• Maw
    2.7k
    After Trump’s unprecedented and surprising election, to “break the liberal bubble” that it was accused of nurturing, the New York Times hired additional conservative voices (Bari Weiss and Bret Stephens) to its op-ed section. By providing a platform for right-wing politics in an otherwise liberal paper the objective was to promote ideas challenging typical liberal preconceptions and conformation biases, and entertain the viability of contemporary right-wing philosophy as argued and elucidated by contemporary conservatives.

    But if the goal of this was to articulate a range of diverse, yet nevertheless conservative/right-wing ideas, then it seems safe to say that the New York Times opinion writers have failed. Since August, many have noted that the New York Time's op-ed page has been religiously devoted to condemning protests, social justice warriors, and liberal identity politics on college campuses, despite the fact that there is no campus free speech crisis.

    There are a few excellent articles that dive into the intellectual poverty and myopia of the conservative side of the New York Times' op-ed section (for example, none of the columnists voted for Trump), but I want to focus on a recent article from Vox which argues that the New York Times' op-ed section simply does not reflect contemporary conservatism, which has morphed into Trumpism, White Nationalism, Anti-Feminism, Biological Essentialism, Race Realism, or other farther right ideas all founded on resentment towards left-wing politics, and fomented by publications such as Breitbart, InfoWars, The Daily Wire, Fox News etc.,

    Taking this as our starting point for the question posed in the discussion title, what is contemporary right-wing politics? Or more importantly, who are the important intellectual leaders that represent these movements by building a systemic political philosophy that can serve as an alternative to liberal politics, rather than existing merely to counter liberalism?

    To my mind, there doesn't seem to be any extant conservative who fits this mold. Ben Shapiro, the young right-wing commentator, whom the New York Times called "the voice of conservative millennials", may be a contender, but Shapiro is mostly concerned with bashing liberal identity politics, transgenderism, "black culture", or simply being hostile to liberalism in all its forms, than seriously guiding contemporary conservatism towards a novel political philosophy. How about Jordan Peterson, a psychologist who dabbles in politics, and was named one of the most influential public intellectuals in the West by The New Yorker? While Peterson's "self-help" psychology could be applied to politics in some ways, Peterson generally disavows political action, and is rightfully considered a "status-quo" conservative. He isn't offering anything new, politically speaking, and denounces activism generally. Is the mantel of contemporary conservatism being carried by the members of the more radical alternative right, such as Steve Bannon, Milo Yiannopoulos, or Richard Spencer? It seems evident to me, however, than their influence as waned recently, and, more to the point, could we even appropriately call them intellectuals?

    So, any idea as to where modern right-wing politics is moving intellectually? Who the intellectual architects are? Are there intellectual architects to speak of, or is it now just predicated on resenting and raging against liberal politics?
  • gurugeorge
    514
    So, any idea as to where modern conservatism is moving intellectually?Maw

    The problem with conservatives is that they're too scared of being called racist to move to the logical next step of the defense of Western civilization they so desperately want to mount: White identity politics.

    Their enemies. the modern Left (and those who would be their friends, if they had their heads screwed on, the Alt Right) see clearly what they don't see: that White identity and the kind of classical liberal politics they like, are intimately connected, and that if the former falls, the latter will fall too.

    There's a double irony here in that yahoos on the modern Left are used to twitting conservatives as racist, etc., but actually they're not, they resist race realism and are still enamoured of "color blindness" and the civic nationalist ideal. (The triple irony would be that even color blindness is called "racist" in some quarters of today's demented humanities :) .)
  • T Clark
    14k
    So, any idea as to where modern conservatism is moving intellectually? Who the intellectual architects are? Are there intellectual architects to speak of, or is conservatism now just predicated on resenting and raging against liberal politics?Maw

    I have no perspective on conservatism as a whole, but I would like to put in a plug for "The American Conservative." Good writers. Moderate in language and at home with nuance and compromise. Strongly anti-war. Low on rabble-rousing and partisanship, long on understanding of political history. Not generally supportive of President Trump. Also great, well-moderated comments sections with very good commenters.

    One of the founders was Patrick Buchanan. His writing here sometimes veers over toward rabble-rousing liberal bashing and Trump support, but I've been surprised at how reasoned and reasonable some of his columns have been.

    I don't know the history of US politics, but it feels like TAC points back to what I have been told is the original base of the Republican Party - A party of farmers and small town businessmen. A focus on tradition, civic responsibility, and self-reliance. A belief in social, cultural, and political institutions, including the church and military. Also a belief in the possible effectiveness of well-run government. A desire to live their lives and participate in their communities without excess outside interference.

    As a liberal, I find myself more at home on the TAC webpage than on Huffington Post or the Washington Post.
  • Thomas H Cullen
    4
    Contemporary conservatism is the hypocrisy of supporting freedom while needing laws and politicians
  • andrewk
    2.1k
    Most people who describe themselves as conservatives these days are not conservative at all, but reactionary. Conservatism is about when in doubt, sticking with the status quo, not about trying to roll back to an era of decades ago.

