State of Conservatism in 2020: Seduced by Populists

by Ray Keating

The Keating Files – March 26, 2020

If the Republican Party is a confused bunch (as I argued in a recent column), then it’s a pretty good bet that conservatives are as well.

Today’s conservatism has lost its way in the era of populism and Donald Trump. 

But this shouldn’t have snuck up on anyone. In an essay I wrote on the state of the conservative movement twenty years ago, the current problems plaguing conservatism were on the rise. That included populism pushing some conservatives to attack big business, free trade, immigration and most traces of internationalism; big government conservatives, who then called for grand government adventures in the name of “national greatness;” and political conservatives willing to toss aside assorted principles to gain political power, and largely taking their instructions from, rather than providing intellectual guidance and firepower to, the Republican Party. 

These three problems have coalesced in recent years so that the traditional center of the American conservative movement – especially during much of the second half of the 20^thcentury – now finds itself back on its heels and dwindling in numbers. 

To summarize, that traditional conservatism – while always having arguments and disagreements, especially when it came to executing policies – had much in common in a foundational sense. That foundation could be quickly outlined as Judeo-Christian values, Western Civilization, the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, and assorted essential ideas and institutions, such as the Christian Church, the intrinsic value of each individual, the role of the family, freedom and individual responsibility, limited government, and free enterprise and free markets. That doesn’t mean that one had to be a Christian, for example, to be a conservative, but there was a need to understand how Christianity helped to inform conservatism on various matters, such as valuing each individual life, marriage and family, natural rights and liberty, and the values and morals that undergird free enterprise.

Thankfully, there remain strong voices in the public arena defending this traditional conservatism – such as George Will, David French, Jonah Goldberg and Mona Charen. 

But large swaths of conservatism have been seduced, in effect, by populism. While populism remains amorphous, it’s largely been about the fear of something or some groups, and in turn, populists’ claiming victim status. Favorite targets of populist rage over the years have been elites, globalists, bankers, big business, immigrants, and foreign businesses. It’s all rather messy and unsavory, but nonetheless, there are so-called public intellectuals willing to try to dress up populism with a depth that simply does not exist.

This populist insurgency has been joined by nationalists. What’s the problem with nationalism; after all, isn’t it just another term for patriotism, as many assert? In a column from February 2017, Mona Charen made a solid case for patriotism and not nationalism:

Patriotism is enough — it needs no improving or expanding. Nationalism is something else. It's hard to think of a nationalist who does not pervert patriotism into something aggressive — against foreign adversaries, domestic minorities or both. When Mexican President Lazaro Cardenas nationalized the oil industry in 1938 (expropriating the property of hated foreigners), he was favored with a chanting crowd of 100,000 supporters in Mexico City. Gamal Abdel Nasser's nationalism found expression in nationalization (of the Suez Canal in that case) and also in aggressive war against Israel and Yemen. Vladimir Putin's nationalism has been characterized by demonization of the United States in domestic propaganda and his invasion of neighboring countries. Benito Mussolini believed in reclaiming Italy's lost glory and invaded Abyssinia (Ethiopia) to fulfill his vision...

I believe that nationalism is a demagogue's patriotism... Demagogues of the right — or nationalists — argue that our troubles are the result of immigrants taking our jobs or foreigners stealing our factories. This is not natural love of home and hearth or reverence for America's founding ideals. It is scapegoating.

And therefore, we see the merging or allegiance of nationalism and populism.

For good measure, some high-profile anti-liberty Catholics with hints of authoritarianism are playing in the “conservative” sandbox, along with political conservatives who proved more than willing to trade in long-held conservative principles for political power and/or influence. And there were some who deemed it necessary to maintain their business models to defend whatever the Republican Party does as being “conservative.”

The Trump years have proven to be a kind of perfect storm for conservatism, with a nationalist/populist Republican president (Trump called himself a “nationalist”) who demands unquestioning support, and a willingness among many conservatives – or former conservatives – to take their marching orders from the Republican Party, and to popularize or enable populism among parts of the GOP base.

And as for those conservatives willing to hold their noses or simply ignore this descent into populism in order to get what they want most – such as the appointment of judges who subscribe to original intent or judicial restraint (which I also support as a conservative), versus judicial activism – they fail to grasp the difference between short-term political gains and the very real likelihood of long-term defeat. 

After all, is an isolationist, fear-ridden, victim-peddling populism more likely to gain or lose adherents to conservative policies, such as pro-life judges and legislators? For that matter, is unquestioning support of Donald Trump going to advance conservatism in any real, lasting way, or make it less appealing? The answer to both questions is, quite frankly, no.

For decades, the conservative movement was marked by its intellectual independence. The policies, actions and arguments made by Republicans, Democrats and others were assessed according to conservative principles, and the conservative case was made in order to persuade others of and advance sound ideas. It was never done to perfection (at times, far from it) and often resorted to wrongheaded means, but conservatives should be among the first to acknowledge the faults – yes, the sins – of human beings, and then work to make improvements. 

Unfortunately, such independence in thought and action is in retreat on the Right, and it promises to be a real fight to reclaim conservatism for true conservatism.

__________

Ray Keating is a columnist, an economist, a novelist (his latest novels are The Traitor: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel, which is the 12^thbook in the series, and the second edition of Root of All Evil? A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel with a new Author Introduction), a nonfiction author (among his recent works is Free Trade Rocks! 10 Points on International Trade Everyone Should Know), a podcaster, and an entrepreneur. You can also order his forthcoming book Behind Enemy Lines: Conservative Communiques from Left-Wing New York– signed booksor for the Kindle. The views expressed here are his own.