American Conservatives Learn from Powell
Writing for The Next Right, a website for conservatives activists, organizers, bloggers and thinkers, Matt Moon takes a closer look at Colin Powell’s endorsement of Barack Obama. Unlike how some conservatives responded, Moon believes that Powell made some excellent points.
Republicans, Moon rightfully believes, should acknowledge that the times are changing and that they have not done their party and conservatism a favor in recent years.
“I’m more and more convinced that the conservative movement of the future has to engage just as much on the intellectual battleground as we do on the electoral and rhetorical battleground. While we have to pay attention to the demographic and political trends in each part of the nation, we also have to engage the liberal movement on their turf as well, and not only fight for conservative principles, but explain why the goals of ‘equal opportunity and freedom’ are superior to the end of ‘equality of condition,’ and come up with creative policy solutions that abide by those principles,” Moon writes.
Conservative leaders and spokesmen, Moon goes on to argue, should combine “tethering rhetoric and “intellectual curiosity” (like Obama has) with great decision-making abilities.” One such person is Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal: “He’s known as a policy wonk, but has an amazing ability to connect with folks. No better time for the Right to have someone like Bobby Jindal to move us forward intellectually on the public policy front while spreading the message of freedom on all levels.”
In addition to more intellectual curiosity – it is fascinating that the right was once reborn due to a rebirth of conservative intellectualism, which seems to have been forgotten by so many conservatives in the last few yeas – American conservatives need to stop using a “divide and conquer” strategy, believing that since only 51% is required in order to win, the other 49% can be ignored. “Sure, we still live in a Center-Right nation for all intents and purposes … but it doesn’t mean that we can’t stop talking to voters about our principles and new ideas based on those principles,” Moon writes. “It seems as though we’ve focused too much on ‘voter turnout’ and have become lazy when it comes to the ‘voter persuasion’ process beforehand.”
Lastly, Moon argued that Powell was right to emphasize the need for solutions for America’s education problems and worldwide poverty. At this moment, Powell argued, only Democrats speak about those issues.
It is interesting to see that Moon was shot down in the comment sections, but I think he made some very good points, ones American conservatives should take to heart. For a long time, the Republican Party has ignored all those who dared disagree. The opinion was, it seemed, that the minority opinion did not count, for these people would not vote Republican anyway. It was about winning over the 51% and in order to do so, the GOP did not have to do much save talking about how bad the Democrats are and throw in some one-liners about conservatism every now and then. This made American conservatives lazy.
If there is one major problem in politics, it is being lazy. Once one stop trying to convince others of one’s viewpoints, one is set to decline and even to become irrelevant.
Furthermore, Republicans haven’t talked about major issues for years. Education and health care are on people’s minds, and rightfully so. Thus far, conservatives have failed to offer a solution for the problems in both and to advocate for them whenever the opportunite arose. This gave voters the impression that the Democrats were the only ones with a plan for both; this while there is certainly a ‘conservative way’ to help Americans get health insurance, and help schools improve (vouchers, more competition, etc.). Republicans should stop running on foreign policy and against big government alone; they should make the case for conservative solutions for America’s problems.
This does mean, of course, that they will have to accept that the problems as they exist today (in health care and education) are serious and require (major) changes.
The general direction of the party as well, moving increasingly towards the right, is also a problem. It makes it impossible for those who are more moderate to express their views without being labeled RINOs. The right-wingers have hijacked the GOP, quickly turning a big tent into a very, very little one.
Conservatives should learn from this year’s defeat (because lose John McCain will), and act accordingly. The debate should have been held two years ago, but better late than never.
“come up with creative policy solutions that abide by those principles”
I agree, that the Republican party has lost it’s was as far as this is concerned, we are a center-right country still, but we have forgotten how to argue Republican policy solutions as a “win to all Americans”, that is the key. Some examples, are the principles of a hand-up (teaching one to fish) and not a hand-out (spreading the wealth around). Another is pushing hard work to get ahead, and not playing the victim.
“For a long time, the Republican Party has ignored all those who dared disagree. The opinion was, it seemed, that the minority opinion did not count, for these people would not vote Republican anyway.”
Where, exactly, have you gotten this notion, Michael? The GOP has not been called “The Big Tent” for nothing. Look how many think-tanks exist on the conservative side and look how often those think-tanks actually tussle with each other over ideas and policies. Then look at what happens to dissenters on the left.
somehow you have bought into the notion that Republicans are lock-stepping drones and that the party is built on purest ideology. That could not be farther from the truth.
I’ll prove it. Name three prominent pro-choice Republicans (hint, one of them is a Governor and one was a prominent Presidential candidate who is quite active in campaigning for McCain) , then block out a bit more time and name prominent three pro-life Democrats (one is…err…umm…).
@Jimmie:
Yes, I agree. The meme that the Republican Party is intolerant towards internal opposition is not in my opinion supported by the facts, at least not comparatively so. Which party prohibits those who dissent from its dominant view on abortion from even speaking at the convention? Hint: Not the Republican Party. Which party nominated a candidate that has a record of opposing the party on at least some issues? That was the Republican Party.
The Republican Party has serious problems and I’m not even supporting them this year at the presidential level, but it should get credit where credit is due. And it does have a better record on tolerance for internal dissent than the Democratic Party does.
