{"id":82263,"date":"2019-06-04T17:01:08","date_gmt":"2019-06-04T21:01:08","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/kendallharmon.net\/?p=82263"},"modified":"2019-06-04T19:07:26","modified_gmt":"2019-06-04T23:07:26","slug":"the-david-french-sohrab-ahmari-contretemps-v-nyt-op-ed-ross-douthat-what-are-conservatives-actually-debating-what-the-strange-war-over-david-french-ism-says-about-the-right","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/kendallharmon.net\/?p=82263","title":{"rendered":"The David French–Sohrab Ahmari Contretemps (V): (NYT Op-ed) Ross Douthat–What Are Conservatives Actually Debating? What the strange war over \u201cDavid French-ism\u201d says about the right"},"content":{"rendered":"

Still, you can see three broad demands at work in their arguments. First, they want social conservatives to exercise more explicit power within the conservative coalition.<\/em><\/p>\n

This may sound like a strange idea, since, after all, it is social conservatism\u2019s growing political weakness, its cultural retreat, that led the religious right to throw in with a cruel sybarite like Trump. But there\u2019s a plausible argument that even with its broader influence reduced, religious conservatism should still wield more power than it does in Republican politics \u2014 that it outsources too much policy thinking to other factions, that it goes along with legislation written for business interests so long as the promised judicial appointments are dangled at the end, and that it generally acts like a junior partner even though it delivers far more votes.<\/p>\n

A more assertive form of social conservatism is already visible in the state-level pushes to substantially restrict abortion, which amount to a demand that all those Republican court appointees actually deliver the latitude for pro-life legislation that generations of religious conservatives voted for. It\u2019s visible in the forays made by Missouri\u2019s new Republican senator, Josh Hawley, who has incited small uproars by imposing sharper abortion and religious-liberty litmus tests than usual on the Trump administration\u2019s judicial nominees, and by taking an explicitly censorious stance toward Silicon Valley.<\/p>\n

But a more assertive social conservatism would also pursue the second thing that the post-fusionist conservatives seem to want \u2014 namely, stronger state interventions in the economy on behalf of socially conservative ends<\/em>.<\/p>\n

These interventions might include more aggressive versions of the pro-family tax policies championed by Republican senators like Marco Rubio and Mike Lee. They might take the form of a new pro-family industrial policy of the kind Trump gestures at but hasn\u2019t really pursued, some kind of infrastructure spending or manufacturing support that tries to revive the breadwinner wage. Or they might take the form of the kind of trustbusting culture war envisioned by Hawley, in which the new formations of woke capital, especially in Silicon Valley, get regulated in the name of both economic fairness and cultural conservatism.<\/p>\n

Then alongside these practical power plays and policy moves, the post-fusionists want something bigger: A philosophical reconsideration of where the liberal order has ended up. <\/em>How radical that reconsideration ought to be varies with the thinker.<\/p>\n

Read it all<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\n

A great introduction to the intramural fights on the American right:
\nWhat Are Conservatives Actually Debating? https:\/\/t.co\/F0B11kHFWk<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Mark Movsesian (@MarkMovsesian) June 4, 2019<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n