To Save Conservatism

 

shutterstock_461975242If one believes conservatism is the only cure for what ails the nation, then 2016 is a bleak year. We have before us a choice of a dedicated leftist whose entire public life has been dedicated to the destruction of our republic (and replacing it with yet another European-styel socialist welfare state), or a guy who can be charitably described as “not a conservative.” Because Hillary Clinton is such a well known statist and a threat to our way of life, it would seem obvious that the only viable option for conservatives would be to oppose her with everything they have. Under any normal set of circumstances that would be exactly the right course of action. Indeed, many have claimed that it’s so obviously correct that there can be no other argument. Ben Shapiro, however, takes a different view:

That brings us to the real reason to oppose Trump’s candidacy: the attempt to turn the conservative movement into a nationalist populist one, complete with shilling for Trump’s incomprehensible decisions and statements. If you believe that the only solution to America’s problems is true conservatism, your greatest fear is not a Hillary presidency: It’s the perversion of the conservative movement itself, the corruption of conservatism in favor of power. Hillary Clinton’s presidency does not snuff out conservatism, even though it provides a serious danger to the republic. Trump’s presidency does.

I share this view. Conservatism is the solution to our problems. Not voting for Trump increases the likelihood of for four more years of an anti-conservative president who will do everything she can to obstruct conservative ideas and policies. However, a vote for Trump is a vote against conservatism itself. If conservatism has outlived its usefulness and must pass then so be it, but I cannot take an active part in bludgeoning it to death while it still draws breath. Hillary is just another external threat against which we have established defenses. Trump represents an internal rot eating away the very foundation of what America is and what we fight to conserve.

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 139 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Bob W Member
    Bob W
    @WBob

    Trumpism doesn’t snuff out conservatism. It does possibly change the Republican party, but conservatism is only one constituency of that party.  If conservatives can’t win as the leaders of that party… and they clearly aren’t…  they will have to make common cause with others who have more in common with them than with liberalism.

    • #1
  2. Guruforhire Inactive
    Guruforhire
    @Guruforhire

    Seriously?

    In what way is Trump materially different than say Eisenhower, Nixon, Romney, or Perot?

    Conservativism is a lot bigger than doctrinaire buckleyism.  The only thing killing that brand of conservativism is an increasing unwillingness to cooperate with others.

    • #2
  3. Douglas Inactive
    Douglas
    @Douglas

    I would add an argument here: there’s a big debate right now among people that call themselves conservative about what conservatism really is. We’re finding  that a lot of people that label themselves as such have vastly different views.

    • #3
  4. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67
    @BrentB67

    I don’t think anyone associates Trump with conservatism. Hopefully he is entirely associated with the Republican party and snuffs that organization out.

    • #4
  5. Bob Laing Member
    Bob Laing
    @

    Guruforhire:Seriously?

    In what way is Trump materially different than say Eisenhower, Nixon, Romney, or Perot?

    Conservativism is a lot bigger than doctrinaire buckleyism. The only thing killing that brand of conservativism is an increasing unwillingness to cooperate with others.

    Well, he’s not a conservative christian, social conservative, fiscal conservative, constitutional conservative, etc.  So while I understand that conservativism is a broader term than many would like, Trump doesn’t remotely belong to any of them.

    • #5
  6. Brian Watt Inactive
    Brian Watt
    @BrianWatt

    Guruforhire:Seriously?

    In what way is Trump materially different than say Eisenhower, Nixon, Romney, or Perot?

    You mean apart from being a narcissist; ignorant about macroeconomics, history, foreign policy, and national security; inarticulate; unable to focus on attacking his Democrat opponent; blatantly vindictive about those he feels have slighted him and even vindictive about Republicans who have already endorsed him; insulting the disabled; encouraging his supporters to engage in violence? You’re right…I can think of absolutely no difference between these men and Donald Trump. Why they’re all virtually identical.

    • #6
  7. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Clearly, conservatism is not selling with the American people, an not even with enough Republicans.

