Why the Rightroots is Lacking

by: Matt Stoller

Tue Nov 25, 2008 at 20:00


I believe there's something of a cottage industry speculating on when the conservatives will develop an internet presence to rival the left's.  Today, it's Jose Antonio Vargas publishing a piece on the rightroots, but it's been in Newsweek, in the Politico many times, and their whole drilling Twitter fiasco captured a bunch of publicity.  It's rather amusing to see the same establishment news outlets rail against liberal impotence while sending journalists to find out when the right will build a fearsome presence to rival those impotent liberals, but consistency is not a strong suit of modern politics.

The problem with the Rightroots is simple.  In order to build a real movement, you have to organize a previously unorganized constituency group and use it to build power.  The right did that in the 1970s, we did it this decade.  They used direct mail and mega-churches, we used the internet.  Right now, their direct mail organized white Christian base is aging and turning into a militantly minority voting bloc, and while they may like reading blogs, they already were listening to Rush and reading direct mail and buying guns, etc.  It's not new marginal power, whereas Dailykos captured people who were not reading the Nation and effectively damaged the New Republic.  The Republican base is still garnering around 46% nationally of the vote and holding onto a bunch of neoliberal Congressional suburban districts, but the basic anti-tax white flight model of politics is aging, and it shows.

Ultimately, their problem is not that the party doesn't use the internet, their problem is that the party's base is shrinking and they can't find a new compatible unorganized constituency group.  I believe there have been five or six attempts to start a Republican version of Moveon, but it's always by a variant of this type of startup model: Republican political consultants who are boxed out of the party's inner circle.

If they find such a group, it will be through the web, but so far, the Huckabee and Ron Paul boomlets do not allow these newer consultants and party officials to maintain their current set of institutional relationships while expanding their base.  

My guess is that they'll find such a constituency group in the next few years, and the animus will be race and economic instability, as it always is.  And then journalists can really write the story of the rightroots, or whatever they call themselves at that point.  It is likely that only the really attentive and risk-taking rightroots folk will be along for the ride, because building a movement is about taking power from existing groups by representing a new group of people.  

Who is that group?  And where are they?  That's the question.  My hope is that this is a moderating progressive group that wants low taxes and progressive governance, but we're in an age of extremes, so I'm not sure that's possible.

Matt Stoller :: Why the Rightroots is Lacking

Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Sheltered (4.00 / 4)
Conservative communities only thrive when they are sheltered from the facts. I've had lots of encounters with creationists. None of them know what the hell is going on because they get all of their information from narrow conservative sources. Creationist ideas die when light is shone on them. I think this is another reason why conservatives have trouble on the net. The truth is just a Google search away, and young people know how to use the Google.

There are many reasons why... (4.00 / 7)
But at the heart of it is the fact that the GOP has devolved into an authoritarian party with authoritarian principles...and if they don't have a leader who tells them what to do, then they're going to fall apart.

Given that the Internet is inherently a decentralizing mechanism, it's no wonder any of the right-wing online efforts, whether it be RedState or Free Republic, pale in comparison to dKos, TPM, or Open Left.


Beat me to it (4.00 / 3)
> But at the heart of it is the fact that the GOP
>  has devolved into an authoritarian party with
> authoritarian principles...and if they don't
> have a leader who tells them what to do, then
> they're going to fall apart.

Darn - you beat me to it.  The Radical Right does not tolerate discussion much less dissent.  And the Republican Party has been controlled by the Radical Right for so long now that it too reflexively crushes anything that troubles the anointed Leader of the day.  You can't have open and honest 1-way communication, and without communication you aren't going to build a modern movement.

sPh


[ Parent ]
Indeed (4.00 / 3)
Given that the Rightroots is made up largely of authoritarian followers, it seems to me sites that try to empower through conversation are doomed due to lack of ability to converse in a civil fashion. Followers need orders to follow, so trying to engage the way the progressive roots does is a waste of time.

In my limited (just because it's too upsetting for me to do) viewing of right-wing sites, they almost all seem to devolve into hate speech right away, which I can't think is all that great for fostering empowerment of a positive, engaging sort, which is what progressives seek to do. It's great for working people into a froth, but that's just about triggering people's programming... nothing else.

Add in a terminal devotion to ignorance, logic and genuine distrust for anything considered thoughtful or intellectual and you've got a completely dysfunctional group of people. One gets the impression they are as impenetrable with each other as they are with us at times. Likewise, it's also their impenetrable nature that prevents them from seeing their own dysfunction. A veritable Gordian Knot Of Stupidity!