Unfortunatly, Jindal is a hard-right winger socially, someone who would never be appealing to the middle. I realize that Repubs so desparatly want someone with somewhat darker skin to front for you, and what better than someone who isn’t “black”, but seems dark – but you will need to do better than that.
But, once again, thats the problem. People like Jindal, or Sarah Palin – your up and coming generation, are just way outside the mainstream. That will be even more true after a few years of liberal leadership.
You are right that the far right has hijacked the GOP. And they aint gonna let go, for they feel it is the only voice they have. It may be a better strategy for RINO-types, to join with Dems and try to shape the new world order from the inside.
“Name three prominent pro-choice Republicans (hint, one of them is a Governor and one was a prominent Presidential candidate who is quite active in campaigning for McCain) , then block out a bit more time and name prominent three pro-life Democrats (one is…err…umm…).”
Excellent point Jimmie
Republicans do appear to be better than democrats at that particular facet.
But as devil’s advocate, some would argue then why have the numbers of Registered Republicans been dwindling? (something I have wondered myself, and not sure even if it is really true, but an argument I hear a lot none the less)
“People like Jindal, or Sarah Palin – your up and coming generation, are just way outside the mainstream. That will be even more true after a few years of liberal leadership. ”
Again, here’s an observation without basis.
Sarah Palin has been running approval ratings in the 80s and 90s in Alaska. Are you saying, then, that only 10 or 20 percent of Alaskans – the ones who don’t like her – are in the mainstream?
Bobby Jindal won pretty handily in Louisiana which is hardly a bastion of conservatism. As I recall, the most recent primary has something like 98 percent of black Democrats voting for Obama. Jindal is quite popular all the way around there. So what’s the mainstream in Louisiana?
I don’t think you really know what the mainstream is, but then again given what the media has been telling us for the past eight years, at least, I’d be surprised if anyone really knew.
Jay_C – My guess here is that you’re seeing one of the organizational differences the Republicans and the Democrats. On the right, there is a discernible difference between “conservative” and “Republican” and you see quite a few conservatives who feel no particular alliegance to the party itself if they believe that the party is going in the wrong direction. On the left, to be a Democrat is to be liberal and one must be the latter to be the former.
I think the past couple years, at least, you’ve seen a serious measure of disgust with the Republican party among those who had been its most faithful adherents (those who came into voting age in or just before the Reagan era). They (and I freely admit I’m one who left the Party) got tired of watching the bigwigs of the GOP spend most of their time playing the same stupid political games as the Democrats, trying to romance an MSM that is genetically predisposed to despise them, and drink from the same trough that fattened Democrats in Congress for 50 years. That’s still going on and most folks are content to call themselves “independents” or “conservatives” or “Libertarians” until some folks with good sense start running the Republican party again.
Heck, up until Barack Obama’s brownshirts mobbed Joe the Plumber, I was content not to vote for a Presidential candidate at all.
Jimmy: o yes, they exist, the but the far right groups have taken over the party, labeling all those with less far-right views ‘RINOs’ and worse. Is it as bad as the Democratic Party? Of course not. Where did I every write that?
Right nowhere.
So what’s happening, as always happens it seems, is that people argue against a point I never, ever, never, zilch made.
I’m disputing that it really exists at all, Michael. Who has been cast out of the Republican party by the “far right” groups? You say they’ve taken over, yet we’ve seen more moderate Republicans at the forefront of the party than we did during the 1980s or 1990s. There’s the aforementioned Governator. There’s Rudy Giuliani. John McCain is the nominee for President, for goodness sakes.
I’m not saying that what you believe is happening in the Republican Party is as bad as what’s been going on for twenty years in the Democratic Party. I dispute that it’s happening at all. The evidence of the Republican party ignoring “all those who dared disagree” just does not exist. Indeed, the evidence suggest that moderate Republicans hold much greater sway in the party than conservatives, social or fiscal.
the developing schism I see is between the “intellectual” right and the “populist” right. What strikes me about that division is that a fair amount of the difficulty that the “intellectual” right has with the “populist” right (i.e. abortion, stem cell) echoes the concerns from the left. Was the Reagan revolution solely a victory for the intellectual underpinnings of conservatism or was it additionally a successful appeal to the “Reagan Democrats” who would, if a member of the Republican Party, now be considered Palin voters?
I believe the Republican Party has in several ways veered “too far” to the right. Having said that, a return to Bill buckley conservatism (or dare I say as a Arizonan, Barry Goldwater conservatism) in the name of “righting the ship” would be a mistake.
Look at the Democratic party. Mondale was the last of the New Deal/Great Society Democrats. The Democratic Party later succeeded not by returning to its roots but by putting out a new brand , Bill Clinton.
At this point in time, I will suggest that Barack Obama will be the leftist version of Ronald Reagan. In other words, an inspirational guy who gets the votes for decidedly “away from the center” movement. We’ll see. I don’t think a “pure” conservative is the counterpoint to that.
Jimmie: Kathleen Parker, Colin Friedersdorf, Christopher Buckley. No, they haven’t been “thrown out of the party” as you describe it, but they have been hammered pretty well by far-right ideologues who will not stand for any criticism of the selection of Sarah Palin.
I would say the more rightist elements of the party have felt pretty empowered for eight years, since it was the President who aligned with them during his campaign and subsequent time in office.
Is it bad with the Democrats too? Yea, it is. Just ask Joe Lieberman. But to pretend it’s not nearly as bad with the Republicans in the past couple months is to ignore reality.