Conservatism in the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For related and other uses, see Conservatism (disambiguation)
The Conservatism series,
part of the Politics series
Schools
Cultural conservatism
Liberal conservatism
Social conservatism
National conservatism
Neoconservatism
Paleoconservatism
Ideas
Fiscal conservatism
Private property
Rule of law
Social order
Traditional society
Organizations
Conservative parties
Int'l Democrat Union
European Democrats
Movement for European Reform
National Variants
Australia
Canada
Colombia
Germany
United States
Politics Portal
This box: view • talk • edit

Conservatism in the United States comprises a constellation of political ideologies including fiscal conservatism, supply-side economics, social conservatism,[1] libertarianism, bioconservatism and religious conservatism,[2] as well as support for a strong military,[3] and federalism. Modern American conservatism was largely born out of alliance between classic liberals and social conservatives in the late 19th and early 20th century.[4]

Contents

[edit] History

[edit] Founding Fathers

Some Loyalists of the American Revolution were political conservatives, a few of whom produced political discourse of a high order, including lawyer Joseph Galloway and governor-historian Thomas Hutchinson. After the war, many remained in the U.S. and became citizens, but some leaders emigrated to other places in the British Empire. Samuel Seabury was a Loyalist who returned and as the first American bishop played a major role in shaping the Episcopal religion, a stronghold of conservative social values.

In his book The Conservative Mind, Russell Kirk identifies John Adams as the first American Conservative. Adams' book A Defence of the Constitution of the Government of the United States of America is considered by Kirk as the first Conservative manifesto in America. Adams' believed in the supremacy of law and that liberty should be subordinate to law. Adams' also distrusted the people as a mass. Adams was the only member of the Federalist Party to become President of the United States. Adams rejected the notions of the French revolution, which Jefferson in part supported. And unlike Jefferson, Adams rejected the idea of agrarian republicanism. Adams outright rejected the ideas of Monarchy and Aristocracy demanding there be a government of laws and not of men. The Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts was written by Adams and is the oldest written Constitution in the world.[dubious – discuss]

The Founding Fathers created the single most important set of political ideas in American history, known as republicanism, which all groups, liberal and conservative alike, have drawn from. The Federalist Party, followers of Alexander Hamilton, developed an important variation of republicanism that can be considered conservative. Rejecting monarchy and aristocracy, they emphasized civic virtue as the core American value. The Federalists spoke for the propertied interests and the upper classes of the cities. They envisioned a modernizing land of banks and factories, with a strong army and navy.

On many issues American conservatism also derives from the republicanism of Thomas Jefferson and his followers, especially John Randolph of Roanoke and his "Old Republican" followers. They idealized the yeoman farmer as the epitome of civic virtue, warned that banking and industry led to corruption, that is to the illegitimate use of government power for private ends. Jefferson himself was a vehement opponent of what today is called "judicial activism". [5] The Jeffersonians stressed States' Rights and small government. In the 1830-54 period the Whig Party attracted conservatives such as Daniel Webster of New England.

[edit] Antebellum: Calhoun and Webster

Daniel Webster and other leaders of the Whig Party, called it the conservative party in the late 1830s.[6] John C. Calhoun, a Democrat, articulated a sophisticated conservatism in his writings. Richard Hofstadter (1948) called him "The Marx of the Master Class." Calhoun argued that a conservative minority should be able to limit the power of a "majority dictatorship" because tradition represents the wisdom of past generations. (This argument echoes one made by Edmund Burke, the founder of British conservatism, in Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790)). Calhoun is considered the father of the idea of minority rights, a position adopted by liberals in the 1960s in dealing with Civil Rights.

The conservatism of the antebellum period is contested territory; conservatives of the 21st century disagree over what comprises their heritage. Thus William Bennett (2006) a prominent conservative leader, tells conservatives to NOT honor Calhoun, Know-Nothings, Copperheads and 20th century isolationists.

[edit] Lincoln to Cleveland

Since 1865 the Republican party has identified itself with President Abraham Lincoln, who was the ideological heir of the Whigs and of both Jefferson and Hamilton. As the Gettysburg Address shows, Lincoln cast himself as a second Jefferson bringing a second birth of freedom to the nation that had been born 86 years before in Jefferson's Declaration. The Copperheads of the Civil War reflected a reactionary opposition to modernity of the sort repudiated by modern conservatives. A few libertarians have adopted a neo-Copperhead position, arguing Lincoln was a dictator who created an all-powerful government.

In the late 19th century the Bourbon Democrats, led by President Grover Cleveland, preached against corruption, high taxes (protective tariffs), and imperialism, and supported the gold standard and business interests. They were overthrown by William Jennings Bryan in 1896, who moved the mainstream of the Democratic Party permanently to the left.

The 1896 presidential election was the first with a conservative versus liberal theme approaching the way in which these terms are now understood in the U.S. Republican William McKinley won using the pro-business slogan "sound money and protection," while the anti-bank and populism of the Democratic nominee, William Jennings Bryan, had a lasting effect on his party.

William Graham Sumner, an influential Yale professor (1872-1910) and polymath, vigorously promoted a libertarian conservative ethic. After dallying with Social Darwinism under the influence of Herbert Spencer, he rejected evolution in his later works, and strongly opposed imperialism. He opposed monopoly and paternalism in theory as a threat to equality, democracy and middle class values, but was vague on what to do about it.[7]

[edit] Early 20th century

Robert A. Taft
Robert A. Taft
See also: Old Right (United States)

In the Progressive Era (1890s-1932), regulation of industry expanded at a rapid pace. Much of the opposition to this governmental expansion came from the remaining classic liberals in the Democratic Party and the corporatists in the Republican Party.

Because of their corporatist views, it was quite common for the leading Republicans at the time to go back and forth between supporting and opposing progressive measures. For instance, while opposed to many of the progressive reforms, Nelson Aldrich nevertheless supported the proposal for a strong national banking system which came to be known as the Federal Reserve System in 1913. In a similar fashion, Theodore Roosevelt, the dominant personality of the era, took some "conservative" and some "liberal" stances on the major issues of the time. While leading the fight to make the country a major naval power, and demanded entry into World War I to stop what he saw as the German attacks on civilization, he nonetheless supported numerous trust busting actions. His successor, William Howard Taft, was also characterized by the same back and forth between "conservative" and "liberal" views. While in office, he promoted a strong federal judiciary that would overrule excessive legislation. Taft defeated Roosevelt on that issue in 1912, forcing Roosevelt out of the GOP and turning it to the right for decades. As president, Taft remade the Supreme Court with five appointments; he himself presided as chief justice in 1921-30, the only former president ever to do so.

