If
one were to summarize why Buckley-style conservatism failed, the clearest
answer is that it stopped being conservative. The central tenets of
conservatism are tradition, organic society, hierarchy, authority, property rights
and prudence. In the Anglo-Saxon model, ordered liberty can also be included.
The limits on authority are the logic of a fixed and orderly legal system.
Probably the most concise explanation of
American conservatism came from Russel Kirk seventy years ago.
Buckley conservatism, in
contrast, was never deeply rooted in social philosophy and this was a
deliberate act. The Buckleyites wanted a create a political movement that could
compete with Progressives. In order to do that it meant winning elections and that
meant providing a practical platform for governance. As a result, Buckley
conservatism was always a compromise. In order to fashion a practical political
platform, it meant deviating from conservative dogma as necessity required.
This lack of ideological moorings, however, led it to drift away
from conservatism toward something that is better described as marketism. Libertarians
see property as the key to individual liberty. All human rights derive from
ownership of self and property is the fruit of labor, so absolute property
rights safeguard individual liberty. Marketism, in contrast, views
liberty as the unfettered right to trade property and labor. Therefore,
liberty is maximized only through the free and unregulated marketplace.
In both cases, the definition of individual liberty is at odds
with conservative conceptions of individual liberty, as well as the tenets of
conservatism. The Right
has always understood that a man could only be free within the context of
society. To exist within a society, he must gain control of his passions and
master himself. Customs and traditions, which habituated him to his duties as a
member of society, also channeled his energies to that which served the good of
his society.
This conception of ordered liberty, in which man can only be
free within the context of his role in society, is the wellspring of
conservative thought. Respect for hierarchy, for example, is not just an
observation of man’s natural state, but an acceptance of the fundamental nature
of human society. Similarly, the right of property can only be a coherent
concept within a human society, not outside it. There can be no property rights
without society, so property rights must ultimately serve the good of society.
For libertarians and market absolutists, any restraint on how you
can dispose of your property or how you trade property with others is seen as a
violation of your individual sovereignty. Inevitably, it means taking the side
of the market when it bumps up against custom or tradition. It means siding
with novelty that promises more market freedom, even when it undermines the
organic institutions of society. Inevitably, conservatives became the
defenders of the wrecking ball that destroyed American culture.
It’s why a Kevin Williamson could gleefully cheer for the
destruction of small-town America and their customs, in the name of the free
market. From his perspective, the limitations of localism are a gross violation
of freedom, so destroying those local communities sets the residents free to
maximize their economic utility. Buckley conservatism has drifted so far from
its alleged starting position, it now stands in opposition to that which
defined its alleged starting position.
This recent piece by
David French is another example. In it, he turns conservatism on its head in
order to promote marketism. The problems of college athletics, however you wish
to frame them, are not the result of too little commercialism. Only a
blithering idiot could come to such a conclusion. The trouble with college
sports, and the college system as a whole, is it is now almost entirely free of
the system of customs and traditions that created it. Higher education is a
market that strives to be a racket.
David French, of course, has become the comical front man for
Buckley conservatism over the last few years. His blend of sanctimonious finger
wagging and principled mediocrity is the exaggerated version of the dissident
critique of conventional conservatism. He is the clown nose of Conservative
Inc. This is not solely due to his many personal defects. His embrace of
unconditional marketism has led him to adopt an entirely transactional view of
human existence.
There used to be a time when both sides of the Progressive
orthodoxy understood the limits and liabilities of the marketplace. The Left
would howl about consumerism at the expense of authenticity. The Right would
point out the dangers inherent in an unfettered marketplace. Buckley famously
said, “The trouble with socialism is socialism. The trouble with capitalism is
capitalists.” The modern
conservative would not understand that juxtaposition. For him, the marketplace
is supreme.
The underlying truth of radicalism is that it not only seeks to free
men from the human condition, but it seeks to have them rise to the heavens and
become gods. For the modern conservative, something similar has evolved.
Whether it is a fetish for property or a fetish for markets, the Buckley
conservatives imagine men breaking free of their constraints in order to become
fully engaged market participants. For them, the paradise at the end is a
shopping mall full of atomized strangers.
That’s why Buckley
conservatism has failed. It is a primal call for a war of all against all,
where atomized bugmen jostle to maximize their utility in the market. To
consume product is the end point of existence. It is a crude and vulgar
existence that celebrates man’s worst instincts at the expense of his nobler
aspirations. What is on offer from so-called conservatives is a different type
of hell than what is on offer from their partners on the Left, but it is still
the same Progressive sandwich.
For
sites like this to exist, it requires people like you chipping in a few bucks a
month to keep the lights on and the people fed. It turns out that you can’t
live on clicks and compliments. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. If you
don’t want to commit to a subscription, make a one time donation. Or, you can
send money to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. You can
also use PayPal to send
a few bucks, rather than have that latte at Starbucks. Thank you for your
support!
