Conservative identity politics In the news

by: Paul Rosenberg

Sat Feb 06, 2010 at 12:00


Several years ago, I had an epiphany:  the core of conservatism is identity politics, not ideology or issues.  Oh, sure, there are ideological differences between conservatives and liberals, but those differences are substantially smaller than the gaps between who they vote for, as I discussed in my Dec, 2007 diary, "Collapsing The Ideological Overlap: The Gulf Between Issues and Candidates".   But if that's so, you might ask, why say that it's conservatives who are responsible for the gap?  The reason is simple: conservatives are more likely to hold liberal policy positions and more likely to vote for candidates opposed to what they say they believe.

One way they deal with this is by denying what the politicians they support believe.  A classic example of this was illustrated in 2004, when the Project on Policy Alternatives (PIPA) found that despite Bush's reputation for strong, decisive leadership, and the importance that foreign policy had in the 2004 election, his supporters were generally clueless about where he stood on a broad range of foreign policy positions. I excerpted key passages in my contemporaneous DKos diary, "PIPA: Bush Supporters Misread His Foreign Policy".

The other side of this phenomena is believing lies about the politicians they oppose.  Swiftboat veterans, anyone? Kenyan birth certificates?  A couple of things in the news this week re-emphasized the salience of conservative identity politics. First, on Monday, Rachel Maddow highlighted the fact that Republicans Senators were turning against long-held positions, rather than voting to support President Obama's proposals.  Their positions on the issues were less important to them than maintaining their identities, now largely defined by opposition to Obama.  Then the next day, Markos released a Dkos/Research 2000 poll of 2000 Republicans that helped explain why.

Maddow cited the deficit commission:

Six Republican senators who originally cosponsored forming a deficit commission voted against it once President Obama signed up for the idea.  Sam Brownback, Mike Crapo, John Ensign, Kay Bailey Hutchison, James Inhofe, and John McCain, profiles in courage against their own policies.

PayGo (pay-as-you-go budgeting):

Paul Rosenberg :: Conservative identity politics In the news
Despite supporting PAYGO before, now that President Obama is for it, John McCain, George Voinovich, Susan Collins, and Olympia Snowe all voted against it when it came up for a vote last week.  You're noticing a trend here?

Cap-and-trade:

And it's not just economic issues.  Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, once sponsors and major supporters of cap-and-trade climate legislation, now say they oppose it.

Trying accused terrorists in federal courts:

On national security, Republicans had no problem with the Bush administration trying terrorism suspects in federal courts.  Now that President Obama is doing that same thing, they've decided they're against that too.

Even taxes:

MADDOW: ... even on taxes, Republicans are now opposed to the one thing we thought for sure they were definitely for.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA:  We cut taxes.  We cut taxes for 95 percent of working families.  We cut taxes for small businesses.

We cut taxes for first-time home buyers.  We cut taxes for parents trying to care for their children.  We cut taxes for 8 million Americans paying for college.

(APPLAUSE)

OBAMA:  I thought I'd get some applause on that one.

(LAUGHTER)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW:  Not this year, Republicans not in favor of tax cuts anymore.  Not if they're Obama tax cuts.

And she concluded:

Let this serve as a standing rebuttal to anyone still arguing that this president just needs to support more Republican-friendly policies and then he'll get some Republican votes.  This president is not just supporting Republican-friendly policies, he is supporting actual Republican's actual policies, and the Republicans are voting no, against their own ideas, just to stick it to him.

This is clearly the case, and has been the case since the very beginning of the Obama presidency.  The only thing new is that Obama finally seems to have noticed.  He thought he was going to get 20+ GOP votes for the stimulus plan just because he loaded it up with poor-performing GOP-style tax cuts.  He got 3-and that was the high-water mark.  On health care reform, he excluded even considering the single-payer alternative favored by his base-which, incidentally, would actually save far more money than any alternative-and instead steered things toward a Mitt Romney-style package...and still didn't get one single Republican vote.

On issue after issue, Obama naively believed that incorporating GOP ideas into his initial proposals-and systematically excluding ideas strongly supported by his base, so as not to make Republicans mad-was a sure-fired way to foster a spirit of bipartisanship.  On issue after issue he was wrong... for a very simple reason: When push comes to shove, conservatives don't care about policy, they only really care about identity-and winning.  Indeed, for conservatives, identity is winning, since conservatism is all about maintaining social hierarchy, elite rule, and conventional morality that keeps the lower orders in line, and virtuous conservatives on top.