    That may mean the Republic is over. Not destroyed by Clinton but by the people.

    I cannot name one lasting conservative victory since 1940. There are many leftist ones.

    I am open to items where conservatism has advanced, if you have examples.

    • #7
  8. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Brian Watt:

    Guruforhire:Seriously?

    In what way is Trump materially different than say Eisenhower, Nixon, Romney, or Perot?

    You mean apart from being a narcissist; ignorant about macroeconomics, history, foreign policy, and national security; inarticulate; unable to focus on attacking his Democrat opponent; blatantly vindictive about those he feels have slighted him and even vindictive about Republicans who have already endorsed him; insulting the disabled; encouraging his supporters to engage in violence? You’re right…I can think of absolutely no difference between these men and Donald Trump. Why they’re all virtually identical.

    As a conservative, I think he meant.

    But then again most of the personality stuff applies to Nixon, who gave us price controls. No conservative there.

    A sure grasp of foreign policy.

    Ike, of course, cemented in place the progressive new society. After years in the wilderness, Ike made permanent the FDR attacks on the Republic. I hold him in pretty low regard for that. Also cheated on his wife if we are keeping score.

    • #8
  9. Guruforhire Inactive
    Guruforhire
    @Guruforhire

    Brian Watt:

    Guruforhire:Seriously?

    In what way is Trump materially different than say Eisenhower, Nixon, Romney, or Perot?

    You mean apart from being a narcissist; ignorant about macroeconomics, history, foreign policy, and national security; inarticulate; unable to focus on attacking his Democrat opponent; blatantly vindictive about those he feels have slighted him and even vindictive about Republicans who have already endorsed him; insulting the disabled; encouraging his supporters to engage in violence? You’re right…I can think of absolutely no difference between these men and Donald Trump. Why they’re all virtually identical.

    I am enjoined to not respond due to the code of conduct.

    • #9
  10. Could Be Anyone Inactive
    Could Be Anyone
    @CouldBeAnyone

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    Brian Watt:

    Guruforhire:Seriously?

    In what way is Trump materially different than say Eisenhower, Nixon, Romney, or Perot?

    You mean apart from being a narcissist; ignorant about macroeconomics, history, foreign policy, and national security; inarticulate; unable to focus on attacking his Democrat opponent; blatantly vindictive about those he feels have slighted him and even vindictive about Republicans who have already endorsed him; insulting the disabled; encouraging his supporters to engage in violence? You’re right…I can think of absolutely no difference between these men and Donald Trump. Why they’re all virtually identical.

    As a conservative, I think he meant.

    But then again most of the personality stuff applies to Nixon, who gave us price controls. No conservative there.

    A sure grasp of foreign policy.

    Ike, of course, cemented in place the progressive new society. After years in the wilderness, Ike made permanent the FDR attacks on the Republic. I hold him in pretty low regard for that. Also cheated on his wife if we are keeping score.

    I didn’t know Ike had the power to rewrite the law and thus is guilty for all that legislation passed by massive democrat majorities and kept in place by them. I mean it’s not like the democrats controlled congress when he was in office.

    • #10
  11. Brian Watt Inactive
    Brian Watt
    @BrianWatt

    I’m waiting for the comprehensive argument that Trump is a conservative. Then I’ll respond.

    • #11
  12. Bob Laing Member
    Bob Laing
    @

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    I cannot name one lasting conservative victory since 1940. There are many leftist ones.

    It all comes down to how you define victory.  My definition would include the slowing down of the liberal agenda and, when feasible, the slow rolling back of liberal policies.  In that regard, conservatives have been very successful.

    If your definition of success only includes instances where unconditional surrender is achieved, then I can understand why you feel the way you do but I would also argue that your goals are unrealistic.

    • #12
  13. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Could Be Anyone:

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    Brian Watt:

    Guruforhire:Seriously?

    In what way is Trump materially different than say Eisenhower, Nixon, Romney, or Perot?

