“The Language of Priorities Is The Religion of Conservatism”

Another one from The American Conservative's Post-Right blog, where I have certainly set them talking:

So almost said Aneurin Bevan, founder of the British National Health Service. I have changed one word. Can you guess which one?

Do paleocons prioritize the protection of American jobs? If so, then you could have no stauncher allies than the labor unions and their Congressional beneficiaries, whose ranks you might even be able to join. Never mind a President hysterically denounced as a “protectionist” as if that meant anything other than a patriot. If only you were Democrats.

Do paleocons prioritize halting and reversing the national emergency of unrestricted and illegal immigration, and making English, both in law and in fact, the only official language of the United States severally and collectively? If so, then you could have no stauncher allies than the Congressional Black Caucus, or anyone with a largely black electorate. If only you were Democrats.

Do paleocons prioritize fair trade agreements, the repeal of much of the USA PATRIOT Act, the complete end of the neocon war agenda, strict campaign finance reform, a crackdown on corporate influence generally and on corporate welfare in particular, and tax cuts for the pitchfork-wielding poor and middle-earning? These are stated aims of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, with its 11 out of 20 House Committee Chairmanships. When did the Republicans last make a paleocon a Committee Chairman? They would have to let one into Congress first. No one expects paleocons to join the CPC. Or the CPC to let them in, for that matter. But you could certainly line up with its members in order to secure the measures listed here. And you might even get one or two Committee Chairmanships out of it. If only you were Democrats.

Do paleocons prioritize moral and social conservatism? Those who feel most strongly about immigration and about the status of English also feel strongly that marriage is only ever the union of one man and one woman. They made that perfectly clear on the same day as they delivered Florida’s and California’s Electoral College votes to Obama, himself a supporter of traditional marriage. The Republicans have been talking about this for years, just as they have been talking about abortion for years. But they have done absolutely nothing about either. Moral and social conservatives are only there to deliver the votes for big business and its government spending programs, including wars. Giuliani conspicuously failed to mention abortion in his 2008 Convention speech, and no one heckled him about it or anything like that. By contrast, Bob Casey set out his position clearly and was heard respectfully. Paleocons could be fighting for the views of the President and of other black Americans on traditional marriage, and for Casey’s Pregnant Women Support Act, effectively endorsed by Obama at Notre Dame. If only you were Democrats.

Do paleocons prioritize foreign policy realism? That is now the mainline Democratic position, the default option beyond the pacifist Left. Any remaining War Partisans (or, indeed, any anti-defense fanatics) are only a primary challenge away from oblivion. Paleocons could be backing, or even mounting, those challenges on the basis that peace must be defended by deterring aggression, and that “liberal interventionism” is the road to Saigon, Belgrade, Mogadishu, Kabul and Baghdad, the graveyards of huge numbers of young blacks, young Irish Catholics, young Scotch-Irish Southerners and Westerners, and young working-class Democrats in general. If only you were Democrats.

To what extent is the Republican Party now influenced by those who would protect American jobs? Absolutely none. To what extent is the Republican Party now influenced by those who would halt and reverse mass and illegal immigration, and make English the only official language? Absolutely none. To what extent is the Republican Party now influenced by those who would enact fair trade agreements, the repeal of much of the USA PATRIOT Act, the complete end of the neocon war agenda, strict campaign finance reform, a crackdown on corporate influence generally and on corporate welfare in particular, and tax cuts for the pitchfork-wielding poor and middle-earning? Absolutely none. To what extent is the Republican Party now influenced by moral and social conservatives? Judged by deeds rather than by words, absolutely none. To what extent is the Republican Party now influenced by foreign policy realists? Absolutely none, to put it no more strongly than that.

Yes, as Democrats, you would have to put up with some things that you did not want, and to go without out some things that you did want. That would be the price of other Democrats’ support for other things that you wanted, and for foregoing other things that you did not want. That is political reality. Conservatives are supposed to be good at dealing with reality. And this reality would be infinitely preferable to the present one. Whether it is the Republican Party that despises you, or the Democratic Party that you have hitherto barely made aware of your existence, you currently get nothing that you want and everything that you do not want.

What would these things be, that other Democrats would want them, but that they would not be detrimental to the causes of economic patriotism, moral and social conservatism, and foreign policy realism? There is a word for people who define politics in terms of economics, rather than making economic means serve socially, culturally and patriotically political ends. Such people are not called conservatives. They are called Marxists. Neocons are Marxists. But are paleocons Marxists, too?

No Republican since 1974 has won state-wide office in New York without the ballot line endorsement of the Buckley-founded, if lately a bit neocon, Conservative Party of New York State. And this has achieved what, exactly, in such causes as family values, strictly limited and strictly legal immigration, constitutional checks and balances, national security, energy independence, Second Amendment rights and responsibilities, America as an English-speaking country, and foreign policy realism? New York Republicans take the Conservative Party for granted, just as the Republican Party at large takes paleocons at large for granted. Imagine the shockwaves from the election of a Democrat as a New York Senator or Governor with the endorsement of the Conservative Party because of his or her stand on those issues (even if not necessarily on others, since politics is like that). But do not just imagine it. Make it happen.

2012 would be a bit soon for something like this to have done its work. But by 2016, the Republican Party shows every sign that it will still be in disarray, even without the mass secessions of economic patriots, moral and social conservatives, and foreign policy realists. So a more-or-less paleocon Democrat as Vice-President, with further such in several Cabinet and other positions, would be perfectly possible, and indeed probable if the game were played properly. And then a more-or-less paleocon Democrat for President in 2024? Why not?

That may seem a long time to wait. But it would still be better than the “never” on offer from the Republican Party.

If only you were Democrats.