They just need a site they can plug into and receive orders from. All that talk stuff just complicates things too much. Thinking is hard work!

"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -Woody Allen, My Speech to the Graduates


[ Parent ]
there's an interesting argument (4.00 / 6)
that conservatives like to be led authoritatively and make good audiences for talk radio and O'Reilly type shows. The broadcast model is top down and perfect for ditto heads, that's the argument.

In this argument the left is more likely to be realized through writing and group deliberation and therefore more in sync with Web culture. Conservatives can succeed on the web but they are more likely to be singular and non-grassroots (no comments or user participation) a la Instapundit.

I'm sure this dichotomy is overly simplistic but I think there may be something to it.  


conservative netroots (4.00 / 1)
It wasn't all that long ago when we fretted that conservatives were dominated the internet as well.  Great how times have changed.  Turns out the early adopters were really libertarians, not true conservatives, which might partially explain the false start.

Besides, what could conservatives talk about?

A: Taxes are too high
B: yea

A: I don't thing the government should do anything
B: nope

A: ...
B: zzz

A: Taxes are too high

Not much to discuss, at least until they start the next war.


You forgot one (0.00 / 0)
A: Liebruls is morans!
B: Boo Yah!


[ Parent ]
"we're in an age of extremes" (0.00 / 0)
There's the Extreme Right. And... and...? I got nothin'.

It has to be the Paulites, right? (4.00 / 3)
The money bomb raised, what, $5M in one day?  Those folks aren't going away, and if they start pushing for a GOP that dropped the social authoritarianism and focused on small government, low taxes, and perhaps isolationism, you may well see a movement.

maybe so (4.00 / 4)
But it's so hard to see something like that happening without pushing the Christianists out of the party altogether. Conversely, if the Christianists try to take the reins, the libertarians will want to flee. It's just hard to see how those two wings of the party can be compatible.

It's going to be fascinating to watch.


[ Parent ]
Have we evicted the Lieberman wing yet? (0.00 / 0)
No.  But we're making progress.  Winning symbolic battles moves the ball forward.

[ Parent ]
true (4.00 / 1)
There are inconsistencies within the Democratic coalition, too, no doubt about it.

But there's a fundamental difference on the Republican side, and it has to do with those Christianists I mentioned. The difference between them and libertarians or neocons, or moderates and liberals, for that matter, is that they don't believe in pluralism. Their principles are incompatible with liberal democracy; they just have different fundamental principles guiding their political engagement than the rest of us (and by "us" I mean like 80% of the American people, including many conservatives, and even many social conservatives). For this reason their support of the Republican party was always an unsustainable alliance, and I don't think it can be maintained for much longer.


[ Parent ]
But would they hang around? (4.00 / 2)
Most of the Paulites seemed to be gadflies. Some of them may very well be influential, but it's unclear that they'll remain part of the Republican base or that they could forge a new organisation of their own. Their mix of hero worship and conspiracy theories is not conducive to movements.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

[ Parent ]
what did they call Markos and Jerome in 2002-03? nt (0.00 / 0)


[ Parent ]
I thought most of the ardent Paulites were young people... (4.00 / 1)
In my experience young, ardent libertarians (or their current flavor, Paulites) rarely stay that way.  They are mostly white males and as they age they just become middle of the road Republicans because pot smoking and sexual freedom just aren't as important as low taxes by the time they hit 40.  Since most of social conservatism is aimed at keeping white males in power being Republican ultimately becomes a win-win and the seeming disconnect between the Christianists and greedicans isn't hard to overcome.  

[ Parent ]
it could be isolationists. both Democrats and Republicans have become very interventionist in foreign policy. (4.00 / 1)
Although for different reasons, with different standards, and different means. (Republicans are certainly more militaristic in their foreign policy.)

There are a LOT of people who would be happy just to say "fuck it, let's watch out for OUR backyard"... but no politicians are saying that.

(Frankly, I don't think we can afford to withdraw from world affairs. But we can afford to be smarter with how we do it. I have a lot of hope for Obama in that regard.)


A wild guess.... (4.00 / 2)
....but a conservative netroots will most likely only have value to the Republican Party as a whole if/when, for the most part, it can surmount the ethnic divide on a regular, sustained basis - when the only color that matters among them is green, and non-whites are sincerely welcomed into the circle in large numbers.