Pro-business Republicans returned to dominance in 1920 with the election of President Warren G. Harding. The presidency of Calvin Coolidge (1923-29) was a high water mark for conservatism, both politically and intellectually. Classic writing of the period includes Democracy and Leadership (1924) by Irving Babbitt and H.L. Mencken's magazine American Mercury (1924-33). The Efficiency Movement attracted many conservatives such as Herbert Hoover with its pro-business, pro-engineer approach to solving social and economic problems. Furthermore, in the 1920s many American conservatives generally maintained antiforeign attitudes and, as usual, were disinclined toward changes to the healthy economic climate of the age.

During the Great Depression, other conservatives participated in the taxpayers' revolt at the local level. From 1930 to 1933, Americans formed as many as 3,000 taxpayers' leagues to protest high property taxes. These groups endorsed measures to limit and rollback taxes, lowered penalties on tax delinquents, and cuts in government spending. A few also called for illegal resistance (or tax strikes). Probably the best known of these was led by the Association of Real Estate Taxpayers in Chicago which, at its height, had 30,000 dues-paying members.

An important intellectual movement, calling itself Southern Agrarians and based in Nashville, brought together like-minded novelists, poets and historians who argued that modern values undermined the traditions of American republicanism and civic virtue.

The Depression brought liberals to power under President Franklin D. Roosevelt (1933). Indeed the term "liberal" now came to mean a supporter of the New Deal. In 1934 Al Smith and pro-business Democrats formed the American Liberty League to fight the new liberalism, but failed. In 1936 the Republicans rejected Hoover and tried the more liberal Alf Landon, who carried only Maine and Vermont. When Roosevelt tried to pack the Supreme Court in 1937 the conservatives finally cooperated across party lines and defeated it with help from Vice President John Nance Garner. Roosevelt unsuccessfully tried to purge the conservative Democrats in the 1938 election. The conservatives in Congress then formed a bipartisan informal Conservative Coalition of Republicans and southern Democrats. It largely controlled Congress from 1937 to 1964. Its most prominent leaders were Senator Robert Taft, a Republican of Ohio, and Senator Richard Russell, Democrat of Georgia.

In the United States, the Old Right, also called the Old Guard, was a group of libertarian, free-market anti-interventionists, originally associated with Midwestern Republicans and Southern Democrats. The Republicans (but not the southern Democrats) were isolationists in 1939-41, (see America First), and later opposed NATO and U.S. military intervention in Korea. According to historian Murray Rothbard, "the libertarian intellectuals were in the minority...[and] theirs was the only thought-out contrasting ideology to the New Deal."

[edit] Later 20th century: Goldwater, Buckley, the Dixiecrats

Barry Goldwater
Barry Goldwater

By 1950, American liberalism was so dominant intellectually that author Lionel Trilling could all but completely dismiss contemporary conservatism: "liberalism is not only the dominant but even the sole intellectual tradition... there are no conservative or reactionary ideas in circulation...." [8]

In the 1950s, principles for a conservative political movement were hashed out in books like Russell Kirk's The Conservative Mind (1953) and in the pages of the magazine National Review, founded by William F. Buckley Jr. in 1955. National Review editor Frank Meyer used the pages of the magazine to advocate "fusionism", the combination of traditional conservatives and libertarians into a unique American style of conservatism.

Whereas Taft's Old Right had been isolationist the new conservatism favored American intervention overseas to oppose communism. It looked to the Founding Fathers for historical inspiration as opposed to Calhoun and the antebellum South.

Ironically, as the Democratic Party became identified with the American Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s through 1970s, many former southern Democrats joined the Republican Party, even in the face of greater proportional support for civil rights legislation among Republicans, thereby increasingly cementing the Republicans' alignment as a conservative party. Senator Barry Goldwater, sometimes known as "Mr. Conservative," argued in his 1960 Conscience of a Conservative that conservatives split on the issue of civil rights due to some conservatives advocating ends (integration, even in the face of what they saw as unconstitutional Federal involvement) and some advocating means (constitutionality above all else, even in the face of segregation). Republicans joined northern Democrats to override a filibuster of the Civil Rights Act in 1964. Later that year, Goldwater was resoundingly defeated by President Lyndon B. Johnson.

Out of this defeat emerged the New Right, a political movement that coalesced through grassroots organizing in the years preceding Goldwater's 1964 presidential campaign. The American New Right is distinct from and opposed to the more moderate/liberal tradition of the so-called Rockefeller Republicans, and succeeded in building a policy approach and electoral apparatus that propelled Ronald Reagan into the White House in the 1980 presidential election.

[edit] Nixon, Reagan, and Bush

See also: Nixon and the liberal consensus

The Republican administrations of President Richard Nixon in the 1970s were characterized more by their emphasis on realpolitik, détente, and economic policies such as wage and price controls, than by their adherence to conservative views in foreign and economic policy.

Ronald W. Reagan
Ronald W. Reagan

Thus, it was not until the election of 1980 and the subsequent eight years of Ronald Reagan's presidency that the American conservative movement truly achieved ascendancy. In that election, Republicans took control of the Senate for the first time since 1954, and conservative principles dominated Reagan's economic and foreign policies, with supply side economics and strict opposition to Soviet Communism defining the Administration's philosophy.