    Trump is not conservative. The religious right are not conservative. Libertarians are not conservative. I am not sure there are many genuine conservatives in the US, or in other countries, of the type that Edmund Burke would recognise. Perhaps Angela Merkel is a true conservative.

    Interesting discussion on this issue on this podcast: The Minefield: Is conservative politics having an identity crisis
  • Ciceronianus
    3k
    Conservatism was once a respectable political ideology. No longer. Contemporary conservatism (or at least what is called "conservatism") is:

    Sanctimonious, maudlin, self-righteous, narrow, mean, petty, blustering, cretinous, jingoistic, hectoring, fearful, hateful, stupid, totalitarian and sectarian.
  • Agustino
    11.2k
    Sanctimonious, maudlin, self-righteous, narrow, mean, petty, blustering, cretinous, jingoistic, hectoring, fearful, hateful, stupid, totalitarian and sectarian.Ciceronianus the White
    Nope.
  • Benkei
    7.8k
    Most people who describe themselves as conservatives these days are not conservative at all, but reactionary. Conservatism is about when in doubt, sticking with the status quo, not about trying to roll back to an era of decades ago.andrewk

    I have to agree with this. Conservatism has mostly become a catch-all for people resisting some kind of social change. They're all reacting to various things: gay marriage, universal healthcare, emancipation of minorities, other cultures and countries etc. etc. Most self-styled conservatists are fundamentally afraid of losing autonomy or of being left behind. I think that the underlying reality is that for many people times are economically uncertain for most, especially in countries with low social safety nets.

    In a sense, modern conservatism has become a fragmented whole and in the perception of others conversatism has become tainted with the worst aspects of the alt-right, race realists or outright racists, mysogynists et. al.

    To answer the OP; nobody has a clue anymore what conservatism means nowadays. For most self-identified conversatists this is not informed by deep reflection on political philosophy. There are a few philosophical conservatists out there but they're being outshouted by angry people who don't want change or want to go back to when they were more or less guaranteed of a job.
  • Ciceronianus
    3k
    Most self-styled conservatists are fundamentally afraid of losing autonomy or of being left behindBenkei
    In this country, I think it's more likely the case that the fear is of loss of status, or power. The fear is that people unlike them will be treated like them in ways they think is inappropriate.
  • Ciceronianus
    3k
    Nope.Agustino

    Damn. I really thought that's what it is. Ah well.
  • T Clark
    14k
    Damn. I really thought that's what it is. Ah well.Ciceronianus the White

    You can't argue against such a well reasoned argument.
  • Agustino
    11.2k
    You can't argue against such a well reasoned argument.T Clark
    Yeah, a piece of unargued crap like the below deserves no better response:

    Contemporary conservatism (or at least what is called "conservatism") is:

    Sanctimonious, maudlin, self-righteous, narrow, mean, petty, blustering, cretinous, jingoistic, hectoring, fearful, hateful, stupid, totalitarian and sectarian.
    Ciceronianus the White
  • Maw
    2.7k
    "Conservative" is the wrong term here, which I admittedly used slap-dashedly. More appropriately would "Right-Wing" as a umbrella term encompasses all forms of right wing thought and ideology, within which includes conservatism. But I don't want to get the discussion hung up on terminology, however.

    I think we can all agree that, to some extent, Conservatism has lost its allure within contemporary Right-Wing philosophy. The question then is, what is replacing it within mainstream thought, and does this thought have intellectual value?
  • Agustino
    11.2k
    More appropriately would "Right-Wing" as a umbrella term encompasses all forms of right wing thought and ideology, within which includes conservatism.Maw
    No. I am slightly left-leaning and I'm a conservative. As was Russell Kirk or G.K. Chesterton for that matter. This thread is horrendously propagandistic, it's not even funny.
  • Maw
    2.7k
    Lol, everything you don't like is "propaganda". You are a self-described constitutional Monarchist, you are not "slightly-left leaning".
  • Agustino
    11.2k
    You are a self-described constitutional Monarchist, you are not "slightly-left leaning".Maw
    Yeah, constitutional Monarchy can be left-leaning.

    hol280dp89c6qyt3.png
    54o7gby4nxqhjkh2.png
  • Maw
    2.7k
    “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that's all.”
  • Agustino
    11.2k
    That's a nice metaphor for what you do. I've provided two test results which identify me as left-leaning. So far you have provided nothing but prejudice. You don't even know my positions on health care, guns, environment, etc.
  • Noble Dust
    8k
    What is contemporary liberalism? That's the real question.
  • frank
    16k
    I think we can all agree that, to some extent, Conservatism has lost its allure within contemporary Right-Wing philosophyMaw
    "Right-wing" comes from the days of the French revolution. It's the free-market ideology. "Conservative" and "rightist" are frequently used interchangeably, but "conservative" can also reference a backward-looking attitude. 19th century conservatives were monarchists. IOW, the content of conservatism changes. Rightism doesn't change.

