What's Next for Conservatives?
An NRO Symposium on Conservatism on National Review Online
NationalReview.com has a good discussion of what the path forward for conservatives should look like.
Lee Edwards,who's been in the conservative movement from the start (and is a very nice guy) makes an excellent point:
Conservatives should remind themselves that they do not live by politics alone. Conservatism is a way of life, of which electoral politics is only a part and not the whole. A movement that survived the unexpected death of Robert A. Taft in 1953, the Senate’s censure of Joseph R. McCarthy in 1954, the crushing defeat of Barry Goldwater in 1964, the failure of Ronald Reagan to win the Republican presidential nomination in 1976, and the overnight fall from grace of Newt Gingrich in 1998 can survive the severe disappointments of 2006. Why? Because our movement is built on a solid foundation of enduring ideas, not the shifting sands of public opinion and the 24/7 demands of the mass media.
Conservatism is more than just a political view; we're not just about government. To paraphrase Russell Kirk, conservatives care more about culture than politics. Partisan Democrats in the media and the Democratic Party have written conservatives off before only to see their hopes dashed. This time won't be any different, either.
Bruce Frohnen makes a similar point:
Conservatism’s roots do not lie in facile slogans about natural rights and free markets — let alone angry, dismissive rhetoric that casts aside the poor and treats rich people as above the law. They lie in our attachment to families, churches, towns, and small businesses. It’s time to remember who we are and who we should be defending.
Conservatives in Congress started responding to the needs of big business and creating bigger government, forgetting that conservatism is about the small: the towns, the churches, the families. We need to remember who we're fighting for and why.
Finally, Stephen Hayward makes an important point:
Despite the electoral carnage last Tuesday, we should recognize a measure of success it represents: just as Republicans had to embrace “compassionate conservatism” as a practical political response to the Clinton years, many Democratic candidates had to move right in response to Republican electoral strength over the last decade. This suggests, incidentally, that we should look to support Democrats like Joseph Lieberman, James Webb, and Heath Schuler when we can.
Given the often unremitting hostility from Demcrats, it's easy for conservatives to identify solely with the Republican Party. This sort of thinking needs to be changed. We've finally got some moderate conservatives inside the Democratic caucus again. (We haven't really had one since Zell Miller retired.) We need to work with them as well. Rather than being a subset of the Republican party, we need to always work to transcend party lines and work with conservatives in both parties (all parties, really) so we can better achieve our ends. If we only work with Republicans, they'll take our support for granted and we'll never advance. Having Democrats who are friendly to our views is a plus for us as we have people in both camps ready to fight for us and our values.
Last Tuesday was a setback for the conservative movement, but hardly a death blow. We took some hits as the Republican Party moved away from our principles and we got caught in the crossfire. The landscape has changed, but not our fundamental challenge: making sure our nations grows in a sensible direction, while protecting our traditions and culture.
Crossposted at Delaware 2006