An icon of the American conservative movement, Reagan is credited by his supporters with transforming the politics of 1980s United States, galvanizing the success of the Republican Party, uniting a coalition of economic conservatives who supported his economic policies, known as "Reaganomics," foreign policy conservatives who favored his staunch opposition to Communism and the Soviet Union over the détente of his predecessors, and social conservatives who identified with Reagan's conservative religious and social ideals. Reagan, in attempting to define conservativism, said: "If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals -- if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is."[9]

It is hotly debated whether the successive Republican Administrations of Presidents George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush are truly conservative.[citation needed] George W. Bush campaigned in 2000 as a "compassionate conservative," but only adopted part of the conservative platform.[citation needed] He has cut taxes and is strongly pro-business. He is seen as a strong supporter of God and country. On the other hand, he has greatly increased the size, power, and spending of the federal government, and the size of the national debt, both of which are against general conservatism. Peggy Noonan, in the Wall Street Journal, wrote, "For this we fought the Reagan revolution? A year into his second term, President Bush is redefining what it means to be a Republican and a conservative."[citation needed]

[edit] Types of conservatism

In the United States today, the word "conservative" is often used very differently from the way the word was used in the past and still is used in many parts of the world. The core ideals of historical conservatism were preserving the power of the land-owning class and preserving strong ties between church and state. As the industrial revolution led to a new manufacturing and professional elite, the ideals of conservatism changed to embrace laisse faire economics and an oposition to socialism.[10] In the United States, from the mid-20th Century on, these two forms of conservatism have formed an alliance. Barry Goldwater is one example of a "free enterprise" conservative; Jerry Falwell is an example of a Christian conservative.

In the 21st century US, some of the groups calling themselves "conservative" include:

1. Classical or institutional conservatism — Opposition to rapid change in governmental and societal institutions. This kind of conservatism is anti-ideological insofar as it emphasizes process (slow change) over product (any particular form of government). To the classical conservative, whether one arrives at a government controlled by a particular political party is less important than whether change is effected through rule of law rather than through revolution and sudden innovation. The classical conservative emphasizes historical continuity, to ensure that a reform does not cause chaos within both the populace and historical institutions of a given society. Classical conservatives also favor tradition over experimentation, and have an inherent distrust in utopian schemes.

2. Ideological conservatism or right-wing conservatism — In contrast to the anti-ideological classical conservatism, right-wing conservatism is, as its name implies, ideological. It favors business and established religion, and opposes socialism and communism.

3. Conservative Christians— are primarily interested in what they describe as family values. They believe that the United States is a Christian nation, and favor teacher-led Christian prayer in the public schools, the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman, and censorship of the media to remove sexual references. They strongly oppose the normalization of homosexuality.

4. Neoconservatism — a modern form of conservatism that supports a more assertive foreign policy, aimed at supporting American business interests abroad. Neoconservatism was first described by a group of disaffected liberals, and thus Irving Kristol, usually credited as its intellectual progenitor, defined a "neoconservative" as "a liberal who was mugged by reality." Although originally regarded as an approach to domestic policy (the founding instrument of the movement, Kristol's The Public Interest periodical, did not even cover foreign affairs), through the influence of figures like Dick Cheney, Robert Kagan, Richard Perle, Ken Adelman and (Irving's son) William Kristol, it has become more famous for its association with the foreign policy of the George W. Bush administration.

5. Small government conservatism — Small government conservatives look for a decreased role of the federal government. They follow the Founding Fathers in their suspicion of a powerful federal government.

6. Paleoconservatism, which arose in the 1980s in reaction to neoconservatism, stresses tradition, especially Christian tradition and the importance to society of the traditional family. They strongly oppose government intervention into people's lives.[1] [2] [3] Some, Samuel P. Huntington for example, argue that multiracial, multiethnic, and egalitarian states are inherently unstable.[11] Paleoconservatives are generally isolationist, and suspicious of foreign ideas.

7. Libertarian conservatism emphasizes a strict interpretation of the Constitution of the United States, particularly with regard to federal power. This mode of thinking tends to espouse laissez-faire economics and a disdain for and distrust of the federal government. Libertarian conservatives' emphasis on personal freedom often leads them to adopt social positions contrary to those of Christian conservatives.

[edit] Conservatism as "ideology," or political philosophy

Classical conservatives tend to be anti-ideological, and some would even say anti-philosophical,[12] promoting rather, as Russell Kirk explains, a steady flow of "prescription and prejudice." Kirk's use of the word "prejudice" here is not intended to carry its contemporary pejorative connotation: a conservative himself, he believes that the inherited wisdom of the ages may be a better guide than apparently rational individual judgment.

In contrast to classical conservatism, social conservatism and fiscal conservatism are concerned with consequences as well as means.

There are two overlapping subgroups of social conservatives—the traditional and the religious. Traditional conservatives strongly support traditional codes of conduct, especially those they feel are threatened by social change. For example, traditional conservatives may oppose the use of female soldiers in combat. Religious conservatives focus on conducting society as prescribed by a religious authority or code. In the United States this translates into taking hard-line stances on moral issues, such as opposition to abortion and homosexuality. Some religious conservatives go so far as to support the use of government institutions to promote religiosity in public life.

Fiscal conservatives support limited government, limited taxation, and a balanced budget. Some admit the necessity of taxes, but hold that taxes should be low. A recent movement against the inheritance tax labels such a tax a death tax. Fiscal conservatives often argue that competition in the free market is more effective than the regulation of industry, with the exception of industries that exhibit market dominance or monopoly powers. For some this is a matter of principle, as it is for the libertarians and others influenced by thinkers such as Ludwig von Mises, who believed that government intervention in the economy is inevitably wasteful and inherently corrupt and immoral. For others, "free market economics" simply represents the most efficient way to promote economic growth: they support it not based on some moral principle, but pragmatically, because it "works".

Most modern American fiscal conservatives accept some social spending programs not specifically delineated in the Constitution. As such, fiscal conservatism today exists somewhere between classical conservatism and contemporary consequentialist political philosophies.

Throughout much of the 20th century, one of the primary forces uniting the occasionally disparate strands of conservatism, and uniting conservatives with their liberal and socialist opponents, was opposition to communism, which was seen not only as an enemy of the traditional order, but also the enemy of western freedom and democracy. For example, in the 1980s, the United States government spent billions of dollars arming and supporting Islamic terrorists, because these terrorists were fighting communists. [13]

[edit] Social conservatism and tradition

Main article: Social conservatism

Social conservatism or "cultural conservatism" is generally dominated by defense of traditional social norms and values, of local customs and of societal evolution, rather than social upheaval, though the distinction is not absolute. Often based upon religion, modern cultural conservatives, in contrast to "small-government" conservatives and "states-rights" advocates, increasingly turn to the federal government to overrule the states in order to preserve educational and moral standards.

Social conservatives emphasize traditional views of social units such as the family, church, or locale. Social conservatives would typically define family in terms of local histories and tastes. To the Protestant or Catholic, social conservatism may entail support for defining marriage as between a man and a woman (thereby banning gay marriage) and laws placing restrictions on abortion.

