Symposium: Slogans Aren’t Half Bad!

This article is in response to “Reject Jingoism and Groupthink” by Daniel Larison and is part of the symposium on “Conservatism: What’s Wrong With It and How Can We Make It Right?”

Wariness is in order when confronting the dangers of narrowing ourselves to political activism, and this fault is largely influenced by the imposition of ideological uniformity. But aren’t we still talking about Conservatism? Mr. Larison is right. We are viewed by many–and we view ourselves–as an ideology. Now our choice is: do we reject that altogether, or do we play the cards we have been dealt?

We are Conservatives in a country which is largely opposed to our views and the battle is, at times, daunting. And as with all clashes in the fields of “-isms”, there are both rash and wise ways to fight. But what if the battle necessarily includes political activism through correctly Conservative approaches to policy and ideology?

I am reminded of Russell Kirk’s words:

“The conservative “thinks of political policies as intended to preserve order, justice, and freedom. The ideologue, on the contrary, thinks of politics as a revolutionary instrument for transforming society and even transforming human nature. In his march toward Utopia, the ideologue is merciless.”

We can maintain our activism by concerning ourselves with the distinction that lies in these words. The importance is found in preserving a strict correspondence between activism and party policy and our core beliefs. But if this correspondence exists, I don’t see the problem.

Now, I know localism is important. Further, our values and traditions are not strictly political but also a worldview and philosophical persuasion. There is much to be accomplished in our families, in our communities–even in the beautification of our country which Gerald Russello proposes–that reinforce Conservative values. But part of the morale on the grassroots level is knowing we have a strong public presence through political activism. It is true that there is a necessary caveat which should be voiced as we seek to define our beliefs in precise phrases and policies. The danger of boxing ourselves in and being safely confined to party-policy lurks around every metaphorical corner. But our fight here—like it or not—has been largely confined the political arena, and we must respond accordingly.