Do They Make Tents That Big?

As British conservatives won a stunning series of local elections two weeks back, folks over here are seeing what can be gleaned from these Tory victories especially as the Republican brand is largely seen as flagging here stateside.

David Brooks from the NYT and Michael C. Moynihan of Reason Magazine have their thoughts here and here, respectively. Both articles focus on Tory leader David Cameron and divine for the Republican Party the strategies for success experienced by conservatives across-the-pond.

The message from both is clear: Move towards the Center. And because of that we are immediately skeptical.

Brooks appears to advocate getting away from an econo-centric message with voters and frame the message in a more holistic manner. Here’s Cameron: “The great challenge of the 1970s and 1980s was economic revival. The great challenge in this decade and the next is social revival.” And separately, “We used to stand for the individual. We still do. But individual freedoms count for little if society is disintegrating. Now we stand for the family, for the neighborhood — in a word, for society.”

And how is this to be accomplished? As Brooks describes it: “These conservatives are not trying to improve the souls of citizens. They’re trying to use government to foster dense social bonds.”

Oh boy...Haven’t we been down this path before? Doesn’t that sound like Bush’s compassionate conservatism or for you more cynical types, like Hillary’s “Politics of Meaning” voodoo. (Well, Hillary of the 90s, that is. Since seen doing shots in Pennsylvania she's ceded that witchcraft to Obama).

In Moynihan’s article, the emphasis was on actual policy shift. He argues that America is indeed becoming more socially tolerant and points to Cameron’s overtures to the gay and lesbian community with a willingness to be open to civil unions. The risk here, of course, is alienating as many or more of your social conservatives and evangelicals as you hope to gain from the gay/lesbian demo.

Look. The overarching message of these articles is not lost on us. We recognize the need for a discussion on “re-branding” or re-assessing your policies, its just that we happen to believe that the core message of individual liberty and responsibility which is inherent to a platform of small government, low taxes, fiscal restraint, free speech, gun rights, school choice, etc. still resonates…. Its just that Republican, independent and swing voters need (R) politicians that actually believe it and more importantly, vote like they believe it when they get to Washington.

One point we will concede: Republicans have done a horrible job on the Environment. Through a combination of abject ignorance on policy and a failure to get out any message on sensible environmental solutions, the Republicans have allowed the Democrats to run away and hide with this issue and because there has been no meaningful debate, we are currently pursuing a policy course whose benefit to the environment is dubious but whose detriment to the economy and the world’s poor may well prove to be disastrous.

We want to leave you tonight with an anecdote from the book “Right Nation” written by two journalists from The Economist, Adrian Wooldridge and John Mickelthwait which informs our skepticism of this proposed rush to the center.

Lyndon Johnson is campaigning in the mid-60s for a fellow Democrat from the back of his limo, glad-handing the crowd. Recently enacted Civil Rights and Great Society legislation has been the fruition of liberal ideology of how government can re-shape society. As Johnson’s motorcade makes its way through the crowd, one gentleman approaches Johnson and shouts above the crowd, “What are you (Democrats) for.” Johnson, at first, seems caught off guard but immediately regains traction seeing this tremendous opening and enthusiastically shouts back: “We’re for a lot of things!”