    You mean apart from being a narcissist; ignorant about macroeconomics, history, foreign policy, and national security; inarticulate; unable to focus on attacking his Democrat opponent; blatantly vindictive about those he feels have slighted him and even vindictive about Republicans who have already endorsed him; insulting the disabled; encouraging his supporters to engage in violence? You’re right…I can think of absolutely no difference between these men and Donald Trump. Why they’re all virtually identical.

    As a conservative, I think he meant.

    But then again most of the personality stuff applies to Nixon, who gave us price controls. No conservative there.

    A sure grasp of foreign policy.

    Ike, of course, cemented in place the progressive new society. After years in the wilderness, Ike made permanent the FDR attacks on the Republic. I hold him in pretty low regard for that. Also cheated on his wife if we are keeping score.

    I didn’t know Ike had the power to rewrite the law and this is guilty for all that legislation passed by massive democrat majorities and kept in place by them. I mean it’s not like the democrats controlled congress when he was in office.

    Ike had power like FDR did. Ike made no moves to roll anything back, not even rhetorical. Did not even ask Congress for it. As leader of the party, he did not move to roll things back.

    • #13
  14. Brian Watt Inactive
    Brian Watt
    @BrianWatt

    Guruforhire:

    Brian Watt:

    Guruforhire:Seriously?

    In what way is Trump materially different than say Eisenhower, Nixon, Romney, or Perot?

    You mean apart from being a narcissist; ignorant about macroeconomics, history, foreign policy, and national security; inarticulate; unable to focus on attacking his Democrat opponent; blatantly vindictive about those he feels have slighted him and even vindictive about Republicans who have already endorsed him; insulting the disabled; encouraging his supporters to engage in violence? You’re right…I can think of absolutely no difference between these men and Donald Trump. Why they’re all virtually identical.

    I am enjoined to not respond due to the code of conduct.

    Is the list I’ve presented somehow not factual?

    I understand the original question regarding a material difference ideologically with the gentlemen mentioned and Trump but I would argue that each, despite their occasional wanderings off the conservative reservation are still more conservative than Trump. Trump is the most Liberal “Republican” nominated to run for president. Happy to hear how that is not the case.

    • #14
  15. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67
    @BrentB67

    Bryan G. Stephens:Clearly, conservatism is not selling with the American people, an not even with enough Republicans.

    Who has tried to sell it to them? A handful of people and they have been immolated for trying by the Republicans. It isn’t that Republicans aren’t selling conservatism, they are complicit in its destruction.

    That may mean the Republic is over. Not destroyed by Clinton but by the people.

    Agree.

    I cannot name one lasting conservative victory since 1940. There are many leftist ones.

    I am open to items where conservatism has advanced, if you have examples.

    • #15
  16. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Bob Laing:

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    I cannot name one lasting conservative victory since 1940. There are many leftist ones.

    It all comes down to how you define victory. My definition would include the slowing down of the liberal agenda and, when feasible, the slow rolling back of liberal policies. In that regard, conservatives have been very successful.

    If your definition of success only includes instances where unconditional surrender is achieved, then I can understand why you feel the way you do but I would also argue that your goals are unrealistic.

    What lasting rollback of liberal policies are you referring too? Could you please provide me with some examples. For the sort of thing I am looking for, let me list some of the left’s lasting victories:

    • Income Tax
    • Direct Election of Senators
    • Expansion of the Commerce Clause
    • Expansion of Eminent Domain
    • Abortion as a right
    • Affirmative Action & Racial Quotas
    • Federal Control of Southern Voting Districts
    • Federal control of Education
    • EPA
    • ATF
    • Imposition of Same Sex Marriage
    • Federal Labor Unions
    • Medicaid
    • Medicare
    • Withholding
    • Social Security

    I could go on, but these are the sorts of long lasting victories the left has had in the past 70 years. At no point has the right turned any of this back. What have we won that is lasting?

