A Modest Proposal—For Re-Branding Conservatism

The time has come for conservatives to take a page out of Bill Clinton’s playbook. Our former president was an expert in the sort of verbal jujitsu those on the political right might do well to emulate. In fact, it may be the only way to fight the fire of dissimulation with the fire of truthfulness.
A decade and a half ago, when Newt Gingrich attempted to promote conservatism by promoting an “opportunity society,” his well-intentioned effort came up short. Gingrich touted the free market as a means through which everyone could pursue freedom and prosperity, but once this idea began to acquire traction Clinton jumped into the fray. He quickly began promoting an opportunity society, albeit one based on government sponsored initiatives.
In short order, opportunity ceased to be a conservative hallmark and hence lost its ability to attract support. Nevertheless, Clinton’s turnabout ploy can be used in reverse. Today, liberals glory in their purported “progressivism.” They claim to be on the side of history and therefore assert the exclusive right champion positive change. Conservatives, in contrast, are characterized as chained to a discredited past. They are alleged to have no new ideas worth honoring.
In fact, liberals are not progressive, whereas conservatives are not conservative. Liberals actually seek to return us to a cross between an updated Enlightenment absolutism and Bronze Age village life. Meanwhile, conservatives, despite their reputation, seek to build upon past successes. Not one of the four pillars of their philosophy is backward looking. Each, namely freedom, democracy, market economics and family values, is relentlessly innovative.
So what can conservatives do to correct this mischaracterization? Well, they can start by calling themselves “progressive.” Moreover, they can contrast themselves with liberals by castigating their opponents as “phony progressives” or perhaps “fairy-tale progressives.” At the same time, they can boast of being the “real progressives” or maybe “rational progressives.” Either way, they can make it plain that liberals are out of touch with reality, while they are not.
The price for not appropriating the progressive mantle has been steep. It allowed the liberals to get away with portraying themselves as the party of change, which translated into attracting two thirds of the youth vote in the last election. The young were bamboozled into believing that Democrats represented their interests, whereas they did not. Unfortunately, the bill for failed liberal polices will soon be theirs to pay.
Similarly, reform-minded moderates were persuaded that Democrats offered social improvements, whereas conservatives were stigmatized as favoring the same old policies as their ancestors. Even though liberals championed a disinterred New Deal, they got away with labeling it “change you can believe in” because Republicans did not emphasize their attachment to social advances.
What conservatives could have done is publicize the progressive nature of the market economy. They could have ballyhooed the creative fervor of individuals allowed to exercise independent initiative. Merely talking about the benefits of small business was obviously not enough.
They could also have explained that strong families were the best hope for preparing children to succeed in a techno-commercial society. What, after all, could be more forward-looking than laying the groundwork for the happiness and prosperity of the next generation?
Nor are freedom and decentralized democracy old-fashioned. Both allow people to control their own destinies. To paraphrase well-loved army advertisements; they allow people to “be the best they can be.” In what way is this being stuck in the past?
Meanwhile self-proclaimed progressives trample on the family, hobble the market economy, and dictate how people should live. Why is that progressive?
It is time to declare that it is not. Indeed, it is time to shout this from the rooftops. Liberalism will not bring improvements, merely government sponsored corruption and run-away inflation. That’s not progress. That is make-believe progress. Paradoxically, it is conservatism that produces genuine advancements.
Melvyn L. Fein. Ph.D.
Professor of Sociology
Kennesaw State University