LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman. Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
May 21, 2013

 Choose a size
Text Size

Trending:     chris hedges     economy     elizabeth warren     politics     robert scheer
Most Read

Rise Up or Die

Revenge of the Bear: Russia Strikes Back in Syria

Tumblr Is Worth $1.1 Billion to Yahoo for One Reason: You

Real American Boy: How Our Byzantine Immigration System and Failed Economy May Have Made a Terrorist

DOJ Allegedly Spied on Fox News Correspondent, the FBI Investigates Bachmann, and More

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports
 * NEW! * Lock Up Washington
 * NEW! * Too Soon to Tell: The Case for Hope, Continued
 * NEW! * Warming Climate Endangers U.K. Farming

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture
Act of Congress
Daily Rituals
The Girls of Atomic City

Digs

Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Reports

Santorum, Huntsman and the Future of Conservatism

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Jan 5, 2012

By E.J. Dionne, Jr.

MERRIMACK, N.H.—I love watching Republicans engage in class warfare. They condemn it as a sin when Democrats come within 100 miles of even mentioning the sharp and growing class inequalities in the United States. But when conservatives play the class card, they see doing so as a high ethical calling involving the defense of good and moral folk against the depredations of a liberal elite.

Blatant hypocrisy is instructive.

Rick Santorum gave by far the best speech Tuesday night after his boffo performance in the Iowa caucuses. Among the Republicans, he along with Jon Huntsman—and, yes, Ron Paul who is really a libertarian—knows who he is and why he’s running. Santorum has a philosophy (and a theology) that holds his views together. It’s a retro philosophy but no less interesting for that. So comparatively speaking, he comes by his class warfare honestly, even if he panders shamelessly on guns and gays and talks about the straight-laced President Obama as if he embodied the moral sensibilities of Woodstock and Gomorrah.

If the Republicans want to have a genuinely searching debate about the future of their party, they’d send Santorum and Huntsman off for the long fight. Huntsman is a forceful economic conservative, but also resolutely modern. He’s a defender of science, a hard-eyed realist on foreign affairs who rejects Santorum’s neoconservative moralism, and he speaks the policy language of an upper-middle class that likes its politics to focus on deficits and our future competition with China.

Santorum is a Catholic of a certain kind, and it’s the most important thing about him. He’s on one side of a long-standing debate in the church about how to build a decent society. Social justice Catholics (and I’m one of those) represent an older American tradition. We agree with more conservative Catholics on the family as an essential social building block, but see capitalism as in need of regulation and correction if it is to serve the common good, and protect the family itself. Many of us—and here we do depart from the church’s official teaching—see gay marriage not as undermining fidelity and commitment but as encouraging them.

Advertisement

By contrast, Santorum is what Republican strategist Steve Wagner years ago called a “social renewal” Catholic. These Catholics see opposition to abortion as a foundational matter and opposition to gay marriage as essential to “protecting” the family. They view the federal government less as a guarantor of social fairness than as “inflicting harm on the nation’s moral character,” as Wagner has put it.

Huntsman’s core vote, such as it is right now, comes from less intensely religious economic rationalists who do not perceive culture wars as breaking out all over. Santorum reflects the sensibility of the Catholic and evangelical working-class voters whose ballots Republicans have long taken for granted.

Santorum’s surge was easy to see coming. He was the last staunch conservative standing, unscathed by foolish mistakes or by Mitt Romney’s highly efficient and unaccountable manufacturing operation whose product is attack ads. (Bain Capital would have picked it as a winner.) Though Santorum is a Catholic, evangelicals knew he was one of them in spirit, the new ecumenism being more political than theological.

Romney needs to win decisively in New Hampshire. His poll lead is massive, his organization is formidable, and the Republican leaders he has with him here are the sort you want on your side in a fight. But Huntsman is drawing good crowds, and a working-class conservative base in places such as Berlin, Laconia and Manchester that warmed to Pat Buchanan in 1992 and 1996 will find Santorum attractive, even if Buchanan and Santorum are continents apart on foreign policy.

There’s also this: Romney’s super-PAC ads in Iowa created a fierce enemy in Newt Gingrich. The proud former speaker of the House seems determined, for now at least, to do as much damage as he can to the candidate he contemptuously calls “timid.”

This race has come down to the highly disciplined and professional Romney who will say and do what it takes to win, against Santorum and Huntsman who have honest-to-goodness visions of what Republicanism needs to be. Paul will continue to preach Austrian economics (his “We’re all Austrians now” was Tuesday’s most remarkable sound bite), and Gingrich will continue to growl. The pro usually wins these things, but the traditionalist-modernist clash has a lot more to do with the future of conservatism.


E.J. Dionne’s e-mail address is ejdionne(at)washpost.com.
   