    • #16
  17. Misthiocracy Member
    Misthiocracy
    @Misthiocracy

    But, I like nationalistic populism, in tempered and reasonable doses.

    • #17
  18. Misthiocracy Member
    Misthiocracy
    @Misthiocracy

    Douglas:I would add an argument here: there’s a big debate right now among people that call themselves conservative about what conservatism really is. We’re finding that a lot of people that label themselves as such have vastly different views.

    This is news?

    • #18
  19. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Misthiocracy:But, I like nationalistic populism, in tempered and reasonable doses.

    I like Nationalism in the sense of “America for America”. I am not a big fan of populism on general concerns around Mob rule.

    What we see here, in part, is that National Review really would not rather be ruled by the first 200 people in the phone book, that they too, really want experts in charge.

    I have decided I cannot do anything to change the outcome, so I am done being mad. And I don’t like depression, so I am on to acceptance. Mona is stuck in mad.

    • #19
  20. Misthiocracy Member
    Misthiocracy
    @Misthiocracy

    Bryan G. Stephens: I cannot name one lasting conservative victory since 1940.

    Well, since almost by definition “conservative victories” are mostly simply the blocking of Leftist victories, every day that the USA isn’t yet a totalitarian communist state could be considered a conservative victory.

    • #20
  21. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles
    @RightAngles

    I don’t even care anymore if he isn’t a conservative by the usual definition. He isn’t Hillary. That’s the most important thing. There will be no “sitting out” the first four years of Hillary.

    • #21
  22. Scott Abel Inactive
    Scott Abel
    @ScottAbel

    Bryan G. Stephens:I cannot name one lasting conservative victory since 1940. There are many leftist ones.

    I am open to items where conservatism has advanced, if you have examples.

    Gun rights. Conceal carry and open carry in many states, a tilt in 2nd Amendment directions.

    Abortion. Despite Roe v. Wade being “settled law”, social conservatives have nibbled at the edges, and the polling of Americans have tilted in favor of the pro-life position. Abortions are more rare than they used to be. The tide, IMO, is turning.

    Taxation. Even Obama didn’t roll back the Bush tax cuts. Taxes are much lower than they were across the board since the Carter days.

    No advancement is permanent, not even the United States. Given that, I see some tangibles along the line.

    • #22
  23. Bob Laing Member
    Bob Laing
    @

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    Bob Laing:

    What lasting rollback of liberal policies are you referring too? Could you please provide me with some examples. For the sort of thing I am looking for, let me list some of the left’s lasting victories:

    • Income Tax
    • Direct Election of Senators
    • Expansion of the Commerce Clause
    • Expansion of Eminent Domain
    • Abortion as a right
    • Affirmative Action & Racial Quotas
    • Federal Control of Southern Voting Districts
    • Federal control of Education
    • EPA
    • ATF
    • Imposition of Same Sex Marriage
    • Federal Labor Unions
    • Medicaid
    • Medicare
    • Withholding
    • Social Security

    I could go on, but these are the sorts of long lasting victories the left has had in the past 70 years. At no point has the right turned any of this back. What have we won that is lasting?

    Specifically, I was thinking of gun rights and right to work in my head when I was typing.  That said, consider how any of the policies you note would have shook out without continued steady pressure against them by principled conservatives.

    If it wasn’t for Conservatives, the top marginal tax rates would be above 70%, abortion in the third trimester would be much more prevalent, affirmative action would be much more heavy handed, you would be contributing to a full blown single-payer system.  I could go on and on.  Given that conservatives have rarely constituted the majority of voters, they have consistently punched above their weight class.

    • #23
  24. Could Be Anyone Inactive
    Could Be Anyone
    @CouldBeAnyone

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    Could Be Anyone:

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    Brian Watt:

    Guruforhire:Seriously?

    In what way is Trump materially different than say Eisenhower, Nixon, Romney, or Perot?

