The Psuedoconservative Moment
Writing by abuhatem on Friday, 13 of June , 2008 at 1:16 am
The so-called “conservative movement” took over Washington D.C. in 1980 with the Reagan era and the end of the reign of liberal republicans and democrats from Richard Nixon (”We are all Keynesians now!”) and Gerald Ford to Jimmy Carter. What began in 1980, went through 1992 and after republican defeat at the ballot box to Bill Clinton re-emerged in 1994 with the “Republican revolution” takeover of Congress, and George W. Bush’s Presidency which was concurrent for the most part with republican takeover of the Congress from 2002-2006.
The so-called conservatives were built upon a movement that traces itself back to the Old Right during the imperial presidency of Franklin Roosevelt who’s “New Deal” found ardent pro-liberty and pro-limited government critics. Robert A. Taft was probably the most well known face of the mid-twentieth century conservative movement, and its intellectual backers were Frank S. Meyer, Russell Kirk, Willmoore Kendall, Robert Nisbet, Albert J. Nock, Robert Nozick, economists Milton Friedman and Friedrich von Hayek and others. What held the conservative movement together was a belief in liberty, free markets, tradition, federalism, and an utter opposition to aggressive war and foreign entanglements, coupled with a suspicion of executive power. These were all outlined by Russell Kirk, perhaps the father of modern American conservatism in his The Conservative Mind: From Burke to Eliot.
Yet what resulted from this movement, from Reagan to Bush II, was not conservatism. The conservative movement was truly a psuedoconservative moment. While republican congressmen often like to quote a word or two of Nisbet or Kirk or Friedman, they truy have revolted against the theoretical underpinnings of conservatism itself. It is rare nowadays in our government to find someone who truly understands American conservatism and political thought, and who truly understands what conservatism even is.
This is perhaps why the republican brand is dying. Obama’s (or even left-wing McCain’s for that matter) election may usher in conservatism’s death, and obituaries are already being written. Did takeover of the White House, the Congress, and a 4-justice stacked conservative Supreme Court accomplish anything remotely conservative?
Without looking at social issues like our soaring divorce rates, crime rates, drug abuse rates, and religiosity rates, or our civil liberties that have been basically ignored for the past 8 years, or even our neo-imperialist foreign policies, the conservative movement hasn’t even yet to deliver on the one mantra promise echoed from Reagan to Bush II: limited government.
Here are the statistics highlighting the change from the liberal Carter years through the conservative movement’s takeover until now. First the growth of the federal budget, so much for limited government:
And now, the budget deficits, so much for fiscal responsibility:
And now, the federal debt as well:
In fact, the only place where “conservatives” actually delivered on their promises were tax cuts. Although they never got rid of the income tax, they did cut top marginal tax rates phenomenally which caused rapid GDP growth in the American economy. For this they must be given credit, but whats the use of getting our money back if budget deficits and the federal debt are causing it to perpetually inflate? Here are the stats on the top marginal tax rate from Nixon to Bush II:
Of course, this graph is disgusting when you figure in the growth of the budget!
All-in-all, the conservative movement was simply a psuedoconservative moment. Conservatives have waited since FDR to restore itself on the scene, but unfortunately it is not working out. Perhaps Ron Paul’s presidential run will inspire a new generation of Americans to fight for liberty and tradition.
Category: Uncategorized
- Add this post to
- Del.icio.us -
- Meneame -
- Digg
No comments yet.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
