Let me set the stage thusly. Troy Senik excerpts Mike Murphy:

The Republican challenge is not about better voter-turnout software; it is about policy. We repel Latinos, the fastest-growing voter group in the country, with our nativist opposition to immigration reform that offers a path to citizenship. We repel younger voters, who are much more secular than their parents, with our opposition to same-sex marriage and our scolding tone on social issues. And we have lost much of our once solid connection to the middle class on kitchen-table economic issues.

Over on the thread about "anti-intellectualism" in the GOP, there's a full-blown debate pitting science vs. religion. One undercurrent there is that social conservatism = fundamentalist Christian = anti-science ignorance.

And finally, watch this admittedly inspiring video of Daniel Hannan, British conservative MEP, speaking at CPAC 2012 earlier this year:

Trust me; I'll connect the three.

So... here's what I'm wondering: what exactly does social conservatism mean in 21st century American politics? I ask because I think I'm a pretty doctrinaire libertarian and have become more and more hawkish in military terms, but I don't think I would qualify as a firm social conservative. (Though compared to Democrats, I'm probably seen as the equivalent of Glenn Beck.)

Does it mean an explicitly Christian movement that forces people like Rubio to nod towards creationist beliefs?

Does it mean an aesthetic movement that is simply rebelling against cultural innovations, like the S&M Club at Harvard? (In other words, a variant of the "Get a haircut, you hippie and get off my lawn" thing that is the privilege of older generations to level at the younger one. I imagine that George Washington's mother tut-tutted her son for his fancy wigs.)

Does it mean a focus on moral components of civilization, taking its cue from the Founders like Ben Franklin, who once said that only a virtuous people are capable of freedom?

I'll confess now that I never thought social conservatism included what Mike Murphy calls "nativist opposition" so I'll just leave that to the side.

The Religion Thing

While there is little doubt that SoCons and religion are mutually reinforcing, at least in recent years, I've seen very little from SoCons that suggest that they want to impose some sort of theocracy on the rest of America. Mainstream social conservatism, seems to me, is motivated by religion, but is not explicitly religious today. Are there fringe guys out there who actually do want a Biblical Republic? Yeah, but there are lots of guys who think 9/11 was an inside job, so...

In fact, environmentalists are far more explicitly religious than most Christians I've met in the GOP.

My take on where religious conservatives are today is that, much like gays of a generation ago, they just want respect and to be left alone. It's sort of a, "Hey, you may not approve of my lifestyle choice to go to church on Sunday, but I don't think that has any bearing on my ability to do this job." And you also have the whole, "Just because you don't like my lifestyle choice doesn't mean you can force me to pay for stuff I don't want to, like abortion for my employees."

But that's my take. I would like to hear more from religious conservatives about what social conservatism means to you.

The Aesthetic Angle

I do think, however, that many SoCons are also motivated by the aesthetics angle. Most of them are older, but not all. For them, contemporary American culture just seems to go from inane and silly to disgusting and vile.

For example, I've never met a fan of rap music at a conservative event. Paul Ryan admits to having AC/DC in his iPod, but I doubt he's got Notorious BIG and Snoop Dogg on it. Mark Steyn is famous for his love of Broadway and the pop standards of Tin Pan Alley, and I don't think he's particularly fond of progressive trance or dubstep.

And of course, the pornification of American culture is not to be countenanced.

There are other examples, of course, of this sort of soft-lit admiration of the past and distaste for contemporary culture, but... I'm not entirely sure. So you tell me, if you are a SoCon: how much of your social conservatism is motivated by aesthetics?

The Civic Virtue Thing

Finally, you have the civic virtue thing. This is the case that is most often made explicitly by all conservatives, even those like me.

A democracy simply cannot exist unless the citizens have certain pre-requisite virtues. People may disagree on what those virtues are, but most would agree that faith, industriousness, and charity are among them.

Social conservatism then is not necessarily about telling other people how to live, but about preserving the foundational moral codes that underlie a free democratic society.

I find this the most attractive and most convincing angle, but ... again, I'd love to hear from actual SoCons how much of your activism/beliefs are really motivated by preserving civic virtue as opposed to religious beliefs or aesthetics.

Mike Murphy, Daniel Hannan, and the Institutions

Why does any of this matter?

Because Daniel Hannan repeatedly makes the point that culture isn't some inchoate thing that sits "out there" like a fog. He believes that institutions create culture. He attributes American culture to its institutions, specifically to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

At one point he says in the speech that if we allow our institutions to become Europeanized, then Americans will behave just like the French.

I find that compelling. Are we not seeing exactly this play out in our elite coastal cities and on our college campuses?