    You mean apart from being a narcissist; ignorant about macroeconomics, history, foreign policy, and national security; inarticulate; unable to focus on attacking his Democrat opponent; blatantly vindictive about those he feels have slighted him and even vindictive about Republicans who have already endorsed him; insulting the disabled; encouraging his supporters to engage in violence? You’re right…I can think of absolutely no difference between these men and Donald Trump. Why they’re all virtually identical.

    As a conservative, I think he meant.

    But then again most of the personality stuff applies to Nixon, who gave us price controls. No conservative there.

    A sure grasp of foreign policy.

    Ike, of course, cemented in place the progressive new society. After years in the wilderness, Ike made permanent the FDR attacks on the Republic. I hold him in pretty low regard for that. Also cheated on his wife if we are keeping score.

    I didn’t know Ike had the power to rewrite the law and this is guilty for all that legislation passed by massive democrat majorities and kept in place by them. I mean it’s not like the democrats controlled congress when he was in office.

    Ike had power like FDR did. Ike made no moves to roll anything back, not even rhetorical. Did not even ask Congress for it. As leader of the party, he did not move to roll things back.

    No Ike did not. He had popularity but the Democrats who dominated congress and had given power to FDR to act like a tyrant were not going to see Ike weaken the presidency and the threat of international socialism was too prominent at the time to weaken government expansion in the event of war which was looming given the issues in Korea and Vietnam to name a few.

    • #24
  25. Misthiocracy Member
    Misthiocracy
    @Misthiocracy

    Bryan G. Stephens: What we see here, in part, is that National Review really would not rather be ruled by the first 200 people in the phone book, that they too, really want experts in charge.

    They never argued that they didn’t prefer to have experts in charge, as long as they’re credible and honest experts, when that’s an option.

    The line is “I am obliged to confess I should sooner live in a society governed by the first two thousand names in the Boston telephone directory than in a society governed by the two thousand faculty members of Harvard University.”

    The line is a dig at Harvard (and arguably the Ivy League in general), not at experts. It was an attack on the Beltway idea that all the best experts come from the insular and out-of-touch world of the Ivy League.

    (It also might simply have been a dig at Harvard from a Yale graduate.)

    • #25
  26. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Misthiocracy:

    Bryan G. Stephens: I cannot name one lasting conservative victory since 1940.

    Well, since almost by definition “conservative victories” are mostly simply the blocking of Leftist victories, every day that the USA isn’t yet a totalitarian communist state could be considered a conservative victory.

    That is not enough to keep me engaged. “We are slowing them down!” is not a fight I will support. You have to have real victories to maintain support.

    The lack of real victories is what has given us Trump. Real conservatives are tired of losing all the time and they are flailing around for a win. People do things when they are flailing they might not normally do. Other real conservatives are aghast at the action of those putting winning above conservative values. They cannot imagine that anyone would make those calculations. Some of those, in their sense of helplessness, are lashing out.

    What we have, is despair and helplessness in the face of the destruction of our republic. It is a lot like a chronically losing sports team. Everyone is mad, everyone is frustrated, and everyone thinks their solution is the best. IF the team is winning, no one cares how.

    If conservatives had been winning anything other than elections, they would be doing fine. But they have won elections all over the nation, and have not managed to make any changes. You cannot tell people “Vote for me now, and in 50 years things will be great.” Nor, can you call voters not listening to that a moral failing.

    Things suck right now, and there is no sign the suck is going away. The political elites offer nothing to a growing number of Americans.

    This is not over in 2016. Trump will not fix it. Clinton will not fix it. The pain will continue. This is because the elite do not want to face the tough problems. None of them is willing to go to the American people and be honest. They might and be shot down, but I don’t seen any of them trying.

    The current malaise will continue until the citizens of the Republic have no choice but to make the hard choices.

    • #26
  27. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Misthiocracy:

    Bryan G. Stephens: What we see here, in part, is that National Review really would not rather be ruled by the first 200 people in the phone book, that they too, really want experts in charge.

    They never argued that they didn’t prefer to have experts in charge, as long as they’re credible and honest experts, when that’s an option.