From this same respect for local traditions comes the correlation between conservatism and patriotism.[citation needed] Conservatives, out of their respect for traditional, established institutions, tend to strongly identify with nationalist movements, existing governments, and its defenders: police, the military, and national poets, authors, and artists. Conservatives hold that military institutions embody admirable values like honor, duty, courage, and loyalty. Military institutions are independent sources of tradition and ritual pageantry that conservatives tend to admire.

Some conservatives want to use federal power to block state actions they disapprove of. Thus in the 21st century came support for the "No Child Left Behind" program, support for a constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage, support for federal laws overruling states that attempt to legalize marijuana or assisted suicide. The willingness to use federal power to intervene in state affairs is the negation of the old state's rights position.

Anti-intellectualism has sometimes been a component of social conservatism, especially when intellectuals were seen in opposition to religion or as proponents of "progress". [14] In the 1920s, William Jennings Bryan led the battle against Darwinism and evolution, a battle which still goes on in some conservative circles today.

[edit] Fiscal conservatism

Main article: Fiscal conservatism

Fiscal conservatism is the economic and political policy that advocates restraint of governmental taxation and expenditures. Fiscal conservatives since the 19th century have argued that debt is a device to corrupt politics; they argue that big spending ruins the morals of the people, and that a national debt creates a dangerous class of speculators. The argument in favor of balanced budgets is often coupled with a belief that government welfare programs should be narrowly tailored and that tax rates should be low, which implies relatively small government institutions.

This belief in small government combines with fiscal conservatism to produce a broader economic liberalism, which wishes to minimize government intervention in the economy. This amounts to support for laissez-faire economics. This economic liberalism borrows from two schools of thought: the classical liberals' pragmatism and the libertarian's notion of "rights." The classical liberal maintains that free markets work best, while the libertarian contends that free markets are the only ethical markets.

[edit] Economic liberalism

The economic philosophy of conservatives in the United States tends to be more liberal allowing for more economic freedom. Economic liberalism can go well beyond fiscal conservatism's concern for fiscal prudence, to a belief or principle that it is not prudent for governments to intervene in markets. It is also, sometimes, extended to a broader "small government" philosophy. Economic liberalism is associated with free-market, or laissez-faire economics.

Economic liberalism, insofar as it is ideological, owes its creation to the "classical liberal" tradition, in the vein of Adam Smith, Friedrich A. Hayek, Milton Friedman, and Ludwig von Mises.

Classical liberals and libertarians support free markets on moral, ideological grounds: principles of individual liberty morally dictate support for free markets. Supporters of the moral grounds for free markets include Ayn Rand and Ludwig von Mises. The liberal tradition is suspicious of government authority, and prefers individual choice, and hence tends to see capitalist economics as the preferable means of achieving economic ends.

Modern conservatives, on the other hand, derive support for free markets from practical grounds. Free markets, they argue, are the most productive markets. Thus the modern conservative supports free markets not out of necessity, but out of expedience. The support is not moral or ideological, but driven on the Burkean notion of prescription: what works best is what is right.

Another reason why conservatives support a smaller role for the government in the economy is the belief in the importance of the civil society. As noted by Alexis de Tocqueville, a bigger role of the government in the economy will make people feel less responsible for the society. The responsibilities must then be taken over by the government, requiring higher taxes. In his book Democracy in America, De Tocqueville describes this as "soft oppression".

It must be noted that while classical liberals and modern conservatives reached free markets through different means historically, to-date the lines have blurred. Rarely will a politician claim that free markets are "simply more productive" or "simply the right thing to do" but a combination of both. This blurring is very much a product of the merging of the classical liberal and modern conservative positions under the "umbrella" of the conservative movement.

The archetypal free-market conservative administrations of the late 20th century -- the Margaret Thatcher government in the UK and the Ronald Reagan government in the U.S. -- both held the unfettered operation of the market to be the cornerstone of contemporary modern conservatism (this philosophy is sometimes called neoliberalism). To that end, Thatcher privatized industries and Reagan cut the maximum capital gains tax from 98% to 20%, though in his second term he raised it back up to 28%. Contrary to the neoliberal ideal, Reagan increased government spending from about 700 billion in his first year in office to about 900 billion in his last year. [15]

The interests of capitalism, fiscal and economic liberalism, and free-market economy do not necessarily coincide with those of social conservatism. At times, aspects of capitalism and free markets have been profoundly subversive of the existing social order, as in economic modernization, or of traditional attitudes toward the proper position of sex in society, as in the now near-universal availability of pornography. To that end, on issues at the intersection of economic and social policy, conservatives of one school or another are often at odds.

[edit] Conservatism in the United States electoral politics

See also: Dixiecrats, Southern strategy, Solid South, Contract with America

In the United States, the Republican Party is generally considered to be the party of conservatism. This has been the case since the 1960s, when the conservative wing of that party consolidated its hold, causing it to shift permanently to the right of the Democratic Party. The most dramatic realignment was the white South, which moved from 3-1 Democratic to 3-1 Republican between 1960 and 2000.

Map of results by state of the 2004 U.S. presidential election representing states won by the Republicans with red, and states won by the Democrats with blue.
Map of results by state of the 2004 U.S. presidential election representing states won by the Republicans with red, and states won by the Democrats with blue.

In addition, many United States libertarians, in the Libertarian Party and even some in the Republican Party, see themselves as conservative, even though they advocate significant economic and social changes – for instance, further dismantling the welfare system or liberalizing drug policy. They see these as conservative policies because they conform to the spirit of individual liberty that they consider to be a traditional American value.

On the other end of the scale, some Americans see themselves as conservative while not being supporters of free market policies. These people generally favor protectionist trade policies and government intervention in the market to preserve American jobs. Many of these conservatives were originally supporters of neoliberalism who changed their stance after perceiving that countries such as China were benefiting from that system at the expense of American production. However, despite their support for protectionism, they still tend to favor other elements of free market philosophy, such as low taxes, limited government and balanced budgets.

