RIP, Movement Conservatism

American Thinker ^ | February 27, 2017 | J.R. Dunn

[Kaslin]

Among his other accomplishments, Donald Trump, without ever intending to, has fractured conservatism – something that was long overdue.

The American conservative movement has come quite a distance since the middle of the last century, from a small coterie viewed with contempt by the larger culture to the front ranks of a juggernaut that set back the plans of this country’s left-wing collectivists to a degree that its founders would not have considered possible. (Recall William F. Buckley’s statement that the role of conservatism was to “stand athwart history, yelling “stop.” Incredible as it may seem, “history” did stop.) Today, in large part due to its own success, it is on its way back to coterie status.

How has this come about? Here’s a simple outline of the conservative movement as it has consisted up until now: a group of conservative intellectuals, associated either with think tanks or journals, who work out philosophical and political stances, translate them into policy proposals, followed by attempts to put them into effect by the GOP, with the support of the mass of conservatives across the country.

This model has served the conservative cause well for half a century. It is now dead. It began to die long before Trump donned the robes of GOP crusader, when the core conservatives – what in the past I’ve called the Northeast Corridor conservatives – in 2008 turned against vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin and in short order against the Tea Party movement that came into being as a response to the Obama regime.

[Zionist Conspirator]

Trump is a Paleo Conservative, of the Pat Buchanan type

G-d forbid!

[ChessExpert]

Conservatism has done a lot, to include defeating the Soviet Union and some slowing of socialism at home. Conservatism is seldom defined. My definition is that I want to conserve western civilization, but without the Marxism. Marxism was a faulty branch.

Marx was an economist - a bad one. His labor theory of value was just wrong. The intellectual edifice he built upon it was wrong.

He created a movement because he gave many people what they wanted. Government could seize power on behalf of “the worker.” Today, it is on behalf of “the environment” and “diversity.” Basically, people can use government to steal from other people. Also, a rejection of Judeo-Christian morality is always welcomed by adulterers, sodomites, etc.

I can see no valid reason for any conservatives to have rejected Sarah Palin. It is a mystery. Snobbery is such a small thing. There article mentions accepting the imperfect candidate - McCain, Romney, etc. OK. What about accepting the imperfect candidate? Palin, Trump for instance..

I voted for McCain, Romney and Trump. Never Trump makes as little sense to me as would never McCain or never Romney. At each turn the Democrats nominated someone who was clearly worse.

[JBW1949]

That also works...LOL

[ConservativeDude]

Not only did the movement core refuse to support Trump, many chose instead to throw their weight behind Hillary Clinton, the most repellent and corrupt American presidential candidate since Aaron Burr.”

Interesting historical analog.

Because what “movement conservatism” lacked precisely was an Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton’s genius lies in the fact that he was able to take a large body of principles, translate them into CONCRETE policy proposals and laws, and he was able to implement them. He was philosopher/historian, strategist and tactician all in one.

There has never been anyone like him in American history.

Though his level of genius is likely not attainable again....the basic idea should be. The idea that we need to actually implement attainable policy proposals embedded in principle should be the goal.

Think tanks by themselves, debating societies, philosophy clubs....these are not serious. They can’t be taken seriously until they actually do something.

Trump, by not seeing the world ideologically, but pragmatically...in fact carries the ball for us on many if not most actual policy proposals. Why? Because they are sound. But he doesn’t care who he allies with, or who he ticks off...he is simply trying to get the best things done.

Trump is a rare genius. He may not quite be a Hamilton...but he’s as close to a Hamilton that the 21st century can produce.

[InterceptPoint]

Now this is an interesting article. Good info. Bad conclusion, at least IMHO. I happen to think that the Conservative Movement in this country is best typified by:

FreeRepublic.com
The Tea Party Movement
Breitbart.com and few others along that line.

Here is a list from the article of the supposed but now supposedly discarded "Core Conservatives", the "Movement Conservatives":

Bill Kristol
George Will
Tom Nichols of The Federalist
John Ziegler
Max Boot longtime WSJ writer
Erick Erickson
James Kirchick
Peter Wehner
Richard Hanna
Mike Treiser
Craig Snyder
Charles Fried
Steve Deace
Charles Sykes
Kyle Foley

Now we are a pretty savvy bunch here at FR. We have known for a long time that Bill Kristol and George Will were never, ever on our side. As to the rest of this list I know almost nothing and I'm betting that would be the position of most Freepers.

And these were the "leaders of the conservative movement".

No they weren't.
They never were.
We were.
We are.

But an excellent article nevertheless. So thanks again for posting.

[AndyJackson]

a group of conservative intellectuals, associated either with think tanks or journals, who work out philosophical and political stances, translate them into policy proposals, followed by attempts to put them into effect by the GOP, with the support of the mass of conservatives across the country.

