Republican Foolishness

Republicans are currently engaged in internal ideological warfare. This battle is a waste of time, in my view, because the outcome means nothing, other than generating talking points. When ideologues on the right take action, they can be equally dangerous as those on the left. When ideology is put ahead of practical government, the American people suffer.

Historically, the Republican Party has been known as the party of the wealthy, while the Democratic Party was known as the party of the working class. When the Republican Party was formed in 1854, it was anti-slavery, pro-business, and in favor of national economic development. During the Gilded Age, the party supported minimal regulation and high tariffs. Later, during the New Deal Era, business leaders opposed FDR’s programs and supported Republican candidates.

Before the 1960s, the Republican Party, as the party of conservatives, had no discernible ideology. Their focus on maintaining the status quo and protecting American traditions is not an ideology. The great Economist Friedrich Hayek pointed this out in a paper he wrote in 1960 while at the University of Chicago. He said,

When I say that the conservative lacks principles, I do not mean to suggest that he lacks moral conviction. The typical conservative is indeed usually a man of very strong moral convictions. What I mean is that he has no political principles that enable him to work with people whose moral values differ from his own for a political order in which both can obey their convictions.

Personally, I find that the most objectionable feature of the conservative attitude is its propensity to reject well-substantiated new knowledge because it dislikes some of the consequences which seem to follow from it - or, to put it bluntly, its obscurantism.

Not long after this paper was written, William F. Buckley began his project to build a conservative ideology that could make conservative beliefs work in practice. Buckley brought together three distinct factions to form a Republican ideology: traditional conservatism, libertarianism, and anti-communism.

The libertarian faction featured economists like Milton Friedman, while the anti-communist faction was composed of former socialists who rejected Marxist ideology. These intellectuals included James Burnham, Frank Meyer, Whittaker Chambers (a former communist spy), and Russell Kirk. This new Republican ideology reached maturity in time to elect Ronald Reagan president.

By the end of Reagan’s second term, the new ideology had broken down. Many Republicans decided that winning elections was more important than ideology, so they went off on their own. The anti-communists moved on to embrace a new ideology called Neoconservatism. Since that time, traditional conservatism has been crushed by the advances of the left, including the attack on the family and religion.

Today’s Republican Party has three components: establishment elites, woke right ideologues, and populists. The first group cares nothing for the American people and pretends to be acting in the public interest. The second group tries to cancel those who don’t toe some ideological line. The third group is Trump loyalists who support everything Trump is trying to accomplish.

The out-of-touch behavior of the Republican establishment left the door open for Trump populism. Trump built MAGA by embracing the middle-class workers whom the left had abandoned in favor of Silicon Valley money.

Now we see Republican ideologues engaged in ideological warfare. A recent example was Tucker Carlson’s interview with Nick Fuentes. Fuentes is the go-to guy for many Gen Z men because he talks about issues that directly affect them: jobs, housing, and the pumilling they receive from the left because they are white men.

His Rumble broadcasts are also full of hate for anyone who is not a white man. He claims to respect Hitler and Stalin, is a holocaust denier, and a Christian nationalist. Listening to the Carlson interview made me realize that Fuentes is, in reality, a con man playing two parts. The first part is the Rumble Nick, full of hate. The other Nick appears on podcasts and acts as a moderate to fool people.

Tucker Carlson faced a raft of criticism for failing to challenge Fuentes’ ideological views during the interview. He gave Fuentes a platform to express himself without pushing back. The president of the Heritage Foundation defended Carlson, only to be attacked for doing so. For a week or two, every political podcast debated the Carlson interview, guessing about its significance. Even Trump expressed his support for Carlson. The attacks on Carlson were ideologically driven. The ideologues want Fuentes cancelled because this evil man should not be given a platform to express his views.

Arguing for cancellation is a mistake because giving “evil” a platform exposes the American people to it rather than keeping it hidden. If Fuentes’ views are abhorrent, the American people will figure that out.

When ideologues on the right try to reject Fuentes, they create two problems. First, they prevent his act from being exposed for what it is. Second, they ignore the reasons why he appeals to Gen Z men. Overlooking the importance of his constituency as a political force is a mistake. Millennials and Gen Z will become an increasingly influential force in American politics going forward, so Republicans need to pay attention to their concerns.

A miscalculation there would mimic the miscalculation Republicans are making about MAGA. Republicans have the levers of power because of Trump and MAGA. When Trump exits, the party must be able to address the concerns of this important constituency. So far, the party is not doing a good job. No one is listening to the problems of the average American. If their concerns are not addressed, Republicans will be handing over power to the Democrats.

Republican/conservative ideologues are trying to create an ideology that has never existed before, and is inconsistent with the way most conservatives think. Conservatives care about traditions and family values, not ideology.

Wrong Speak is a free-expression platform that allows varying viewpoints. All views expressed in this article are the author’s own.