For conservatives, a liberal proposing conservative ideas is simply acknowledging the natural order of things-and if he really acknowledges the natural order of things, then he ought to acknowledge that conservatives should be running the show.  So, if he doesn't acknowledge that, then he's not really serious--indeed, he's downright deceitful, and everything Glen Beck says is true.  He's really a socialist fascist Nazi out to destroy America.

In psychological terms, it's very simple: The more he moves towards them, the more he threatens their identities as not-him, and the more hysterically they have to oppose him.  It's a strategy doomed to failure from the start.

Evidence supporting this view is abundantly evident in the new Dkos/R2000 poll of Republicans that Markos summarized here.  The first section is particularly telling:

OBAMA and AMERICA

Should Barack Obama be impeached, or not?

Yes 39
No 32
Not Sure 29

For what? Who the heck knows. Who needs high crimes or misdemeanors when...

Do you think Barack Obama is a socialist?

Yes 63
No 21
Not Sure 16

That's the power of Fox News and Rush Limbaugh, after one year of relentlessly claiming Obama is the second coming of Lenin ... and Hitler!

Do you believe Barack Obama was born in the United States, or not?

Yes 42
No 36
Not Sure 22

We still have over a half of Republicans who don't think Obama was born in the US or think it's a matter open to debate.

Do you believe Barack Obama wants the terrorists to win?

Yes 24
No 43
Not Sure 33

Not just a quarter of Republicans believe this ludicrous premise, but another third think it's a matter open to debate. How do you negotiate with a party whose rank and file are that divorced from reality? And speaking of divorced from reality...

Do you believe ACORN stole the 2008 election?

Yes 21
No 24
Not Sure 55

One in five Republicans think ACORN is so powerful as to magically make 10 million votes appear. Another 55 are open to the theory. In other words, just 24 percent of Republicans have an even passing relationship with reality.

Do you believe Sarah Palin is more qualified to be President than Barack Obama?

Yes 53
No 14
Not Sure 33

Sigh...

Do you believe Barack Obama is a racist who hates White people?

Yes 31
No 36
Not Sure 33

I bet more people think Obama is racist, but were too afraid to tell a live operator the truth.

Do you believe your state should secede from the United States?

Yes 23
No 58
Not Sure 19

42 percent of Republicans aren't really patriotic. They pretend to love America only when they approve of the president. These traitors don't believe in democracy, in our nation's founding ideals, or in our flag. To them, those colors run. They are cowards.

Note, secession sentiment is MUCH stronger in the South than elsewhere -- 33 percent want out, compared to just 52 percent who want to stay. In the Northeast, "just" 10 percent want out, in the Midwest, its 18 percent, and in the West, it's 16 percent.

None of this is all that surprising, when you remember the Civil War.  Or as I like to call it, "The War of Southern Aggression."

For Democrats, the problem is that their ultra-ideological Versailles leadership refuses to face reality.  The DKos/R2000 poll ought to tell them quite clearly that the strategy they have been pursuing simply can't work.  Conservatives aren't just liberals with a different set of policy ideas.  In fact, conservatism isn't about policy ideas at all.

Fiscal conservatism?  Like this?

Conservatives don't believe in "fiscal conservatism" at all. Conservatives believe that conservatives are "fiscal conservatives".

That's identity politics, pure and simple.  It's also a ludicrous lie, as the chart above clearly shows.


Tags: , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
I'm not going to argue against the cultural voting thing (4.00 / 3)
because it's absolutely true (though it is true of some Democratic voters, too--the Obama Rohrsach test thing is a pretty good example of that).  But another thing that helps explain the Republicans being able to move like this is that they actually respond to whipping by their leadership, or at least, their leadership will try and whip them.  

The Republican leadership knows that there is nothing to be gained by having anyone support Obama, and they consequently make it clear to Susan Collins that she is going to have to move into line or she's toast.  

There is no reason that the Dem leadership coudln't be leveraging the obama visits, Obama's organization, obama's money along with the DSCC and the DCCC against OUR moderates in tough districts.  They just don't.  