    The line is “I am obliged to confess I should sooner live in a society governed by the first two thousand names in the Boston telephone directory than in a society governed by the two thousand faculty members of Harvard University.”

    The line is a dig at Harvard (and arguably the Ivy League in general), not at experts. It was an attack on the Beltway idea that all the best experts come from the insular and out-of-touch world of the Ivy League.

    Which appears to be where our Conservative elite want their experts to come from. They appear just as out of touch.

    • #27
  28. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Could Be Anyone:

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    Could Be Anyone:

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    Brian Watt:

    Guruforhire:Seriously?

    In what way is Trump materially different than say Eisenhower, Nixon, Romney, or Perot?

    You mean apart from being a narcissist; ignorant about macroeconomics, history, foreign policy, and national security; inarticulate; unable to focus on attacking his Democrat opponent; blatantly vindictive about those he feels have slighted him and even vindictive about Republicans who have already endorsed him; insulting the disabled; encouraging his supporters to engage in violence? You’re right…I can think of absolutely no difference between these men and Donald Trump. Why they’re all virtually identical.

    As a conservative, I think he meant.

    But then again most of the personality stuff applies to Nixon, who gave us price controls. No conservative there.

    A sure grasp of foreign policy.

    Ike, of course, cemented in place the progressive new society. After years in the wilderness, Ike made permanent the FDR attacks on the Republic. I hold him in pretty low regard for that. Also cheated on his wife if we are keeping score.

    I didn’t know Ike had the power to rewrite the law and this is guilty for all that legislation passed by massive democrat majorities and kept in place by them. I mean it’s not like the democrats controlled congress when he was in office.

    Ike had power like FDR did. Ike made no moves to roll anything back, not even rhetorical. Did not even ask Congress for it. As leader of the party, he did not move to roll things back.

    No Ike did not. He had popularity but the Democrats who dominated congress and had given power to FDR to act like a tyrant were not going to see Ike weaken the presidency and the threat of international socialism was too prominent at the time to weaken government expansion in the event of war which was looming given the issues in Korea and Vietnam to name a few.

    I am not willing to give Ike a pass on it. or Nixon.

    They were not conservative. Nor was Bush I or II.

    That is the problem. Conservatives don’t win.

    • #28
  29. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Scott Abel:

    Bryan G. Stephens:I cannot name one lasting conservative victory since 1940. There are many leftist ones.

    I am open to items where conservatism has advanced, if you have examples.

    Gun rights. Conceal carry and open carry in many states, a tilt in 2nd Amendment directions.

    Abortion. Despite Roe v. Wade being “settled law”, social conservatives have nibbled at the edges, and the polling of Americans have tilted in favor of the pro-life position. Abortions are more rare than they used to be. The tide, IMO, is turning.

    Taxation. Even Obama didn’t roll back the Bush tax cuts. Taxes are much lower than they were across the board since the Carter days.

    No advancement is permanent, not even the United States. Given that, I see some tangibles along the line.

    Not one thing you mention is nearly as lasting as any of the things I mentioned for the left. Every major leftist advance since FDR is permanent. Every single one. Based on the evidence, all their advances are permanent.

    You have listed small ball, nibbling around the edges that will be wiped away the moment Clinton puts someone on the Supreme Court.

    • #29
  30. Bob Laing Member
    Bob Laing
    @

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    Misthiocracy:

    Bryan G. Stephens: I cannot name one lasting conservative victory since 1940.

    Well, since almost by definition “conservative victories” are mostly simply the blocking of Leftist victories, every day that the USA isn’t yet a totalitarian communist state could be considered a conservative victory.

    That is not enough to keep me engaged. “We are slowing them down!” is not a fight I will support. You have to have real victories to maintain support.

    Critics of the #nevertrump position like saying that not voting for Trump is a vote for Hillary.  If that’s the case, not supporting “slowing them down” means that you are implicitly supporting “speeding them up”.  Trump is “speeding them up” personified.

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.