Bush/Rove tried to do this somewhat, most especially with the Latino/Hispanic community, but they failed because "fear" became less about terrorism and more about nonwhites, especially immigrants, becoming more of a factor in daily life, with the discomfort it caused, especially among working class whites who feared being placed on the bottom rung of the social heiarchy.

Greed and Fear is what keeps the Republicans together presently.  And they really don't have anything else to sell other than Fear.  When they can get past that as a selling point, assuming no 9-11 redux happens to drive people into their arms again, then maybe they'll have something people want.

But Fear, as opposed to redefining and working through what it means to be a Republican, or a conservative, is too alluring to sell.  If it isn't fear of brown skin, it's fear of the the Chinese, or of the Russians, or whatever seems to work within their circle.

And so they'll throw a lot of spaghetti at walls, trying to find something that will stick, while placating their base.

The conservative netroots, in the meantime, should set to work on an honest discussion of what it means to be a conservative in this day and age, and develop the chops to outargue their elders, in due course, with opinions that can eventually compete with our side of the spectrum.


Very interesting post (4.00 / 2)
Here's my question: if their organizing principle in the next few years is going to be "race and economic instability," can they exploit race in such a way that they don't drive away more voters than they attract. Given what the 2008 election said about the state of the American body politic, I think the answer to that question is likely: no.

That may depend... (0.00 / 0)
Part of the 2008 election was about people overcoming those little racial insecurities in large part because of economic insecurities caused by the party that's been in charge for the last 8 years.  If things get even worse (and most people seem to think it will), and with a [black] Democratic  president at the helm this time, perhaps those insecurities will be amplified rather than overcome the next time around.

[ Parent ]
Ron Paul is the future of the GOP (0.00 / 0)
There are the social conservatives. Mike Huckabee and Sarah Palin will be contesting these votes.

There are the business conservatives. Mitt Romney will be their darling.

There will be candidates that try to appeal to both groups, like Newt Gingrich and Bobby Jihdahl.

And there's some noise being made about candidates going for a moderate message. We'll see who volunteers for this category. Pawlenty maybe?

But the libertarian message, especially the "screw the establishment, I'm fighting my fight" niche is Ron Paul's.

In a crowded primary Paul can emerge as one of the top three candidates. And he's got more activists. And if Bushism is hated by the electorate, Paul is the one guy who can credibly say, "I was against Bush's policies before most of the Democrats".

I think big business will side with Obama against Paul.

But I don't see any of these other guys credibly making the case to go back to Bush conservatism. And I don't see any of them having the courage to admit Bush conservatism was wrong, except maybe Huckabee.


if that was going to happen (4.00 / 2)
why not in the weak field of 2008? Plus Paul is 73, older than McCain. Maybe a "new" Paul would have a chance.

[ Parent ]
Maybe they needed to be defeated handily... (0.00 / 0)
Before they saw the light... When Palin is running 2012 we will see practically the entire rest of the GOP field trashing her as completely unelectable and dangerous.  Just as McCain emerged this year, independents and moderate conservatives will probably kill her and any other social conservative know-nothings in the field.

Unless of course... they've already become Democrats after 4 successful Obama years.  Then we may indeed see someone like Palin nominated only to be demolished by Obama... after which the GOP will pretty much seize to exist as anything more than the Jesus party.  At that point, the only challenge to Democrats will be other Democrats that decide the current Democrats are going in the wrong direction, or actually a new party (or independent run) as Chris wrote about shortly after the election.


[ Parent ]
Also... (0.00 / 0)
As a note, I don't think I consider Huckabee a social conservative "know-nothing"... If the GOP has a chance of reforming their old constituency groups, he's probably their best hope.  Of course, he scares the fiscal conservatives, but if he ran against Obama as a tax and spend liberal, who knows... maybe he'd even be able to gain their support.

[ Parent ]
Republicans assumed the Bush message could work (0.00 / 0)
again.

The party just needed a new messenger who could connect with swing voters.


[ Parent ]
I don't know (0.00 / 0)
I think the idea that they have already organized their people is pretty convincing.  

But I have no doubt some Republican in the next cycle will raise a lot of money: We know Obama did it, but remember Clinton was also able to raise a lot of internet money once she caught on, and of course there's the Ron Paul people.  Obama's clever early idea of getting large numbers of donors by selling tee shirts, bumper stickers, etc. was quickly matched by the other candidates.  There are MILLIONS of Republicans out there who could afford to give $25 or $100 on the internet, once someone reaches them and excites them.  


New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.


I heard rightroots way out in front in UK (4.00 / 1)
IF conservatives dominate the netroots in UK.... then the "out of power" explanation may be the strongest.