This isn't conservatism, it's GOPe. Conservatism is not putting policies into affect (through mass movements and legislation). It's tearing apart the admiminstrative state, cutting regulations and the agencies that impose them, focusing on national security and what is best for America.

And not that is not racist or xenophobic. It's believing that the best organizations to look out for the welfare of the British or the French is not the UN or the EU or the US, but the government AND people of the UK or France. We can be friends, we can trade, but we have to steer clear of each others internal affairs.

Conservatism is not about bringing conservative principles to the criminalization of petty regulatory violations. It's getting rid of all of it so that a free people can be free.

The problem is that "establishment" conservatives are not conservative, they are establishment, driven by the same K-street guys who drive the liberals. The difference is that the leftists want subsidies for the poor out of the crony capitalist state; establishment "conservatives" want a compassionate corny capitalist state.

[semantic]

One of the reasons FR seems to keep dropping in Alexa rankings is because of both old, archaic terms *and* perspective.

Conservative vs liberal has no bearing when the real issue was/is empire vs nation. Or, to phrase it in a more contemporary manner, globalist vs patriot.

Globalists - either R or D aka the uni-party - used the levers of state to advance their own quest for power, control & wealth. Patriots want the state enforce the law against force & fraud in order to protect their rights of association, self defense, etc.

ZH was onto this new, more relevant reality years ago. The kids at Reddit also intuitively understand the distinction. These venues are were the new, young(er), high(er) energy "conservative" voters hang out and discuss the issues of the hour/day.

As long as people continue to mistakenly associate traditional conservatives as small government advocates yelling 'stop' to ever increasing state encroachment, they will never see that the GOPe were more than passively watching the trends; rather, they were active, willing participants.

[AndyJackson]

The conservative movement is doing just fine with Publius Decius Mus aka Michael Anton working now in the white house with Banon.

[jjotto]

The development of Western Civilization has meant that conservatism has come to mean defend God AND country, to put it perhaps too succinctly.

Country without God is just ‘might makes right’. God without country? We are experiencing that in the form of this pope’s Catholicism, and other mainline denominations. It’s called liberalism. Another variety is Islam.

[griswold3]

What had the “Conservative Movement” accomplished all of those years, other than being nothing more than a “debating society”?

Good question.

[thulldud]

I’ll call them “BMW Conservatives” because not only do they bitch, moan and whine about all of us they’re all globalists to boot who avoid buying things made in America.

Except that Beemers are also made in America.

Somebody suggested that in this case "BMW" means "Bubba Makes Wheels".

[InterceptPoint]

This isn't conservatism, it's GOPe.

Indeed. You and I posted essentially the same message to the Freepers less than a minute apart.

[TangoLimaSierra]

Sour Kraut decided to make fun of the “syntax” of Sarah Palin.

Yeah, I hope his batteries run out.

[trebb]

I would say he has fractured “fake conservatism via lip service w/o conservative action”...He has embarked on the most conservative agenda and seated the most conservative staff (so far) than anyone I can remember.

[Flavious_Maximus]

Bill Kristol
George Will
Tom Nichols of The Federalist
John Ziegler
Max Boot longtime WSJ writer
Erick Erickson
James Kirchick
Peter Wehner
Richard Hanna
Mike Treiser
Craig Snyder
Charles Fried
Steve Deace
Charles Sykes
Kyle Foley

What is the one thing that unites all these men on this list? They all fully support homosexual marriage and unlimited immigration.

Tell me again, who are the conservatives? It sure ain’t them.

[dfwgator]

Killed the Soviet union.

And brought it here.

[dragonblustar]

What had the “Conservative Movement” accomplished all of those years, other than being nothing more than a “debating society”?

They sold a lot of books...

[ek_hornbeck]

Good article, and good riddance to "movement conservatism," which is the faux right wing of liberal globalism, i.e. multiculturalism and internationalism with a tax cut.

"Movement conservatism" has become little more than a collection of party apparathchiks scraping money from lobbyists, entrenched incumbents that nobody can seem to get rid of (McCain, Graham, etc), Bush heirs waiting with a sense of entitlement for their "turn" for a seat at the throne, and mouthpieces for transnational corporations who dream of switching every American worker with a less uppity, darker-hued Third World replacement, either here or abroad.

Most Trump voters rejected the GOP establishment as firmly as they rejected Clinton and the Democrats. Let's hope that GOP establishment moles like Priebus don't derail the new, nationalist path.

[Fiji Hill]

The conservative movement began to die in the 1980’s when conservatives failed to find and unite behind a conservative who would sustain the Reagan revolution. By 1988, the Republicans had to choose between George Bush and Robert Dole—Tweedledee and Tweedledum—for their presidential standard bearer.

[central_va]

I was too young in the 1980’s to realize how evil the GOPe was back then. I thought Reagan was just a typical Republican. I didn’t know he was an anomaly and the establishment hated him. They disguised Bush the elder’s globalist agenda making him appear harmless so I voted for him twice. Ugh.