The Guardian (USA)

The Conservati­ve Sensibilit­y review: George Will and a right wronged

- Lloyd Green

In America, traditiona­l conservati­ves are not having a good day. Their amalgam of limited government, patriotism, rule of law and free markets is in retrograde. On the right, there are those who now yearn for a soul-filled state driven by “order, continuity, and social cohesion” and who demand that individual autonomy take a back seat in an ersatz Eden. On the left, socialism, political correctnes­s and identity politics are cudgels for beating the benighted into submission, winning professori­al tenure and growing the Leviathan of government.

For both groupings, “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” and the resulting right to be left alone are at best debatable propositio­ns. Enter George Will’s latest book, a bracing response to progressiv­ism, “compassion­ate” conservati­sm and neo-Caesarism.

In the eyes of Will, a self-described “amiable atheist”, rights precede government and are a bounty bestowed by the “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God”, to quote the Declaratio­n of Independen­ce. They do not emanate from the state, nor are they conferred by majorities.

Will, a columnist at the Washington Post and former panelist at ABC and Fox, now regularly appears on MSNBC. That says plenty about the state of 1980s Reaganism. It is no longer the religion of the party faithful, a reality of which Will is acutely aware but which he refuses to embrace as his own.

As Will recently explained, “You may notice that in my book the name Donald Trump doesn’t appear … Neither does the name of Charlemagn­e or Doris Day or Humphrey Bogart. None of them have anything to do with conservati­sm.”

Many would beg to differ, especially the president and his minions. Will has ceased to be a member of the GOP, which he brands a personalit­y cult.

The Conservati­ve Sensibilit­y, a 640page tome, focuses on America’s origins and developmen­t. Will happily observes that John Locke was a muse to Thomas Jefferson’s Declaratio­n of Independen­ce and to James Madison and his constituti­on. As Will frames things: “The constituti­on is John Locke’s political philosophy translated into institutio­nal architectu­re.” At that moment, the Word was made marble and given the force of law.

By that same measure, when it comes to the civil war Will is a unionist to his core and an ardent fan of Abraham Lincoln. It is Lincoln’s fealty to America’s founders and foundation­al documents that enshrines him in Will’s pantheon. On that score, the book opens with an excerpt from a speech Lincoln delivered in 1838.

In Will’s words: “Lincoln’s greatness was commensura­te with that of the founders because his overarchin­g purpose was to reconnect the nation with the founders” and their “natural rights tradition”. For Will, as for Lincoln, the American experiment is about a certain July day in 1776 and what came next.

Will captures Lincoln weeks before he is to assume the presidency, saying: “I have never had a feeling politicall­y that did not spring from sentiments embodied by the Declaratio­n of Independen­ce.”

The bright line running from that document to Lincoln conferred a legitimacy on his decision to keep the nation together at a bloody cost. In the end, the horrors of slavery ran counter to the spirit of Jefferson’s best-known work, even if Jefferson was a slaveholde­r.

The grandson of a Lutheran minister, Will looks back at history but is not mired there. He relishes social and technical dynamism and the grenade hurled by Charles Darwin. On the other hand, he has a bone to pick with Woodrow Wilson, progressiv­ism, utopianism and majoritari­anism.

Will finds Wilson’s belief in the malleabili­ty of human nature to run counter to reality, his missionary zeal to be overbearin­g and self-defeating, and his utopianism more harmful than good. In Will’s view, increased inputs do not necessaril­y lead to greater or better outcomes. Nor do majorities necessaril­y deliver wisdom.

Will peruses the 20th century and observes that government’s failures rival if not exceed its successes. He also recalls progressiv­ism’s early affinity for eugenics. As a matter of policy and preference, Will puts a premium on personal autonomy, and that places him directly at odds with the arc of government over the past century.

According to The Conservati­ve Sensibilit­y, the supreme court got it right in its 1905 decision in Lochner, which struck down a New York law that set a legal maximum on the number of hours in the workplace as an unconstitu­tional encroachme­nt on the right to contract. The court again reached the correct conclusion in 2003 when it ruled in Lawrence that Texas’s sodomy statute violated the constituti­on’s guarantee of due process – over a dissent by Antonin Scalia.

Will argues that “Scalia, consistent in his majoritari­anism, was as wrong about Lawrenceas he was about Lochner.” In light of Justice Clarence Thomas recently taking aim at contracept­ion in Box, an unsuccessf­ul challenge to Indiana’s abortion laws, it is unlikely the debate over privacy and the reach of government will end any time before the 2020 elections. If ever.

For Will, the political is not reflexivel­y the personal. Nor is it driven by the urge to “own the libs”. Among other things, The Conservati­ve Sensibilit­y brims with admiration for the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a Democrat who served in the Nixon and Ford administra­tions and in the Senate.

Will does not predict what comes next. But it is also safe to say that America, the Republican party and conservati­sm are all in flux. The GOP is no longer home to John Cheever’s world and aspiration­al America. In 2018, suburban moms flipped the House. Paint Greenwich and Rye reliably blue.

These days, fewer than three in 10 Republican­s are white voters with a BA or better. Instead, nearly 60% of the party’s support comes from whites without a four-year degree. Even after Trump leaves office, don’t expect Will’s brand of conservati­sm to find a warm welcome in what once was the Party of Lincoln. To be sure, America is poorer for that.

In my book the name Donald Trump doesn’t appear … Neither does the name of Charlemagn­e or Doris Day or Humphrey Bogart

 ??  ?? Donald and Melania Trump at the Lincoln Memorial in January 2017. Photograph: Evan Vucci/AP
Donald and Melania Trump at the Lincoln Memorial in January 2017. Photograph: Evan Vucci/AP
 ??  ?? Daniel Patrick Moynihan, presidenti­al urban affairs adviser, and President Richard Nixon, seen in 1970. Photograph: AP
Daniel Patrick Moynihan, presidenti­al urban affairs adviser, and President Richard Nixon, seen in 1970. Photograph: AP

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States