[edit] Conservative geography, "Red States"

Today in the U.S., geographically the South, the Midwest, the non-coastal West, and Alaska are conservative strongholds. However, the division of the United States into conservative red states and liberal blue states is artificial and does not reflect the actual distribution of voters of either stripe. Most college towns are generally liberal and vote Democratic. The majority of people who live in rural areas and a smaller majority of those living in the "exurbs" or suburbs of a metropolitan area, tend to be conservative (socially, culturally, and/or fiscally) and vote Republican. People who live in the urban cores of large metropolitan areas tend to be liberal and vote Democratic. Thus, within each state, there is a division between city and county, between town and gown. [4] [5]

[edit] Other topics

[edit] U.S. conservatism and change

Conservatives in the United States are not necessarily opposed to change. One must distinguish between actions and beliefs in the political sphere. A nominally conservative politician may be under popular pressure to act, or may find a political compromise on one issue useful for achieving other goals, even when he or she believes that inaction is the best course. Just as there are plural conservative intellectual strains in the US, there are several perspectives on the desirability of social change. In the first issue of National Review, William F. Buckley noted that "NATIONAL REVIEW is superfluous, it is so for very different reasons: It stands athwart history, yelling Stop..."[16] This represents one aspect of the traditionalist position on social change. Another traditionalist view was articulated by G. K. Chesterton in The Victorian Age in Literature:

"...real development is not leaving things behind, as on a road, but drawing life from them as from a root. Even when we improve we never progress. For progress, the metaphor from the road, implies a man leaving his home behind him: but improvement means a man exalting the towers and extending the gardens of his home."

This viewpoint, of traditional mores and social order being a wellspring of knowledge to guide political action, was a key component of the philosophy of Leo Strauss, and so this perspective on change is common among neoconservatives.

Some conservatives who emphasize small government or economic liberalism are in favor of change if it achieves these ends. For example, during his Presidential campaign, Barry Goldwater advocated dismantling the Tennessee Valley Authority and allowing participation in Social Security to be voluntary. Similarly, the Reagan administration in the U.S. claimed to be conservative, but during Reagan's term of office the United States radically revised its tax code; furthermore, Reagan took, or attempted, significant measures to reduce the power of labor unions. These changes were justified on the grounds that he was enabling the U.S. to move back to the conditions of a more prosperous time in which the government was a smaller component of the overall economy.

In the US, conservatives have often been in power during periods of economic expansion which have been disruptive of previous social and political arrangements, for example the Presidency of Grover Cleveland during 1893-1897. Some political philosophers have claimed that in times of social change, a democratic society often seeks out a conservative "protector".

Political memory can be of various durations, and the traditions conservatives embrace can be of relatively recent invention. The prevalence of the nuclear family is, at most, a few decades old. Western democracy itself is a late 18th century invention. Corporate capitalism is even newer. The reference to God in the Pledge of Allegiance only goes back to the 1950s. The race-blind meritocracy now embraced by many U.S. conservatives as an alternative to affirmative action would have seemed quite radical to most U.S. conservatives in the 1950s.

[edit] Contemporary Burkean conservativism

In western Europe conservatism is generally associated with the following views, as noted by Russell Kirk in his book, The Conservative Mind:

  1. "Belief in a transcendent order, or body of natural law, which rules society as well as conscience."
  2. "Affection for the proliferating variety and mystery of human existence, as opposed to the narrowing uniformity, egalitarianism, and utilitarian aims of most radical systems;"
  3. "Persuasion that freedom and property are closely linked: separate property from private possession, and the Leviathan becomes master of all."
  4. "Faith in prescription and distrust of 'sophisters, calculators, and economists' who would reconstruct society upon abstract designs."
  5. "Recognition that change may not be salutary reform: hasty innovation may be a devouring conflagration, rather than a torch of progress."

[edit] Conservatism and the Courts

Main article: Originalism

One stream of conservatism exemplified by William Howard Taft extols independent judges as experts in fairness and the final arbiters of the Constitution. However, another more activist or populist (depending on one's perspective) stream of conservatism condemns "judicial activism" -- that is, judges rejecting laws passed by Congress or interpreting old laws in new ways. This position goes back to Jefferson's vehement attacks on federal judges and to Abraham Lincoln's attacks on the Dred Scott decision of 1857. In 1910 Theodore Roosevelt broke with most of his lawyer friends and called for popular votes that could overturn unwelcome decisions by state courts. President Franklin D. Roosevelt did not attack the Supreme Court directly in 1937, but ignited a firestorm of protest by a proposal to add seven new justices. The Warren Court of the 1960s came under conservative attack for decisions regarding redistricting, desegregation, and the rights of those accused of crimes.

A more recent variant that emerged in the 1970s is "originalism", the assertion that the United States Constitution should be interpreted to the maximum extent possible in the light of what it meant when it was adopted. Originalism should not be confused with a similar conservative ideology, strict constructionism, which deals with the interpretation of the Constitution as written, but not necessarily within the context of the time when it was adopted.

[edit] Semantics, language, and media

[edit] Language

In the late 20th century conservatives found new ways to use language and the media to support their goals and to shape the vocabulary of political discourse. Thus the use of "Democrat" as an adjective, as in "Democrat Party" was used first in the 1930s by Republicans to criticize large urban Democrat machines. Republican leader Harold Stassen stated in 1940, "I emphasized that the party controlled in large measure at that time by Hague in New Jersey, Pendergast in Missouri and Kelly Nash in Chicago should not be called a 'Democratic Party.' It should be called the 'Democrat party.'" [Safire 1994] In 1947 Senator Robert A. Taft said, "Nor can we expect any other policy from any Democrat Party or any Democrat President under present day conditions. They cannot possibly win an election solely through the support of the solid South, and yet their political strategists believe the Southern Democrat Party will not break away no matter how radical the allies imposed upon it." [Taft Papers 3:313]. The use of "Democrat" as an adjective is standard practice in Republican national platforms (since 1948), and has been standard practice in the White House since 2001, for press releases and speeches.