In contrast, Mike Murphy's view appears to be that if Republicans stop repelling Latinos and young secular people, we'd be fine. There are plenty of other voices after Romneycalypse 2012 that are calling for dialing down the whole social conservatism thing.

But to what point? If Hannan is correct, then Ben Franklin had it backwards. It's not that only virtuous people are capable of freedom; rather, it is that freedom creates virtuous people.

A century of Progressive politics transforming our political, educational, and cultural institutions has meant that Americans are now more like the French than they are like the Pilgrims. So if we do as Murphy suggests, does that give us the ability to reverse the transformation of our institutions?

I'm not sure. Certainly, without victory, we can do nothing but whinge. But victory at the cost of continuing the transformation of American institutions into European ones does not strike me as particularly useful in the long run.

A Thought for Social Conservatives

So let me come at last to a possible suggestion for both the Republican Party and the social conservatives.

Perhaps what is needed, especially if Daniel Hannan is correct, is a focus not on behavior, but on institutions. Maybe our notion that civic virtues lead to better institutions is wrong; maybe, it's that better institutions will lead to civic virtues. Maybe restoring the Constitution as much as we could would naturally lead to a more moral, more just, and more aesthetically pleasing society, rather than the other way around?

The institution we may be able to restore at least partway back to Constitutional framework, and the one that would most protect and most benefit the interests of social conservatives, is federalism. Hannan spoke of it admiringly, and for good reason.

Perhaps the way forward is to end every one of our political statements with, "Restore the 10th Amendment." And by decentralizing power, the goals and aims of social conservatives may be fulfilled far easier.

What do you think? Does that strike you as too much of a "keep quiet" thing? Because that is not my intent at all. I meant it more as a "If you'll respect our lifestyle over here, then we'll respect yours... over there" thing.

Comments:


EThompson
Joined
Dec '11
EThompson

He [Franklin] believes that institutions create culture. He attributes American culture to its institutions, specifically to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

The crisis occurs when in a democratic society, the culture chooses to reject its institutions. American institutions are peculiar in that they depend solely upon the protection and maintenance of American citizens.

Edited on November 30, 2012 at 11:22pm
BrentB67
Joined
May '12
BrentB67

EThompson:He [Franklin] believes that institutions create culture. He attributes American culture to its institutions, specifically to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

The crisis occurs when in a democratic society, the culture chooses to reject its institutions. American institutions are peculiar in that they depend solely upon the protection and maintenance of American citizens. · 1 hour ago

Edited 47 minutes ago

Respectfully disagree. The Federal Reserve has enabled politicians to perpetuate the exponential growth of government through debt.

The endless ability to borrow at very low rates disconnects government from citizens because we only pay for a portion (slightly more than half) of the largess that is dispersed by the federal government.

The fed eliminates an important check and balance on the unrestrained growth of government.

Joseph Stanko
Joined
Jun '10
Joseph Stanko
Mendel: Sometimes I hate living on the West Coast.  You log on, read a great post, and then find out all the great comments you had in mind have already been made....

I know just how you feel!

Since most of my thoughts of substance have already been posted, let me just add that I consider myself a social conservative, and while I never much cared for Snoop Dogg, my MP3 collection does include Notorious BIG, Jay-Z, Public Enemy, Run D.M.C. and the Beastie Boys.   

TheSophist
Joined
Jan '11
TheSophist

Crow's Nest

I think some confusion here may result from your definitions of "weak" and "strong". I am sure our social scientists can denominate this dilemma with a fittingly academic name, but 'round here we call it: incompetence.

If a bureaucracy is attempting to respond to a crisis, but has to cut through mountains of paperwork and red tape in order to respond in a basic way, a most simple-minded way, a way that the common man observing the scene cansee in front of his face is necessary--regardless of whatever its legal authority may be--this is a weak and limp-wristed institution.

Strong institutions give rise to strong individuals and strong cultures. Weak, CYA institutions give rise to....well....look around.

Edited 4 hours ago

Actually, I think my idea of "strong" vs. "weak" have nothing to do with competence, but everything to do with power. The EPA is a powerful, strong institution that is run incompetently. The existence of the EPA weakens informal institutions and therefore citizens, for example.

Joseph Stanko
Joined
Jun '10
Joseph Stanko

katievs

jhimmi: I agree 100% with the importance of federalism. 

So do I.  But not when it comes to fundamental human rights and natural law.  No human government has the authority to change those.

Hence, those who imagine that the marriage question can be settled by "leaving it up to the states" are wrong.

