the teat out of someone's mouth.
-
Permalink Reply by Aaron Henry Diaz on -
The GOP is suffering from an Identity crisis. You ask the right questions at the right time Frank. The party must ask themselves who are they, what is the definition of Republican conservatism, and are they truly the 'big tent' party. Most young people blindly follow the neo-conservative brand just because it has been dominant this decade. The future of the party must be educated and guided by a solid foundation. A shift to the right or left is not necessary at this point but the definition of conservatism is. I criticize the overly used "back to conservative roots" remedy offered by leadership because they do not know what those roots are. New and old ideas, this generation of leaders and the the next must come together to discuss the redefining of the party.
-
Permalink Reply by Frank DuBois on
-
They have certainly dominated the decade, even taking over my beloved National Review. This was the publication that got it all started for me. It led me to the Conservative Book Club, to Goldwater's The Conscious Of A Conservative, to Hazlitt's Economics In One Lesson, which led me to Bastiat's The Law (pdf). But enough of that. Suffice it to say I yearn for the old NR where the different strands of conservatism were openly discussed and debated.
Your point about how can they return to their roots when they are confused about their roots is well made. If the root is viewed as neocon or big gov't, we've gained nothing.
Henry, please don't be offended when I tell you that I immediately become suspicious when someone wants to redefine something in the political arena. My experience is that redefine means abandon one or more principles and move to the left. I'm sure that's not your intent but that is my experience. This is especially true in the philosophical arena and mostly true in the political arena. How do you redefine free markets? How do you redefine private property? Repackage the concept, yes. Do a better job of marketing the ideas, yes. Redefine worries me. Political parties can redefine themselves till the cows come home, but if that redefinition is based upon political ideas, we run into the same problem.
I'll try to address the "big tent" and "coming together" later.
Let me close for now by saying how exciting it is for me to see a young man so intelligently engaged in the political process. Forty years ago I was one of the young turks who took on the moderates and liberals in the party. You are in for some interesting times and I'm sure you are up to the challenge.
-
Permalink Reply by A Lawyer for Cowboys on
-
As another young politically active person, let me say this, the current shift of our generation within the GOP party is disheartening. Every time I have heard somebody talk of redefining the party it means becoming more moderate. More moderate invariably means falling prey to the culture war and inevitably the neocons. If you really wish to see how you become big tent, I recommend that you take a look at Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty. If you really want to bring in people of all different shades then look to the one thing that unifies them. That is Liberty. That's it Liberty pure and simple. Liberals, Libertarians and Conservatives are already uniting under the theory of govt. that does not interfere with our civil liberties. The days of the Evangelical Conservatives aka big govt. moral squad, aka neocon aka borrow and spend Republicans are numbered. We don't want a govt. that interferes in our business or our private lives. We want a Republic. The GOP will never be that party again until the neocons have died off, we are better off starting new elsewhere. Being a lifelong GOP member is a no longer just an indicator, it is a mandatory qualification (no big tent there). It is time to get outside the two party system, these two parties are too entrenched and too concerned with maintaining the status quo.
Besides Mr. Diaz, it rings hollow for you to discuss the big tent, when you attacked participants in the GOP CD2 primary this past spring for not being long time Republicans.
As Mr. DuBois already indicated, the answers are already out there, they can be found in Goldwater's Conscience of a Conservative:
The turn will come when we entrust the conduct of our affairs to the men who understand that their first duty as public officials is to divest themselves of the power that they have been given. It will come when Americans, in hundreds of communities throughout the nation, decide to put the man in office who is pledged to enforces the Constitution and restore the Republic.
Who will proclaim in a campaign speech: 'I have little interest in steamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not inaugurate new programs, but to cancel the old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed in their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is 'needed' before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents' 'interests,' I shall reply that I was informed their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can.
-
Permalink Reply by Aaron Henry Diaz on
-
As a veteran politico I am certain you've heard redefinition muttered in the ranks many times before. I understand your suspicion, you are correct it is not my intent. The neo-cons have already redefined conservatism this generation, I simply advocate for a pure redefinition, a true return to our roots which are found in Goldwater and others. Unfortunately GOP leadership refuses to open the discussion and shun those who wish to. Patient persistence is key for young soldiers in the movement to keep. We have much to learn from those who experienced the founding of the movement, I look forward to reading more from you Frank.
-
Permalink Reply by A Lawyer for Cowboys on
-
Patient persistence never got the movement anywhere....nor did patient persistence serve our forefathers as they established this Country. It was revolution that has brought about great change... You can dodge what I am saying all you want...but playing pattycake with the GOP leadership is a waste of time.
I respect the hell out of what Mr. Dubois has to say, but I think you Mr. Diaz are trying to dodge a much needed revolution. It is time for Liberty.
-
Permalink Reply by Aaron Henry Diaz on
-
Note taken... but please do not make assumptions.
-
Permalink Reply by A Lawyer for Cowboys on
-
If I am assuming something incorrectly lets discuss it. At the very least lets discuss the merits of the arguments. If you really do just want to take a pass and not get into the subject that fine, just say so. But as one young politico to another I would like to hear your arguments for or against the dead rotting corpse that was once the party of Goldwater and is now the party of the Bush neocons.
-
Permalink Reply by Frank DuBois on
-
You appear to be itchin' for a fight. Let's keep it on the high road here, as much as possible.
The issue you raise is important and needs to be discussed. Do you push for liberty inside or outside the GOP, or use both avenues? See Viguerie's link above.
In the meantime, as long as you and Henry are both pushing for liberty, I don't give a damn if it's inside, outside, topside or bottomside, just keep pushing.
We all benefit that way.
-
Permalink Reply by Frank DuBois on
-
While this little mini-spat was going on, I was being visited by Karl Hess, the son of THE Karl Hess, who was the speechwriter for Goldwater.
Karl jr. edited his father's autobiography, Mostly On The Edge. The interesting thing about Hess sr. is he was on the inside as part of the Goldwater movement, but later chose to exit the Republican establishment. I was honored to meet Hess sr. and stay at his place in West Virginia.
I asked, and Karl jr. agreed to post about his father as part of our discussions. This will occur upon his return to DC.
That is the type of information/idea exchange I prefer to see happen here.
Groups
-
Job Creation
1 member
-
Support Unfairly Targete…
10 members
-
Liberty Talent
4 members
-
Open Source Users
4 members
-
Boston Tea Party
9 members
© 2012 Created by The Rio Grande Foundation.
