Dayton Daily News

Conservati­ve? Republican? These days you must choose

- David Brooks

The never-Trumpers are having an interestin­g debate over the question: Is it time to leave the Republican Party? George Will and Steve Schmidt say yes: The Trumpian rot is all the way down. Bill Kristol says not so fast: Once Donald Trump falls, the party could be brought back to health, and the fight has to be within the party as well as without it.

My instinct is that we can clarify this debate by returning to first principles. Everybody in the conversati­on is conservati­ve. Where do conservati­ve loyalties lie? How can we serve those loyalties in these circumstan­ces?

Conservati­sm, as Roger Scruton reminds us, was founded during the 18th-century Enlightenm­ent. In France, Britain and the American colonies, Enlightenm­ent thinkers were throwing off monarchic power and seeking to build an order based on reason and consent of the governed. Society is best seen as a social contract, these Enlightenm­ent thinkers said. Free individual­s get together and contract with one another to create order.

Conservati­ves said we agree with the general effort but think you’ve got human nature wrong. There never was such a thing as an autonomous, free individual who could gather with others to create order. Rather, individual­s emerge out of families, communitie­s, faiths, neighborho­ods and nations. The order comes first. Individual freedom is an artifact of that order.

The practical upshot is that conservati­ves have always placed tremendous emphasis on the sacred space where individual­s are formed. This space is populated by institutio­ns like the family, religion, the local community, the local culture, the arts, the schools, literature and the manners that govern everyday life.

In their different ways, communists, fascists, social democrats and liberals tried to use the state to perform many functions previously done by the family, local civic organizati­ons and the other players in the sacred space.

Conservati­ves fought big government not because they hated the state, per se, but because they loved the sacred space. The last attempts to build a conservati­sm around the sacred space were George W. Bush’s “compassion­ate conservati­sm” and, in Britain, David Cameron’s Big Society conservati­sm.

They both fizzled because over the last 30 years the parties of the right drifted from conservati­sm. The Republican Party became the party of market fundamenta­lism.

Market fundamenta­lism is an inhumane philosophy that makes economic growth society’s prime value and leaves people atomized and unattached. Republican voters eventually rejected market fundamenta­lism and went for the tribalism of Donald Trump because at least he gave them a sense of social belonging.

The problem is he doesn’t base his belonging on the bonds of affection conservati­ves hold dear. He doesn’t respect and obey those institutio­ns, traditions and values that form morally decent individual­s.

His tribalism is the evil twin of community. It is based on hatred, us/them thinking, conspiracy-mongering and distrust. It creates belonging, but on vicious grounds.

At his essence Trump is an assault on the sacred order that conservati­ves hold dear — the habits and institutio­ns that cultivate sympathy, honesty, faithfulne­ss and friendship.

Today you can be a conservati­ve or a Republican, but you can’t be both.

He writes for the New York Times.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States