    Both seem pretty robust at the moment (in the states, anyway.)
  • Jamal
    9.8k
    Those who sat on the right in the National Assembly and in the assemblies that followed it were the nobility, and the monarchists. It seems to me that neither rightism nor conservatism are essentially (and transhistorically) pro-free-market.

    And there is the obvious fact that fascism is uncontroversially right-wing and yet is not especially pro-free-market, and has in fact often been explicitly against free markets.
  • frank
    16k
    Oops. I'm totally wrong.
  • ssu
    8.7k
    Conservatism and right-wingers and right-wing ideology aren't synonyms.

    Just like "liberal", in the American use of the term, hasn't much to do with true leftist thought of socialism and communism. American democrats aren't socialists and even if some Bernie Sanders can say he is a socialist, compared to Europe he is quite centrist socialist, for many quite right wing.

    And the US is a special case compared to many other countries, were those view themselves "conservatives" would in the US fall in the category of being liberals, democrats or rhinos.


    Hence as the Democratic Party in the US is a centrist right-wing party, it means that basically you will find conservatives also there,
  • Ciceronianus
    3k
    Yeah, a piece of unargued crap like the below deserves no better response:Agustino

    Nope.
  • frank
    16k
    This is why it's confusing: strictly speaking, conservatives aren't supposed to support change. "If it ain't broke don't fix it", as the SEP mentions. But American "conservatives" have a long track record now of actively dismantling depression era regulations, lowering taxes in the name of economic intervention; in short, being something other than conservative or rightist. It was done in the name of capitalist principles. So what's the name for that?
  • Thorongil
    3.2k
    what is contemporary conservatism?Maw

    It exists in many forms. There are neocons and paleocons at the poles and lots of variations in between, not to mention overlap with libertarians and reactionaries. What most conservatives share in common, in the US at least, is a commitment to the principles of the founding.

    any idea as to where modern conservatism is moving intellectually?Maw

    This question is malformed according to a conservative sensibility. Conservatives value what is best in the past. You will, for this reason, not find it moving anywhere intellectually, except in the direction of a better understanding and articulation of its principles.

    Also, I feel compelled to state that Trump is not a conservative, or not much of one.
  • Thorongil
    3.2k
    But American "conservatives" have a long track record now of actively dismantling depression era regulations, lowering taxes in the name of economic intervention; in short, being something other than conservative or rightist. It was done in the name of capitalist principles. So what's the name for that?frank

    The idea is that such regulations, tax schemes, and economic interventions are broken, and so require fixing.
  • Thorongil
    3.2k
    Hence as the Democratic Party in the US is a centrist right-wing party, it means that basically you will find conservatives also there,ssu

    The Democratic party is pretty far to the left these days, if you look at their most recent platform in particular. The last remaining pro-life Democrat barely got reelected recently as well, which is quite telling about how much it's changed.
  • frank
    16k
    The idea is that such regulations, tax schemes, and economic interventions are broken, and so require fixing.Thorongil
    Per the SEP, old school conservatism says to take only small measures no matter how bad things look. 'Don't intervene' is the rule. Conservatives didn't really care what the system is: socialist, capitalist, aristocracy. Whatever it is, honor the forces that brought it into being and leave it alone. Let the people suffer from time to time. That's normal. If we call Reagan an economic conservative because he favored a more free market, I think that means the older style conservatism died out. Maybe with Hoover? Is that true?
  • Maw
    2.7k
    I used the term "Conservatism" in the title and opening post as a synecdoche for right-wing political thought in general, rather than conservatism in particular.

    That said, while Trump is certainly not a conservative, he nevertheless transforming right-wing politics; moving it into a particular direction. The question is: does this boisterous form of politics, which flirts with white supremacy, race realism, advocates economic nationalism, America First priorities, etc., represent the new intellectual movement of right-wing philosophy? An overwhelming amount of Republicans approve of Trump, and we've recently seen the preeminence of public "intellectuals" (perhaps architects is a better word here) who advocate alternative right, or quasi-alternative right politics.
  • Kitty
    30
    Surprisingly good replies here, I almost agree with all of you to a certain extend. Maw, this is a good post and a very good question.

    It is true that you can be conservative and far left leaning economically, as that was the case in the UK. The conservatives wanted to socialise economically, whereas the liberals wanted to privatise it.

    Conservative "intellectuals" (although those people dislike that word) that are alive today, and decently influential, are Roger Scruton and Thomas Sowell. Peter Hitchens could probably also be added to that list.

    My personal pick would be Angela Merkel. She is probably not an intellectual in the sense of the word you intended, but nevertheless a conservative in the classical interpretation -- namely none-ideological none-dogmatic pragmatist.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.