That argument assumes that the marriage is manipulable—a creature of the state.  It isn't.  Just as human nature isn't. · 7 hours ago

I agree entirely that marriage is part of the natural law, and the state has no business redefining it.  But I also think that laws about marriage, divorce, family codes, and the like are properly legislated at the state level and are outside the limited scope of the federal government.

So I tend to think that both as a matter of correct public policy and political expediency, we ought to "leave it up to the states" and then wage a state-by-state campaign to protect traditional marriage.

TheSophist
Joined
Jan '11
TheSophist

katievs

It happens that I care about teenagers in CO, even though I don't live there.  

I can only support laws that I think improve things.  I'll support laws that undercut federal power, provided they're being replaced by a better state of affairs, not a worse one.

I would like to see much less federal involvement in education.  And I'd like Roe v. Wade overturned, which I think (in addition to its core evil) a grotesques violation of the 10th amendment. · 3 hours ago

Could you explain to me how Roe v. Wade is a grotesque violation of the 10th Amendment, but a national law making marijuana illegal, because you care about teens in Colorado, is not?

show Tom's comment (#67)
Tom
Joined
Oct '12
Tom

Social conservative should mean being someone who cares for the preservation of the heritage of Western civilization as embodied in American culture and society and all the people who participate and contribute to it, labor as well as capital. This means two cheers only, not three, for capitalism and the market. The Wall Street Libertarian Globalist elements of the Republican Party are NOT true conservatives insofar as they overlook or despise the plain persons who make up the '47%' struggling in a radically changed economy no longing offering traditionally middle-class jobs.

Miffed White Male
Joined
Mar '11
Jeff Richter

I just want to stop hearing F-bombs in public.

EThompson
Joined
Dec '11
EThompson

BrentB67

EThompson:He [Franklin] believes that institutions create culture. He attributes American culture to its institutions, specifically to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

The crisis occurs when in a democratic society, the culture chooses to reject its institutions. American institutions are peculiar in that they depend solely upon the protection and maintenance of American citizens. · 1 hour ago

Edited 47 minutes ago

Respectfully disagree. The Federal Reserve has enabled politicians to perpetuate the exponential growth of government through debt.

The endless ability to borrow at very low rates disconnects government from citizens because we only pay for a portion (slightly more than half) of the largess that is dispersed by the federal government.

The fed eliminates an important check and balance on the unrestrained growth of government. · 4 hours ago

Who do you think appoints the Fed Reserve? Elected politicians!! Alan Greenspan was all too aware of the power of his public persona/popularity.

BrentB67
Joined
May '12
BrentB67

EThompson

BrentB67

EThompson:He [Franklin] believes that institutions create culture. He attributes American culture to its institutions, specifically to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

The crisis occurs when in a democratic society, the culture chooses to reject its institutions. American institutions are peculiar in that they depend solely upon the protection and maintenance of American citizens. · 1 hour ago

Edited 47 minutes ago

Respectfully disagree. The Federal Reserve has enabled politicians to perpetuate the exponential growth of government through debt.

The endless ability to borrow at very low rates disconnects government from citizens because we only pay for a portion (slightly more than half) of the largess that is dispersed by the federal government.

The fed eliminates an important check and balance on the unrestrained growth of government. · 4 hours ago

Who do you think appoints the Fed Reserve? Elected politicians!! Alan Greenspan was all too aware of the power of his public persona/popularity. · 4 hours ago

Absolutely, thanks for confirming the point.

Charles Mark
Joined
Aug '10
Charles Mark

When public values are set in accordance with the Lowest Common Denominator, disaster beckons. It's tough enough trying to steer one's children through the morass that is popular culture without the national government getting in on the act by incentivising conduct that corrodes society. Hence, for example, abortion is seen by liberals as a critical escape valve for the unintended but entirely predictable consequences of their "value system"-to be protected at all costs.

Barkha Herman
Joined
Jul '11
Barkha Herman
Charles Mark: When public values are set in accordance with the Lowest Common Denominator, disaster beckons. It's tough enough trying to steer one's children through the morass that is popular culture without the national government getting in on the act by incentivising conduct that corrodes society. Hence, for example, abortion is seen by liberals as a critical escape valve for the unintended but entirely predictable consequences of their "value system"-to be protected at all costs. · December 1, 2012 at 4:45am

Charles, and yet, me a libertarian who supports polyandry has two teenage kids who are staunchly against abortions because they respect human life.

It does not take a village, government or television (or laws) to raise a child.  It takes honest, hardworking parenting.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading

Start your shopping here!

Help support Ricochet by making your purchases through our Amazon links.

Welcome Visitor!
Join  or  Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Ricochet: The Right People, The Right Tone, The Right Place.  Join today!

Already a Member? Sign In