The Republican Identity Crisis

Newsweek ^ | Dec. 25, 2006 | Michael Gerson

[Small-L]

...

This reaction previews a broader, high-stakes Republican debate as we head toward the 2008 election. One Republican Party—the Republican Party of movement conservatives on Capitol Hill and in the think-tank world—will argue that the "big government Republicanism" of the Bush era has been a reason for recent defeats.

Like all fundamentalists, the antigovernment conservatives preach that greater influence requires a return to purity—the purity of Reaganism.

But the golden age of austerity under Reagan is a myth.

...

As antigovernment conservatives seek to purify the Republican Party, it is reasonable to ask if the purest among them are conservatives at all. The combination of disdain for government, a reflexive preference for markets and an unbalanced emphasis on individual choice is usually called libertarianism. The old conservatives had some concerns about that creed, which Russell Kirk called "an ideology of universal selfishness." ...

[jmc813]

If your stomachs are feeling particularly strong, check out what this CFR goon has to say about what he feels conservatism is. If you click the URL for the full article, it gets even worse. Check out this gem...

The old conservatives had some concerns about that creed, which Russell Kirk called "an ideology of universal selfishness." Conservatives have generally taught that the health of society is determined by the health of institutions: families, neighborhoods, schools, congregations. Unfettered individualism can loosen those bonds, while government can act to strengthen them. By this standard, good public policies—from incentives to charitable giving, to imposing minimal standards on inner-city schools—are not apostasy; they are a thoroughly orthodox, conservative commitment to the common good.

[LowCountryJoe]

Do you read the Wall Street Journal? If so, do you generally find yourself in agreement with the editorial page?

[traviskicks]

See comment 41.





Libertarian ping! To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here.

[M203M4]

The combination of disdain for government, a preference for markets and an unbalanced emphasis on individual choice is usually called libertarianism.

I thought it was called sanity.

[monday]

"The old conservatives had some concerns about that creed, which Russell Kirk called "an ideology of universal selfishness."

Which is ironic since nothing could be more selfish than the special interest group pressuring government to use it's power to get it's way. Socialism is the ideology of universal selfishness wrapped in a self righteous mask of philanthropy. It is the ideology of lies and deceit. Libertarianism the ideology of truth and reason.

Republicans have become even more socialist than the Democrats in their pandering for socialist votes. Fiscal conservatives have been ignored, so of course we have ignored the Republican party.

[monday]

"I consider myself to be a Republican, but I also want government to work for me - not against me."

THATS the problem. EVERYONE wants the government to work for THEM, to do what they want. If what they want isn't constitutional for the government to provide, $crew it, find a way to do it anyway. Which leads us to where we are today, with government doing everything for everybody. Soon, that which is not prohibited will be mandatory and everyone will hate life, and the government, and will wonder how it is things got to be so *ucked up.

The answer is everyone wants the government to work for them, when constitutionally, the government shouldn't even be collecting income taxes. Thats how far from the limited Federal government our founders envisioned, to where we are today.

You want a 21st century government? Might as well say that what you want is a socialist government. What we need is an 18th century government. The one our founders planned for us.

[mugs99]

individualism can loosen those bonds, while government can act to strengthen them

The concept of the fasces.
.

[Shahar Adom]

The author of this Newsweek piece is using a secular liberal worldview to judge the GOP and does not appear to recognize the effect of Christian morality on the expectations of Republican voters. I would recommend that readers should dismiss this article.

[NCSteve]

Yay, another article by another Bush Administration socialist. I guess Newsweek never tires of its formula.

[Small-L]

Welcome to FR, Newbie. And what would those expectations be? In responding, you may want to address why we should ignore the article since it was written by an advisor to our Republican President. You may also want to compare the view of income redistribution espoused by many of our Christian churches and Marxist Socialist (Compassionate Conservative) principles.

[woofie]

spoken like a true teenager

[William Terrell]

The combination of disdain for government, a reflexive preference for markets and an unbalanced emphasis on individual choice is usually called libertarianism.

Let's restate that for a little more clarity and strip away a little editorial bias. Not much, just a little.

"The combination of disdain for government, a preference for markets and an emphasis on individual choice is usually called libertarianism."

[TeenagedConservative]

And I'm glad that as the next batch of voters, teenagers, for all their crazy liberalism, are at least motivated to break away from the two-party dualopoly.

[woofie]

like some of us voted for Ross Perot?


That worked out well

[kcbc2001]

Having a government and societal structure is a good thing, so I'm not an anarchist; however, just because I want a government that works - that doesn't make me a socialist either.

Ideally, I'd love the 18th century model to prevail; however, when we elect people (who are supposed to represent us) who have no interest in solving actual problems and doing the business of government - on top of either throwing money at problems or creating new government programs - something is terribly wrong with our government.

And as a side note: if we want to stop tax collection then we'd need to repeal the 16th amendment to the constitution.

[TeenagedConservative]

Ross Perot didn't give Clinton the election, Bob Dole did. Third Party candidates do what the Republicrats fail to do. If Dole had brought a good message, Perot would have had nowhere to attack from.

Third party candidates, and elections they tip, are a symptom of the problem, not the problem. Disgruntled GOP loyalists like to blame Libertarians for their defeats, but Libertarians only exist because Republicans allow them to. Blame your party, not voters like me who actually are willing not to vote for the GOP when it doesn't measure up to our principles.

[woofie]

I think you are wrong but sense you are a teenager I wont argue

[Gritty]

[DaGman]

"Why don't the compassionate conservatives just go to the so-called party of helping--the democrat party. Us "extremists" will do just fine."

And never win another election. But, you'll be just fine. Elections are won through coalitions. The phrase "politics makes strange bedfellows" has a lot of meaning for winning elections.

[monday]

"And as a side note: if we want to stop tax collection then we'd need to repeal the 16th amendment to the constitution."

I know. The sixteenth amendment was passed during the early 20th century along with prohibition and FDR's great society. Apparently our ancestors were especially stupid then.