© 2011, Washington Post Writers Group


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

oddsox's avatar

By oddsox, January 7, 2012 at 4:47 pm Link to this comment

Dionne, what are you trying to do here?
Create a little suspense, maybe?
Give Huntsman his turn as flavor of the month?
Give Ron Paul a hint to run 3rd party?

Romney is on the brink of and wrapping up the nomination early & you dwell on philosophical differences between Huntsman and Santorum and what they mean for the future of Conservatism.

As if you cared.

The Repub nomination will go to Romney, barring a Ron Paul Miracle. 
Newt can’t beat him.  Newt can’t stop him.
With the MSM now in attack mode, Santorum will melt faster than June snow, that’s already beginning.
Perry and Huntsman are already done.

This election is going to be about jobs. 
Not Obama’s strong suit, thus Dionne will avoid the topic for as long as possible, even with the recent good economic news. 

http://open.salon.com/blog/oddsox/2011/12/31/12_predictions_for_2012

Report this

By Foucauldian, January 6, 2012 at 6:21 pm Link to this comment

It’s difficult to puncture holes in your argument,
Gerard, because it’s all so “reasonable.”  While
black n white—either-or vision is one of
exclusion, I wouldn’t be as hasty as you seem to be
about introducing our moral values into politics.  In
fact, I regard those values as the only basis upon
which to build an equitable society and viable
communities.

Having said that, of course we’ve got a long way to
go.

Report this

By gerard, January 6, 2012 at 3:55 pm Link to this comment

In view of national and world events, it might be wise to ask whether conservatism has any future at all. Conservatives are not much interested in the future and so are unlikely to ask this question. But the question is projecting itself everywhere and will soon be self-evident, if it isn’t already.
  Conservatives look to preserve what they regard as the best of the past—patriotic values (not especially tied to morality, however), what they see as “sound” money policies (meaning free-market capitalism, regulated as little as possible), and avoiding the “evils and excesses” like welfare, which they define as using the tax money of honest, hard-working citizens to support people who are lazy, incompetent and useless. They have no qualms about judging everyone and everything in black or white (not limited to racism but going far beyond it), and they do not like relativism or gradations of meaning and significance.  It’s either/or, and if you say otherwise, you are a liberal, an atheist or an anarchist, all of which is un-American. Militarism, patriotism and American exceptionalism are okay by them. )Those are my biased conclusions—not that I think Liberals are all that great.)
  I do think, however, that Liberals are kinder, gentler and more broadminded, generally speaking. Their values are opposite in most cases They have just as hard a time relating to Conservatives as vice versa. There’s no cure but gradual understanding.
  The world is multifaceted and can never be made to conform beyond the bare minimum to achieve and maintain peace and free itself to face the many possibilities of a changing future.  Conservatism tends to try to stop the clock, which by the very nature of the universe is impossible from the get-go. Therefore, conservatives are fighting a losing battle, no matter what temporary issues they might win. That is cold comfort to Liberals who can never learn enough, and live on discovery and research.
  Chances are, conservatism will gradually be replaced by some blend of rational compromise and wisdom.  Liberalism will also be replaced by ???  Rational compromise and wisdom?
  Thus Spake Zara Schuster.

Report this

By c.d.embrey, January 5, 2012 at 12:02 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I’d love to see a President with “the moral sensibilities of Woodstock”. I find Peace and Love much more appealing than Pandering to Wall Street.

Report this

By Arcelio Martinez, January 5, 2012 at 9:54 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Conservatives operate on hate and disrespect for the
office of PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.  The
outlandish statements of disrespect serve to taint
themselves with the mantra of hate as displayed in
their reactionary ‘‘debates’‘~~The so called debates
were a fiesta of hateful rhetoric filled with anti
everything that would help the average American who is
rapidly leaving the middle class down to the poverty
stricken due to the obstructionists they managed to
elect by being gullible and downright stupid

Report this

By Foucauldian, January 5, 2012 at 9:31 am Link to this comment

Amazing.  Dionne is so concerned about a “genuinely
searching debate about the future of the
[Republican] party.”  When was the last time the
Democrats had any genuinely searching debate about
anything.

Truthdig bills itself as digging beneath the
headlines.  It’s time for Robert Sheer and the rest
of the editorial staff to discontinue republishing
lame columns by political hacks such as Dionne. 
It’s an insult to our intellect and the composition
of the readership.

That would be the best New Year’s resolution I can
think of.

Report this

By Arcelio Martinez, January 5, 2012 at 2:20 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Conservatism is the ultimate oxymoron because those who
claim being a conservative ~ tconserve nothing, and do
nothing for the ordinary American ~ they are anti
everything; anti minority, anti union, anti education,
anti women, anti conservation, anti regulation, etc.. a
good descriptor ~~”“Never have so many done so little
for so few.””  Rooted deep inside the ““conservative”’
philosophy (for lack of a better word) lies the basic
reactionary tendency to keep the less fortunate don.

Report this
Newsletter

sign up to get updates


 
 
 
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
© 2013 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.