Then in 2000, for the first time Republicans took control of both houses of Congress and the White House. At last, conservatives believed, they would be able to deliver on the agenda they had been advancing for decades.What happened? Republicans increased federal spending by a trillion dollars in six years. They passed the biggest expansion of entitlements since the LBJ years. They federalized education. They gave unprecedented power to the executive. They launched a massive nation-building project thousands of miles from home, to do in Iraq what conservatives would never expect government to do in the United States.
Even worse, the conservative intellectual movement abandoned its limited-government roots. The neoconservatives, who drifted over from the radical left, brought their commitment to an expansive government intimately involved in shaping the social and economic life of the nation. They transformed conservatism from rugged individualism to "national greatness." The religious right demanded that government impose their social values on the whole country. Conservatives who had once rallied to a famous Reagan declaration - that "government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem" - became loyal supporters of George W. Bush, who said, rather differently, "When somebody hurts, government has got to move."
I was never as conservative as Buckley. Not in the social sense, anyway. Certainly he (like many conservatives of his era) was far too, we'll be polite and say "tolerant", of racism.
But I'm definitely a fiscal conservative (in the fiscal sanity, not the LOWTAX and damn the consequences, way), and a local government (but not necessarily small government) conservative. Also I recognize that many issues are decided by violence, and thus wars, while believing that war is not to be entered into lightly.
But I'm certainly not a libertarian. There is a place for government. And for regulations, especially in the modern world. Global Warming is real, evolution likewise.
Buckley, and some other conservatives (George Will, Andrew Sullivan) came to oppose the Iraq War on ideological grounds, and some of those same conservatives look at the Republican party and see: radicals. Anti-conservative Republicans, if you will. They see people who think that legislating on the liveliness of Terry Schaivo is a proper function of the Federal Government. That, by the way, was when the fractures in modern conservativism started to become highly visible.
If, as seems likely, McCain loses the Presidential race and Congress moves even more towards the Democrats, the ideological bloodbath amongst the Republicans will be interesting to watch. The Neo-cons declared people like me to be unconservative, and therefore not welcome in the Republican Party. Will the Republicans be happy as a permanent, possibly regional, minority party? Or will they become more conservative, less radical, and thus present a useful alternative to Progressivism/Liberalism?
I have no idea, but it's going to be fun to watch.
| < When one monitor | BBC White season: 'Rivers of Blood' > |