[edit] Radio

Conservatives gained a major new communications medium with the advent of talk radio in the 1990s. Rush Limbaugh proved there was a huge nationwide audience for specific and heated discussions of current events from a conservative viewpoint. Major hosts who describe themselves as either conservative or libertarian include: Michael Peroutka, Jim Quinn, Dennis Miller, Ben Ferguson, Lars Larson, Sean Hannity, G. Gordon Liddy, Laura Ingraham, Mark Levin, Michael Savage, Glenn Beck, Larry Elder, Kim Peterson, Neal Boortz, Michael Reagan, Jason Lewis and Ken Hamblin. The Salem Radio Network syndicates a group of religiously-oriented Republican activists, including Catholic Hugh Hewitt, and Jewish conservatives Dennis Prager and Michael Medved. One popular Jewish conservative Dr. Laura offers parental and personal advice, but is an outspoken critic of social and political issues. Libertarians such as Neal Boortz (based in Atlanta), and Mark Davis (based in Ft. Worth and Dallas, Texas) reach large local audiences. Art Bell held some Libertarian views before his talk show adapted a new paranormal format. Many of these hosts also publish books, write newspaper columns, appear on television, and give public lectures (Limbaugh was a pioneer of this model of multi-media punditry). At a rarer level, University of Chicago psychology professor Milt Rosenberg has been hosting a talk show "Extension 720"[17] on WGN radio in Chicago since the 1970s. Talk radio provided an immediacy and a high degree of emotionalism that seldom is reached on television or in magazines. Pew researchers found in 2004 that 17% of the public regularly listens to talk radio. This audience is mostly male, middle-aged, well-educated and conservative. Among those who regularly listen to talk radio, 41% are Republicans and 28% are Democrats. Moreover, 45% describe themselves as conservatives, compared with 18% who say they are liberal.[18]

[edit] Television

Pew further reports that conservatives and liberals are increasingly polarized in their TV news preferences. The cable news audience is more Republican and more strongly conservative than the public at large or the network news audience. Among regular cable news viewers, 43% describe their political views as conservative, compared with 33% of regular network news viewers; 37% of cable viewers are moderate, compared to 41% of network viewers; and 14% are self-described liberals versus 18% of network viewers.

The audience for the Fox News Channel has grown since 1998, attracting more conservative and Republican viewers. In 1998, the Fox News audience mirrored the public in terms of both partisanship and ideology. However, the percentage of Fox News Channel viewers who identify as Republicans has increased steadily from 24% in 1998, to 29% in 2000, 34% in 2002, and 41% in 2004. Over the same time period, the percentage of Fox viewers who describe themselves as conservative has increased from 40% to 52%.[19]

[edit] Conservative political movements

Contemporary political conservatism — the actual politics of people and parties professing to be conservative — in most western democratic countries is an amalgam of social and institutional conservatism, generally combined with fiscal conservatism, and usually containing elements of broader economic conservatism as well. As with liberalism, it is a pragmatic and protean politics, opportunistic at times, rooted more in a tradition than in any formal set of principles.

It is certainly possible for one to be a fiscal and economic conservative but not a social conservative; in the United States at present, this is the stance of libertarianism. It is also possible to be a social conservative but not an economic conservative, or to be a fiscal conservative without being either a social conservative or a broader economic conservative, such as the "deficit hawks" of the Democratic Party. In general use, the unqualified term "conservative" is often applied to social conservatives who are not fiscal or economic conservatives. It is rarely applied in the opposite case, except in specific contrast to those who are neither.

It can be argued that classical conservatism tends to represent the interests of the Establishment. Yet, this is not always the case. Considering the conservative's opposition to political abstractions, the "true" conservative ought never support a contrived social state, be that on the left (Communism) or on the right (Fascism). There is an independent justification of the attitude of conservatism, which tends to favor what is organic and has been shaped by history, against the planned and artificial.

[edit] Psychological Research

Psychological research [20]increasingly suggests that ideologies reflect motivational processes, as opposed to the view that political convictions always reflect independent and unbiased thinking. Research in 2008 [20]proposed that ideologies may function as prepackaged units of interpretation that spread because of basic human motives to understand the world, avoid existential threat, and maintain valued interpersonal relationships. The authors conclude that such motives may lead disproportionately to the adoption of system-justifying worldviews.

Psychologists have generally found that personality traits, individual difference variables, needs, and ideological beliefs seem to have a common thread. For instance, a meta-analysis by Jost, Glaser, Kruglanski, and Sulloway in 2003 [21] analyzed 88 studies, from 12 countries, with over 22,000 subjects, and found that death anxiety, intolerance of ambiguity, lack of openness to experience, uncertainty avoidance, need for cognitive closure, need for personal structure, and threat of loss of position or self-esteem all contribute to the degree of one's overall political conservatism. The researchers suggest that these results show that political conservatives stress resistance to change and justification of inequality and are motivated by needs that are aimed at reducing threat and uncertainty.

Two research studies suggest that conservatives in the U.S. give significantly more money to charitable causes than do liberals, and are also more likely to donate time or give blood. This may be explained in part by differences in their ideological views, as individuals who believe helping the poor is not a responsibility of the government may tend to make more charitable contributions than those who believe the poor should be aided by government programs. Religion may also be a factor, as religious belief appears to be the strongest predictor of giving.[22][23][24]

[edit] Right-Wing Authoritarianism

According to research by Robert Altemeyer, individuals that are politically conservative tend to rank high on Right-Wing Authoritarianism, as measured by Altemeyer's RWA scale. [25] Those that are identified as high RWAs, in addition to having a tendency to be conservative, tend to wish to restrict personal freedoms, are more punitive toward criminals, and tend to hold more orthodox religious views.[neutrality disputed]

Scores on the RWA scale also correlate highly with measures of ethnocentrism and hostility toward homosexuals. It is important to note that high RWAs tend to show more prejudiced attitudes when their answers on the questionnaires are anonymous. Recent research by Cunningham, Nezlek, and Banaji [26] has found support for the idea that prejudice find a home in people with rigid ideologies, as was predicted by Altemeyer as well as Theodor Adorno. Cunningham and his colleagues found that people who are high in explicit prejudice are also high in implicit prejudice, and that people who demonstrate a rigid, right-wing ideology tend to be prejudiced toward many disadvantaged groups that have little in common.

[edit] Social Dominance Orientation

Psychologist Felicia Pratto and her colleagues have found evidence to support the idea that a high Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) is strongly correlated with conservative political views, and opposition to programs and policies that aim to promote equality (such as affirmative action, laws advocating equal rights for homosexuals, women in combat, etc).[27] According to psychologists, an SDO is an attitude toward intergroup relationships which says that groups are subordinated and of lesser status than others.[28][27] High-SDO persons seek to maintain this structure by promoting group inequality and policies that help maintain the dominance of one group over another. Low-SDO persons seek to reduce group inequality and eliminate the hierarchical structure of society's groups.

