Ignore the pundits: Conservatism doesn’t need an extreme makeover
Doubtless mistakes were made, as they say, at the political level in 2012. But the real work of conservatives now is not at that superficial, topsoil level, it is in the deeper soil of policy and the tap root of values where conservatives need to toil now. Americans should be presented with a deeper and more compelling narrative about the policy choices facing the country and the problems the present path will create. It is less about an extreme makeover and more about deepening its own policy message and clarifying its own values. Otherwise, why bother to become merely a pale version of liberalism simply to broaden your appeal and win?
For example, there is a serious conversation to be had about the family, one that is not reduced merely to pro-life and pro-choice sound bites, one that doesn’t begin and end with same-sex marriage. Liberal Harvard Professor Daniel Patrick Moynihan pointed out the importance of a stable family life to the health of the republic in the 1960’s, and many have noted the troublesome decline of family stability and the birthrate in Europe. That conversation needs to take place in a serious way here in America. What family values are entirely personal, and which affect the public good? This question of values is one that conservatives should appropriately raise, but in a thoughtful way.
There is a real debate to be had about the role of government. Here my Hoover Institution colleague Peter Berkowitz rightly points out that conservatives have mistakenly allowed the debate to be about big versus small government. Government is big and it isn’t likely to shrink much. The real debate is about the role of government, not merely its size. It’s about limited government, not just big government.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Changing conservatism sounds like an oxymoron.
The only thing it needs to be is applied to new issues.
astonerii on December 27, 2012 at 7:45 PM
Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf died.
davidk on December 27, 2012 at 7:47 PM
Conservatism is common sense.
Charlemagne on December 27, 2012 at 7:48 PM
Davenport has apparently confused Conservatives with the GOP. I’ll make it a point to ignore him more often in the future.
Xavier on December 27, 2012 at 7:48 PM
I don’t know, I’d say you Trog’s need to get on over to Frum and Brooks and Andrew Sullivan, I believe that’s where you’ll find the Bleeding Edge of Conservatism.
Tell yourselves that small-ish government, low taxes, self-reliance, and free markets ARE Conservatism, but the REAL Conservatives know differently…it’s Gay Marriage, Rejection of Christianism, Moderate Gun Control, Higher Taxes, and Cap and Trade. EVERYONE but you dinosaurs knows this.
JFKY on December 27, 2012 at 8:08 PM
The idea is that conservatism is just what it is, it needs no make-up or makeover, just people who will actually do what they say in the realm of conservative politics.
Now the GOP… that needs a good, solid flushing out of the apparatchiks in charge.
ajacksonian on December 27, 2012 at 8:09 PM
That’s it in a nutshell…
Tim Zank on December 27, 2012 at 8:12 PM
I agree totally… but common sense just isn’t so common anymore. Nov. 6 proved having sense is becoming unusual.
lynncgb on December 27, 2012 at 8:14 PM
Conservatism is vague.
What kind of Conservatism? Fiscal or social? Because the socons are so last century. Fiscal is common sense.
Socons can’t even get one of their guys to the nom and they swear they’re what a winner is in November when everybody votes. It makes no sense.
Like, America was going to vote for Santorum. Uh, yeah.
Moesart on December 27, 2012 at 9:10 PM
,b>Because the socons are so last century. Just like the Constitution or the Bible, right, not hip, up-to-date or a part of the “Smart crowd”.
You DO realize that the best fiscal con’s are also Socon’s right? Because except, arguably, for Ron Paul, all the Social Moderates/Liberals also ware willing to spend heaps of your money, too.
JFKY on December 27, 2012 at 9:15 PM
Huh. How big WAS Mitt Romney’s margin of victory?
Oh wait.
The ONLY reason Santorum got any momentum was because the base didn’t want Mitt. Even Ron FREAKING Paul had some momentum, and that’s enough to proclaim the movement dead at first blush.
Myron Falwell on December 27, 2012 at 9:16 PM
The GOP has a “messaging” problem..It is not getting to enough folks..
Dire Straits on December 27, 2012 at 9:32 PM