Sure Obama Could Do This (4.00 / 1)
And, in fact, even I expected him to do precisely this.  Not because I thought he was particularly progressive, but because I thought he was smart and ambitious enough to realize--sooner or late--that this was absolutely necessary in order to have a successful presidency.

But even had he done that, it would amount to nothing more than smart politics for single president.  It would not necessarily amount to anything deeper.

And even that has proven to be beyond us.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
If he made a thing out of doing it, it would be different (0.00 / 0)
the most effective thing that Reagan said was pushing the "11th commandment" thing, and then centralizing power in such a way that it was almost always better for a Republican to support him than oppose him.  

This almost immediately stopped the Republican defections that enabled things like Medicare and the Civil Rights bills and Title IX to pass.  

Now, I don't know that copying the authoritarian Republican model is good for Democrats, but exerting some leverage on the conservadems couldn't hurt.  


[ Parent ]
Well, There's A Lot More Options Out There Than This Big-Picture Thumbnail Sketch (0.00 / 0)
Reagan still couldn't convince Congressional Republicans to do away with Social Security, as he wished to, and he himself ended up doing a "grand bargain" with Tip O'Neil to save it instead.  It wasn't until a decade later that House GOP got that militant, and not till a decade after that that the Senate fully followed suit.

So even if the Dems were identical in psychology, it doesn't mean everything would change overnignt.  But we have something going for us that the conservatives didn't and still don't: reality.

Who knew that Obama would be as allergic to it as GW Bush?  (See my new quick hit, "Obama Cluelessness Watch: 'True Engine Of Job Creation Will Always Be Businesses'", for a brand new example.)

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
I don't disagree that there aren't more options (0.00 / 0)
but there is going to have to be some sort of dressing down of the Joe Liebermans of the world, either in public or in private, or something like the abolishment of the filibuster to make them irrelevant.  

There needs to be a way to rein in the bad faith negotiators within the Democratic Party that are, with what seems to be intentionality, destroying the party.  


[ Parent ]
Oh, Definitely (0.00 / 0)
The Dem's bad faith caucus has to be dealt with.  And the abolition of the filibuster is needed now for multiple reasons--all the haters, Dem and Rep, are upping the use/abuse of it in ways previously un-dreamed of.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
And, I would argue that the situation with Reagan was different (0.00 / 0)
He never had a majority in Congress.  And while the Dixiecrats may have given him a functional majority on some issues, a committed leadership can do a lot to alter the directions of policy.  And Tip O'Neil was no Dick Gephardt.  

[ Parent ]
No (0.00 / 0)
Tip O'Neil was a master politician, with a relatively responsible majority on many issues, despite the Dixiecrats.  That's why Reagan could get the Dixiecrats on some things, but not nearly on everything, and never in a split-second knee-jerk fashion that totally undercut O'Neil.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Very True - and the Joke's on Us (4.00 / 4)
This president is not just supporting Republican-friendly policies, he is supporting actual Republican's actual policies, and the Republicans are voting no, against their own ideas, just to stick it to him.

Democrats control the presidency and Congress, with large majorities in both houses, with Republicans united in a thoroughly discredited ideology, and yet Democrats insisted (even when they had sixty votes) that Republican votes were important. So they adopted Republicans policies, sometimes enacted them, and are now complaining that Republicans aren't helping them enact more Republican policies.  

For me, that seems like more than a strategic problem.

Support a Pennsylvania Progressive for Governor - Joe Hoeffel


Oh, DEFINITELY More Than A Strategic Problem (4.00 / 3)
It's a problem on so many levels, you'd think it was designed as an illustration for the 30th Anniversary Edition of Goedel, Escher, Bach.

My recent diary on Obama & reaction formation was just one of those levels, among many.  Coming up later today is a diary on the three "Third Ways", which is more on the ideological/historical level.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
The Republicans remind of Huey Long (4.00 / 1)
A man who FDR accurately labeled as dangerous.  Long's goal in the Senate was to undercut FDR and make him vulnerable.  His plan was to work with Father Coughlin and perhaps a few others to support a third-party candidate who would drain enough votes from Roosevelt to put a Republican in the White House in 1936 who would vulnerable to Long's planned 1940 presidential bid.  Long's famous recipe-reading filibuster against an extension of the National Recovery Act was supposedly because it didn't go enough to help the poor, but more because he didn't want his political opponents in Louisiana to benefit and because he didn't want FDR to be too successful.  The death of the principle-less Huey Long, whose populism was a facade that, pragmatically, the best vehicle for him to attain more power, was probably a net positive for the United States.

Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both

Because Long Didn't Live (4.00 / 1)
we'll never know for sure.  Views about who Long really was were all over the map, and I tend to think there was a piece of the truth in at least three or four mutually contradictory views.  But even if we take yours as true, Republicans remind me much more of the Liberty League, which--among other things--hatched a plot to try to overthrow the government, and establish a military dictatorship.

Once upon a time, Oliver Stone was supposed to be working on a film project about this forgotten chapter in American history.  Not sure what happened with that.  

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Ain't they the like John Birch Society? (0.00 / 0)
Not only the similarity of the names is stunning (Birchers - Birthers), but also the hate of everything "socialist" (and that's everything to the left of them!) and the crush for conspiracy theories is the same!

[ Parent ]
You're Confused On One Point Paul (0.00 / 0)
It's a substantial segment of Republicans, not conservatives, that doesn't believe in fiscal conservatism. If you don't believe in and practice fiscal conservatism then you're not a conservative - by definition. Same goes for Democrats and progressivism, by the way.

That said, I absolutely agree with your premise that there are a much greater percentage of professed conservatives (who actually aren't) in the GOP who don't vote conservatively than professed liberals in the Democratic Party who don't vote progressively. The reason, I suspect, is quite political. With Democrats promising government-as-savior for whatever ails us it's a tough slog to convince any electorate to vote for restraint, discipline or (horrors!) Uncle Sam involving itself less in our lives. It's just easier (and more cozy) to snuggle up to the idea that government is our benevolent caretaker and its costs will just.. work themselves out somehow. The problem in this for Democrats, of course, is when their margins get called and government gets revealed, typically through an economic downturn, for the.. ahem.. non-savior that it is. Thus will be the story, I suspect, come November.

So Ronald Reagan Wasn't A Conserative, By Definition? (4.00 / 1)
If you don't believe in and practice fiscal conservatism then you're not a conservative - by definition.

I always learn something new, each time you comment, Rick.

It's always something false, too.  But it's new.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
In What Ways Would You Suggest He Wasn't? (2.00 / 2)
Passionate believer in and advocate of laissez-faire, supply side economic theory.

Reducer of federal income tax rates.

Cutter of many federal programs (non-military), including Medicaid.

Ended price controls on domestic oil.

That's a pretty great fiscally conservative pedigree to me. Obviously ideology of any flavor is a matter of degree and Reagan wasn't as conservative as others in some ways - his light touch on Social Security and Medicare come to mind - but if you're serious that The Gipper wasn't a conservative you're on crack.

[ Parent ]
Read The Fricken Chart! (4.00 / 1)
Where it says, "Reagan Republicans".

Before Reagan, we had almost continuously reduced the debt-to-GDP ratio since WWII.  Reagan put an end to that, and from then on, only Clinton reduced the debt-to-GDP ratio.  Ballooning the debt became a central operating principal of so-called "fiscal conservatism".  It only became "socialist" when Obama took over the reins from Bush II.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Sorry, I know it wasn't the main point of the post: (4.00 / 1)
But PayGo? Wtf are Obama and Congr. Dems doing embracing PayGo? Do they not understand that PayGo will make it harder to govern in this economy? Paygo will make it harder to get a good jobs bill passed, and harder to put together another stimulus.

It's just more of that counterproductive deficit-peacockery*, and we have quite enough of that already.

*Ia, ia, Krugthulu rlyeh


It's Not That I APPROVE Of PayGo (4.00 / 1)
It's that PayGo would actually make "fiscal conservatives" walk the walk, and hence they hate it an order of magnitude more than I do.

Or, if the trend of conservative victimology ratios I've been writing about recently continues to hold, make that five orders of magnitude more than I do.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Write a book on this (0.00 / 0)
Paul, I think your insight that modern conservatism is an identity, not a philosophy is one of your best insights in the past few years. I encourage you to expand this thesis into a book.






Donate to Open Left




blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
USER MENU
QUICK HITS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search