Pratto and her colleagues also found that high SDO scores were also highly correlated with measures of sexism and anti-Black prejudice. There has been some debate within the psychology community on what the relation is between SDO and racism. One explanation suggests that opposition to programs that promote equality is based not on racism or sexism but on a "principled conservatism." [29] This perspective suggests that opposition to such programs is based not on racism but on a "concern for equity, color-blindness, and genuine conservative values."

Furthermore, some principled-conservatism theorists have suggested that racism and conservatism are independent, and only verly weakly correlated among the highly educated, who truly understand the concepts of conservative values and attitudes. In an effort to examine the relationship between education, SDO, and racism, Sidanius and his colleagues [29]asked approximately 4,600 Euro-Americans to complete a survey in which they were asked about their political and social attitudes, and their social dominance orientation assessed. Results indicated partial support for the principled-conservatism position. However, the data suggest several problems for the principled-conservatism position. Contrary to what these theorists would predict, correlations among SDO, political conservatism, and racism were strongest among the most well educated, and weakest among the least well educated, according to Sidanius and his colleagues[29], because conservatives tend to be more invested in the hierarchical structure of society and in maintaining the inequality of the present status quo in society.

[edit] Conservative thinkers and leaders in the United States

Some notable figures in the history of modern conservatism in the United States are:

[edit] References

  1. ^ http://usconservatives.about.com/od/theconservativephilosophy/p/social.htm The Conservative Philosophy
  2. ^ http://atheism.about.com/library/weekly/aa070898.htm About atheism
  3. ^ http://www.conservative.org/columnists/divine/001226dd.asp The American Conservative Union
  4. ^ Clark, B. (1998). Political economy: A comparative approach. Westport, CT: Praeger.
  5. ^ Jefferson on Politics & Government: Judicial Review
  6. ^ The word was originally used in the French Revolution. The British used it after 1839 to describe a major party. The first American usage is by Whigs who called themselves "Conservatives" in the late 1830s. Hans Sperber and Travis Trittschuh, American Political terms: An Historical Dictionary (1962) 94-97.
  7. ^ Curtis, Bruce. "William Graham Sumner 'On the Concentration of Wealth.'" Journal of American History 1969 55(4): 823-832.
  8. ^ Lapham 2004
  9. ^ Reason Magazine, 1975-07-01
  10. ^ The Concise Columbia Encyclopedia, Columbia University Press, 1983, ISBN 0231056788.
  11. ^ Samuel P. Huntington, "The Clash of Civilizations," Foreign Affairs Summer 1993, v72, n3, p22-50, online version.
  12. ^ The Value-Centered Historicism of Edmund Burke
  13. ^ National Geographic, September 2007.
  14. ^ Richard Hofstadter, Anti-Intellectualism in American Life (1963)
  15. ^ The World Almanac and Book of Facts, ISBN 0-88687-910-8
  16. ^ Flashback by William F. Buckley Jr. on National Review Online
  17. ^ Untitled Document
  18. ^ I. Where Americans Go for News: News Audiences Increasingly Politicized
  19. ^ I. Where Americans Go for News: News Audiences Increasingly Politicized
  20. ^ a b Jost, J.T., Ledgerwood, A., & Hardin, C.D. (2008). Shared reality, system justification, and the relational basis of ideological beliefs. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2,171-186
  21. ^ Jost, J.J, Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A.A., & Sulloway, F.J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129(3), 339-375.
  22. ^ George F. Will, "Bleeding Hearts but Tight Fists," The Washington Post, March 27, 2008; Page A17
  23. ^ Ben Gose, "Charity's Political Divide," The Chronicle of Philanthropy, November 23, 2006
  24. ^ Arthur C. Brooks, Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth about Compassionate Conservatism, Basic Books, November 27, 2006, ISBN 0465008216
  25. ^ Altemeyer, B. (1981). Right-wing authoritarianism. Winnipeg, Canada: University of Manitoba Press.
  26. ^ Cunningham W.A., Nezlek, J.B., & Banaji, M.R. (2004). Implicit and explicit ethnocentrism: Revisiting the ideologies of prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(10), 1332-1346.
  27. ^ a b Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L.M., & Malle, B.F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(4), 741-763.
  28. ^ Sidanius, J. (1993). The psychology of group conflict and the dynamics of oppression: A social dominance perspective. In W. McGuire & S. Iyengar (Eds), Current approaches to political psychology (pp. 183-219). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
  29. ^ a b c Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., & Bobo, L. (1996). Racism, conservatism, affirmative action, and intellectual sophistication: A matter of principled conservatism or group dominance? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70(3), 476-490.

[edit] Intellectual history

  • Dunn, Charles W. and J. David Woodard; The Conservative Tradition in America Rowman & Littlefield, 1996
  • Filler, Louis. Dictionary of American Conservatism Philosophical Library, (1987)
  • Foner, Eric. "Radical Individualism in America: Revolution to Civil War," Literature of Liberty, vol. 1 no. 3, 1978 pp 1-31 online
  • Bruce Frohnen et al eds. American Conservatism: An Encyclopedia (2006) ISBN 1-932236-44-9, the most detailed reference
  • Genovese, Eugene. The Southern Tradition: The Achievement and Limitations of an American Conservatism Harvard University Press, 1994
  • Gottfried, Paul. The Conservative Movement Twayne, 1993.
  • Guttman, Allan. The Conservative Tradition in America Oxford University Press, 1967.
  • Willmoore Kendall, and George W. Carey. "Towards a Definition of 'Conservatism." Journal of Politics 26 (May 1964): 406-22.
  • Kirk, Russell. The Conservative Mind. Regnery Publishing; 7th edition (2001): ISBN 0-89526-171-5
  • Lora, Ronald. Conservative Minds in America Greenwood, 1976.
  • Lowi, Theodore J. The End of the Republican Era (1995) online review
  • Meyer, Frank S. ed. What Is Conservatism? 1964.
  • Murphy, Paul V. The Rebuke of History: The Southern Agrarians and American Conservative Thought (2001)
  • Nash, George. The Conservative Intellectual Movement in America Since 1945 (1978) influential history
  • Nisbet, Robert A. Conservatism: Dream and Reality. University of Minnesota Press, 1986.
  • Ribuffo, Leo P. 1983. The Old Christian Right: The Protestant Far Right from the Great Depression to the Cold War. Temple University Press.
  • Rossiter, Clinton. Conservatism in America. 2nd ed. Harvard University Press, 1982.
  • Melvin J. Thorne; American Conservative Thought since World War II: The Core Ideas Greenwood: 1990
  • Peter Viereck; Conservatism: from John Adams to Churchill 1956, 1978

