The Trouble With Social Conservatives
Back a while ago, when I was complaining about Republicans who think the GOP has just too darn many religious voters ("funny, so do the Democrats"), I promised I would explain how social conservatives have contributed to this misimpression — and also to their oddly subordinated role within the GOP governing coalition. It's simple. Social conservatives have had bad models for political action. We've depended on two basic strategies, and neither of them work very well: 1. The Mass-Uprising Model. "The people will rise up and throw off their oppressors spontaneously." Well, it's nice when it happens, but it's hardly a plan, is it? 2. The Secular-Messiah Model: Join with others in the GOP to elect a godly man to office and then expect him to solve all your problems for you. For example, some thought Bush was responsible for failing to pass a Federal Marriage Amendment — at a time when the poor man was 33 percent in the polls. Gay-rights groups don't behave like this. They understand it's their job to make it easy for politicians to do what they ask, not the other way around. Social conservatives simply have not been in politics. We lack institutions that can defeat our enemies and directly assist our friends. After a while, threatening to leave the coalition unless the coalition does what you want gets old. And tiring. And ineffective. It makes your allies not like you very much. Social conservatives talk like that because it's our one lever of power. Time to get some new levers.
1 comments:
A model not used much since before the middle ages of the single combat warrior. One warrior goes into battle, the outcome determining the fate of the nation.
Tim Eyeman in Washington State is a possible modern example (permanent-offense.org/). His ambition seems to be to operate a small office and bother as many politicians as possible. Eyeman provides a focus and some useful results for his backers. Plus he has become a newsmaker for responsible government.
Lefties have used this approach, but they have always aspired to the public payroll. I guess it beats working.
Post a Comment