Changing of the conservative guard

Just for the record, I am very wary of John McCain. I strongly disagree with him about the war, and don't trust him one bit on immigration. These might be enough to keep me from voting for him this fall (and I cannot foresee voting Democratic). While I disagree with McCain, I have always hated this idea, held by so many on the right, that McCain is not a conservative. As one of the pre-eminent conservative social philosophers of our time would say, "Bosh! Blimshaw!"

To be clear, I believe that McCain is rather unconservative on some issues, given my understanding of what it means to be conservative. But then again, I believe that the mainstream GOP and its pundit class are rather unconservative too. But it would be folly to take this too far in common discourse. Conservatism is not a revealed religion, with its own dogmas and hierarchy possessing the divine charism to authoritatively teach and interpret, but rather a way of approaching the world based on a particular understanding of human nature, and a set of principles that guide political, religious, moral and social thought and policy-making. As a practical matter, it's far too reductive to speak in US political terms of "conservatism"; there are, rather, conservatisms, plural, and they coalesce around the GOP, the Party of the Right. Let me underscore the point: the Republican Party is a party of the right, which is not the same thing as calling it conservative. It's a subtle but important distinction, one that gets elided in daily discourse. There are parts of it that are more conservative than others, depending on which strand of conservatism you identify with. But if you are on the right -- the religious right, the social right, the national-security right, the economic right, and so forth -- you are probably going to be associated with the GOP, despite its sins and failings. Similarly, whether you're a social liberal, and economic liberal, etc., you're likely to identify with the Democrats, the party of the left. There is a great deal of philosophical difference between Maxine Waters and Jim Webb, but they're both on the left. How much sense would it make to call them both "liberal," as if there were no real and important distinctions there?

But it is politically inconvenient to recognize that there's more than one way to be conservative, because to admit that there are alternative ways of seeing the world that reflect a worldview that is still well within the broad conservative tradition is to grant your opponents legitimacy. I believe John McCain is dangerously unconservative about immigration, for example, but I have no idea how rightists who hold the free market to be sacrosanct conclude that his views on immigration are unconservative. McCain's position on immigration first and foremost benefits the desires of big business, and rejects the concerns of cultural conservatives. On the matter of law and order, it's all about interpretation: I, for instance, believe his views diminish respect for law and order, but I think it's valid to say that he is only reconciling himself to the world as it is, recognizing a social reality that's not going to be changed. There is something conservative about that, it must be recognized.

All of this is to say that I am not one bit bothered by the way McCain's rise is eroding the hegemony of the established conservative opinion-makers. Conservatism in America has ceased to be dynamic and creative and self-renewing, and instead has hardened into "conservatism." Here's a writer for the NYObserver musing about why McCain is succeeding in spite of being hated by the right-wing pundit class:

But it may simply be that the Republican electorate (or at least enough of it to select a nominee) may not be as ideologically pure as the conservative pundits might prefer. Perhaps many Republican voters really do think global warming should be addressed. It could be that lots of Republican voters like tax cuts but want them accompanied by good old-fashioned budget cuts. It may be that when they’re not in the throes of an impassioned immigration debate, many Republican voters wouldn’t mind eventually legalizing millions of immigrants, so long as the border is sealed first. And frankly, G.O.P. primary voters simply may find Mr. McCain’s heretical support for campaign finance reform a lot less significant than personal character traits like honesty, courage and persistence.

Or, as the conservative Southern Baptist leader Richard Land, a McCain critic, says in today's NYT:

“When I hear Rush Limbaugh say that a McCain nomination would destroy the Republican Party,” Dr. Land added, “what I want to say to Rush is, ‘You need to get out of the studio more and talk to real people.’ ”

Popular conservatism is changing right out from under the feet of the old guard. Via Andrew, John Cole, a conservative who got so fed-up with the GOP he became a Democrat last fall in protest, adds:

It sure would be nice to think that the base of the dwindling GOP is not as batshit insane as the nutters at the NRO, Red State, etc., but I have not seen much evidence of it. The thing that needs to be said, over and over, though, is that Rush Limbaugh and those guys simply aren’t conservatives. They just aren’t. Radically restructuring government to create an unaccountable executive is not conservative. Building a security apparatus that is designed to spy on citizens is not a conservative principle. Runaway spending and bloated budgets are not conservative ideas. Torture and permanent aggressive wars are not conservative principles. Fearmongering and keeping the electorate scared is not a conservative principle. And on and on.

The fact of the matter is the self-styled loud-mouth conservatives just aren’t very conservative.

Yes indeed. Or, to put a finer point on it, they don't have a monopoly on what conservatism means, and what conservatives should do. And more people are starting to see that.

This is good. It's not good for "Republican unity," but really, is that the point of conservatism? To hold power no matter what? The Republican Party does not deserve to hold on to power, given how badly it has governed. It's time for a new conservatism. And one way or another, we're going to get it. John McCain won't give it to us; it will emerge over the next few years, as conservatives tear each other to bits with recriminations after this fall's election, and we spend a lot of time in the woods rethinking things. And it almost certainly won't end up being a conservatism of which I wholly approve. But it won't be Limbaugh's conservatism either. And that's a good thing too.

Anyway, I suspect David Keene of the American Conservative Union has more than a fair point when he says, of the GOP activist contingent's revulsion over the idea of a McCain presidency:

“There are people who don’t like the idea of a being off a campaign or being on the bad list if the guy gets into the White House,” Mr. Keene said. “[Washington] is a town in which 90 percent of the people balance their access and income on the one hand versus their principles on the other.”