[edit] Political activity

  • Hart, Jeffrey. The Making of the American Conservative Mind: The National Review and Its Times (2005)
  • Lora, Ronald.; The Conservative Press in Twentieth-Century America Greenwood Press, 1999
  • McDonald, Forrest. States' Rights and the Union: Imperium in Imperio, 1776-1876 (2002)
  • Malsberger, John W. From Obstruction to Moderation: The Transformation of Senate Conservatism, 1938-1952 2000.
  • Patterson, James. Congressional Conservatism and the New Deal: The Growth of the Conservative Coalition in Congress, 1933-39 (1967)
  • Perlstein, Rick. Before the Storm: Barry Goldwater and the Unmaking of the American Consensus (2004) on 1964
  • Reinhard, David W.; Republican Right since 1945 University Press of Kentucky, 1983
  • Shelley II, Mack C. The Permanent Majority: The Conservative Coalition in the United States Congress (1983)
  • Wilensky, Norman N. Conservatives in the Progressive Era: The Taft Republicans of 1912 (1965).

[edit] Critical views

  • Bell, David. ed, The Radical Right. Doubleday 1963.
  • Huntington, Samuel P. "Conservatism as an Ideology." American Political Science Review 52 (June 1957): 454-73.
  • Coser Lewis A., and Irving Howe, eds. The New Conservatives: A Critique from the Left New American Library, 1976.

[edit] Biographical

  • H. Lee Cheek Jr.;Calhoun and Popular Rule: The Political Theory of the Disquisition and Discourse University of Missouri Press. 2001. Stresses Calhoun's Republicanism
  • Crunden, Robert M. The Mind and Art of Albert Jay Nock (1964)
  • Dierenfield, Bruce J. Keeper of the Rules: Congressman Howard W. Smith of Virginia (1987), leader of the Conservative coalition in Congress
  • Fergurson, Ernest B. Hard Right: The Rise of Jesse Helms, 1986
  • Fite, Gilbert. Richard B. Russell, Jr, Senator from Georgia (2002) leader of the Conservative coalition in Congress
  • Goldberg, Robert Alan. Barry Goldwater (1995)
  • Judis, John B. William F. Buckley, Jr.: Patron Saint of the Conservatives (1988)
  • Kelly, Daniel. James Burnham and the Struggle for the World: A Life (2002)
  • Patterson, James T. Mr. Republican: A Biography of Robert A. Taft (1972)
  • Rodgers, Marion Elizabeth. Mencken: The American Iconoclast (2005)
  • Federici , Michael P. Eric Voegelin: The Restoration of Order (2002)
  • Pemberton, William E. Exit with Honor: The Life and Presidency of Ronald Reagan (1998)
  • Smant, Kevin J. Principles and Heresies: Frank S. Meyer and the Shaping of the American Conservative Movement (2002) (ISBN 1-882926-72-2)
  • Smith, Richard Norton. An Uncommon Man: The Triumph of Herbert Hoover (1994) strongest on 1933-64
  • Tanenhaus, Sam. Whittaker Chambers: A Biography (1997) (ISBN 0-394-58559-3)
  • Chambers, Whittaker, Witness (1952), a memoir his Communist years

[edit] Recent politics

  • John B. Bader; Taking the Initiative: Leadership Agendas in Congress and the "Contract with America" Georgetown University Press, (1996)
  • Berkowitz, Peter . Varieties Of Conservatism In America (2004)
  • Collins, Robert M. Transforming America: Politics and Culture During the Reagan Years, (Columbia University Press; 320 pages; 2007).
  • Himmelstein, Jerome and J. A. McRae Jr., "'Social Conservatism, New Republicans and the 1980 Election'", Public Opinion Quarterly, 48 (1984), 595-605.
  • Micklethwait, John, and Adrian Wooldridge. The Right Nation (2004)
  • Geoffrey Nunberg, "Language and Politics"
  • Rae; Nicol C. Conservative Reformers: The Republican Freshmen and the Lessons of the 104th Congress M. E. Sharpe, 1998
  • Schoenwald; Jonathan . A Time for Choosing: The Rise of Modern American Conservatism (2002)

[edit] Neoconservatism

  • Allan Bloom. The Closing of the American Mind (1988)
  • "History of Neoconservatism" at dKos.
  • Gerson, Mark. The Neoconservative Vision: From the Cold War to Culture Wars (1997)
  • Halper, Stefan & Clarke, Jonathan, America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order (Cambridge University Press, 2004) ISBN 0-521-83834-7 [6]
  • Stelzer, Irwin. Neo-conservatism (2004)
  • America at the Crossroads: Democracy, Power, and the Neoconservative Legacy by Francis Fukuyama (2007)

[edit] Critical views

  • Diamond, Sara. Roads to Dominion: Right-Wing Movements and Political Power in the United States. (1995)
  • Koopman; Douglas L. Hostile Takeover: The House Republican Party, 1980-1995 Rowman & Littlefield, 1996
  • Lapham, Lewis H. "Tentacles of Rage" in Harper's, September 2004, p. 31-41.
  • Martin, William. 1996. With God on Our Side: The Rise of the Religious Right in America, New York: Broadway Books.

[edit] Primary sources

  • Buckley, William F., Jr., ed. Up from Liberalism Stein and Day, (1958)
  • Buckley, William F., Jr., ed. Did You Ever See a Dream Walking? American Conservative Thought in the 20th Century Bobbs-Merrill, (1970)
  • Mark Gerson, ed., The Essential Neo-Conservative Reader (Perseus Publishing, (1997)) ISBN 0-201-15488-9
  • Irving Kristol, Neoconservatism: the Autobiography of an Idea, ISBN 0-02-874021-1
  • Gregory L. Schneider, ed. Conservatism in America Since 1930: A Reader (2003)
  • Irwin Stelzer ed. The NeoCon Reader (2005) ISBN 0-8021-4193-5
  • Wolfe, Gregory. Right Minds: A Sourcebook of American Conservative Thought. Regnery, (1987)

[edit] See also

[edit] Outside USA

[edit] External links

[edit] U.S. conservative organizations and publications

[edit] Articles and essays on U.S. conservatism