Populist prairie fire from the Right

I have to admit, the idea of lighting a match to the Republican party holds great appeal to me.

Your friend Stegall probably does have an automatic in with bird watchers, inasmuch as he is on the board of the Kansas Audobon Society, and he probably appeals to other white people who cling to agrarian roots while working in towns and eating fast food. But an inspiration to lead our nation, I really don't see it. Then again, having actually lived on ad lived from a subsistence farm, I don't think your crunchiness is really all that crunchy.

Your DMN article was a delight to read, Rod. And I've long enjoyed the snippets of Caleb's writings that you have shared here on the CC blog. I agree with most of what I read from him.

But there is one thing in your article that gives me some pause. Its this quote: "Stand up! Stand up on your own two feet. Stand on your own ground, with your own family and culture to love and care for. And if anyone comes to take that away, you give them hell!" Perhaps I am reading too much into it, but it implies that Caleb might support rolling back government environmental regulations, or at least putting land use decisions entirely in the hands of individual landowners. From my 30 years of experience in the environmental field (24 in government), I think that would be a serious mistake, one that would jeopardize the crunchy values that crunchy cons hold so dear. If you take the state environmental agency out of the picture and instead leave all of the decisions to individual landowners (or even towns or counties), then the boomers in the communities start subdividing the farms, running ATVs through the streams and filling in the wetlands. All too often, I have heard the boomers resist state environmental regulation with much the same language as quoted from Caleb above.

But perhaps I shouldn't make assumptions about where Caleb stands on land use or environmental regulation. I know he is active in Kansas Audubon, and as a fellow Audubon member myself I'm glad to hear that. I look forward to hearing in more detail what Caleb advocates in terms of land use planning and environmental regulation generally. Maybe I am reading him wrong.

Based on my experience, I think that Garrett Hardin was right when he said in his infamous "Tragedy of the Commons" that the only way to prevent us from ravaging our common resources is to rely on "mutual coercion, mutually agreed upon." And to my mind, that means that some level of land use and environmental regulation is essential. As you have said, Rod, human nature is inherently flawed (we Calvinists would say "depraved"), so we need rules.

Anyhow, I am encouraged by Caleb's foray into the political field. More power to him.

p.s. Rod, your article's take on the Palin phenomenon was rich. Loved it.

I wish Caleb the best, and will very likely enthusiastically support him from my little home base here in Wichita if his as-yet hypothetical plans to shake up the Kansas GOP actually get that far. However, in so far as his general orientation and overarching approach are concerned, I share some of Bill's reservations. As Caleb knows, he and I share very similar (though not completely identical) aspirations for what we'd like to see our corner of America become, but we have very different (though not diametrically opposed) ideas about what would be necessary for it to achieve those ends. Caleb and many others who we could group in the "crunchy"/populist crowd are too quick, I think, to adopt vaguely libertarian, seccessionist-style responses to the complex problems of modern life (like, for instance, land use) rather than thinking in terms of populist engagement. Autonomy is an important expression of liberty, of course, but an "autonomy" that truly empowers people (and, in a sense, the land they live upon) is better called "sovereignty," and it depends, at least in part, upon the mutual action and submission that Bill wisely mentions.

"I hope Caleb runs an outsider campaign to get the GOP nomination. His could be a great test case for a new conservative populism in this country."

Then the test case would fail. Jefferson County, KS has a population of 20K. Only three years of service there likely wouldn't create a statewide profile, and he'd have to start his campaign in late 2011.

How could he fund his campaign, especially considering that he's already alienated his county party?

And wouldn't his localist sympathies make him prefer the state legislature to the national one?

A major problem with his reform perspective is that he's a lawyer. Is there any class of citizens who have brought more misery or ignorance upon the populace than lawyers?

What the U.S. needs is a Christian Democrat party to openly advocate for the wisdom of the West and the culture of the ages.

To add the thread's perspective... there is no and cannot be a "populism" movement from the right. Well, there could be, but it amounts to rejection of the view of limited government, and the adoption of unlimited belief in government.

There isn’t going to be any “populism” from either side of the aisle in 2010. A large part of the electorate is still going to be self-satisfiedly preening at itself in the mirror over being “advanced” and electing a black man President. No prairie fires there.

The next large part will be the heads of the large corporations and their hangers-on; they want bailout money, and in quantities. They'll (continue to) get it; campaign contributions will do that.

Another large part of the electorate is going to be too busy trying to keep above water financially to care overmuch about politics. They’ll take one look at the various bailouts that the Government is going to be throwing around and asking where their bailout is. Populism requires anger to fuel it. What motivates this segment of the populace is fear. No spontaneous organizations here.

The other major part of the electorate that will be trying to act their shoe size rather than their age is the Boomers. They’ll be looking to guarantee that their entitlement programs remain intact, and they won’t care overmuch if taxes go up (as they certainly will). Time to cooperate and compromise with the New Obama Establishment; no protests to be had here.

American politics in the next 20 years won’t be about “raising less corn and more Hell”. Rather, it will bear a strong resemblance to the old wag about “democracy”: three wolves and a pig deciding on what to eat for dinner.

Your servant,

Lord Karth