I wouldn't exactly agree with that assessment... (4.00 / 1)
...though I would say it's close.

I think New Labor has essentially lost touch with what it came into being for, to the extent that Old Labor supporters and the muddled middle don't support them much anymore.  I would venture that being the "junior partner" the war in Iraq were the final nails in the coffin - slowly, but thoroughly.


[ Parent ]
My thinking is along the same lines.. (0.00 / 0)
The OP said "Ultimately, their problem is not that the party doesn't use the internet, their problem is that the party's base is shrinking and they can't find a new compatible unorganized constituency group."

Not trying to be argumentative - but what is the evidence that the right's base is shrinking? There are still 23% (or so) of Americans that support Bush. I would be inclined to think that is a good measure of his base. And all of the evangelicals I talk to (I'm in Texas) all support Bush.

While Obama beat McCain handily, I'm still concerned about the strength of the right in future elections - especially their base. I love Obama's message but I'm inclined to think that he only won the way he did because of the timing of the financial crisis. Is an ongoing financial crisis the only thing that keeps big business from aligning with evangelicals as they did in 2000 to bring Bush into power for nearly a decade?


[ Parent ]
That's because we don't have a netroots (0.00 / 0)
We're a smaller country and the internet is much less 'our' domain than it is for Americans.

Then we have a much more aggressive press (including a top-rank muckraking machine in Private Eye), a left that though often ignored is always querulous and we don't really hate our politicians, because we never liked them to start with.

So you see, we have no netroots, as there's no clear need for it. There is ConservativeHome and LabourHome, neither of which is exactly crucial reading. And there are guys like GuidoFawkes, who are basically just British amateur Joe Kleins.  

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog


[ Parent ]
They can't break out (4.00 / 1)
My experience tracking right-wing blogs, etc. is that there is an almost total lack of intellectual honesty (authors, not just the commenters) which will prevent them from advancing their cause and addressing real circumstances.  With nothing new to show for what ails them, they will founder for some time.

They need to read an internalize Andrew Sullivan and figure out if there's a way to translate his philosophical conservatism into a political movement.

With new ideas, they may be able to then find new constituencies.


forget (4.00 / 1)
the animus will be race and economic instability, as it always is

you forget to add demonizing gays and lesbians will also continue to be a part of their strategy.


perhaps (0.00 / 0)
It seems likely.

[ Parent ]
Andrew Sullivan has made some interesting points (0.00 / 0)
about the Tory comeback in Britain following their crushing loss to Tony Blair. Basically, the way I understand it, they have become much more community and family oriented, following two false start candidates, the first being a McCain moderate type, the second being a Palin "screw it i'm going for the base" type. Now the Tories are much different ideologically, including being to the left of even Labour on some issues (civil liberties most notably, as I understand it). I would like to see them come back as this type of party, focusing on whats good for people on the family/community level.

Yglesias had a good post the other day about how conservatives have largely ceded the debate on many issues where their principles could do some good, such as urban planning, transportation, etc. I think that is a good point. If the Republicans are going to come back, they will have to compete in cities, especially for the minority vote, so they will have to develop entirely new policies that they have just largely ignored until now. There has to be some deep pocketed Republican bankrollers right now who are looking at the demographics of the 2008 election and coming to the same conclusions. My guess? They'll end up with Huckabee, Jindal, or Romney, who will lose in 2012 because they won't bring anything particularly new to the table, while they rebuild the conservative infrastructure in time for 2014 midterms and the 2016 presidential election. Probably some blend of social conservatism (it won't ever go away), conservative community social welfare policy, and good governance, and probably a touch of isolationism unless the neo-cons make a stunning comeback. I would be okay with that.


Sullivan's wrong about the reasons (0.00 / 0)
The Tories have come back up in the polls because Blair and Brown have become deeply unpopular, and because Cameron has 'detoxified' the Tory brand with PR stunts.

The thing is, there was little substance to their politics, just photo-ops (visiting glaciers etc.) Now they're running on not borrowing in a depression and against cutting taxes now because they'll have to go up again later. Concern for family issues is nowhere in the picture.

The only time it has been there was under Iain Duncan Smith, their leader before last (they've had three leaders between Major and Cameron, not two.) It's a backburner issue for now. And they aren't recognisably ideologically different, they've just tried to appear to have rejected the Thatcher/Major insanity whilst in fact doing nothing of the sort.

Oh, and the government is insanely right wing on civil liberties. Being to their left here is not difficult.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog


[ Parent ]
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox