Mugged by Fallacy

The national conservatism movement is drenched in nostalgia for a past that never was.

By
249

This isn’t really a column I want to write.

I admire Christopher DeMuth deeply. He is, without qualification, one of the smartest people I’ve ever met, and I’ve spent my whole career surrounded by very smart people. He was the president of the American Enterprise Institute when I first started working there as a larval policy gnome in the 1990s. He often knew more about various policy issues than the specialists studying them. He’s charming, friendly, and again, quite brilliant.

But if history has taught us anything, it’s that smart people can be wrong. And it’s because I respect him so much that I think it’s worth engaging him at some (possibly unforgivable) length. If “national conservatism” is going to succeed, it will be because people like DeMuth put their well-deserved reputations behind it.

Last week, he wrote a Wall Street Journal op-ed based on his remarks to the National Conservatism Conference—which he chaired.

Keep reading with a free account
Create a free Dispatch account to keep reading Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
249
By
Comments (249)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Annette VIGES

    Great article

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Ben Connelly

    It’s a tough job, but somebody has to do it. And Jonah Goldberg realized that it’s not enough to say, “somebody’s got to do something,” without then following it up with, “and that somebody is me.”

    Thanks, Jonah. It’s important to have strong voices refuting the National Conservatives, who have all too much oxygen right now. If this is outside of the paywall, I may share it.

    Collapse
  3. Eric Waxman

    This column is a triumph, informed by so much of what Jonah has espoused in his prior works. (I've been reading Jonah since his G-File days at NR and read or listened to all or nearly all his books.) Way to go! I was a student in Irving Kristol's Capitalism and Socialism class at NYU's business school back in the day. I think he would endorse Jonah's views and then smoke another cigarette.

    Collapse
  4. Michael E

    "The three pillars of modern conservatism are religion...."

    Aaaaand that's why I'm not and could never be a conservative.

    Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    Gerald Arcuri

    "Personally, I think the sudden onset of transgenderism in teenagers can be at least partially explained by this kind of thing."

    Jonah,

    You needn't have qualified that statement with the introductory phrase "personally, I think". The statement following those words stands on its own two feet. It is, to use my favorite "Goldbergism", incandescently obvious that the sudden onset of transgenderism is a form of mimicry, not to mention a form of seeking meaning by identification with a supposedly oppressed ( tiny ) minority as a source of virtue. It is pathetically the case - of you look at American youth - that we are on the same secular trajectory as Japan. We are reaping the same whirlwind, fo only slightly different reasons.

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Earl King

    Conservatism vs. National Conservatism. What is the difference? I still am not sure I understand it. So let me throw my 2 cents in which is likely what its worth.

    In its simplest form and explanation...Should Americas businesses work to promote solely themselves or should they have a filter that says "is it good for the country"? Look having lived thru the cold war....if America and its companies and politicians didn't all row the boat in the same direction would not have have beaten the Soviet Union. It was patriotic to participate in the Cold War on Americas side.

    So now look at this thru the eyes of Personal Protection Equipment. In the middle of pandemic we looked around and we didn't have enough PPE to fight the pandemic properly. Those of us who needed it were told to just keep using the one we were given. There were even disinfection plans, how to wash it...all sorts of goofy crap. Suddenly we found out that America doesn't produce its PPE...China does. They needed PPE as well. They, no doubt, were keeping much to themselves. So Trump asks the question....in his ignorant fashion....Shouldn't we, (the US) have some capacity to manufacture PPE? Then he said it about Steel. Should we retain the ability to manufacture Steel in America? People like Scott Lincicome recoiled...let the markets handle it. That belies the realities of modern life. Wars, hot and cold occur. Countries who might be manufacturing vitals ingredients for your business can in a moments notice stop selling them to you. Some, not all of our pharmaceuticals are manufactured overseas...

    We all get the value of having cheaper options...Keeps inflation low... gives Americans a price break which then can be spent on "other" items. Wal Mart and those who shop these speak to the value. But what of the long term implications. Will the world always be safe? The Pandemic gave us that lesson. The answer is no.

    So here is the question I have for Jonah. Do we want to protect American interests against the economic and military hegemony of China...Do American companies have any responsibility to do so? Do we regulate the behavior of American companies? If Intel wants to sell it's latest advanced chip to a Chinese company is it ok with you?

    I get it is about the principal of a smaller less overreaching government bent on implementing authoritarian tendencies. I too am skeptical....But I also am worried for our position...I like the fact we do have an innovative system, we are an economic powerhouse that can afford the greatest military in the world....I'm scared there are those who simply want to surrender to China.

    Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    rlritt

    It won't count for small businesses. And anyway supposedly there are millions of unfilled jobs out there waiting for lazy slackers living off the stimulus money to get off their duffs.

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Philbnichols

    Jonah's salt analogy could be a bit better by diluting it in a compartmental way with a different but still realized use of salt - as a preservative.
    The salt-as-seasoning analogy well-illustrates the danger of 'too much salt' - death by poisoning - but it falls short of aptly illustrating the true danger in having too little of an important thing. By adding salt-as-preservative to only the 'too little salt' side of the equation, you get a more accurate sense of the real danger of too little of a good thing, in the sense that what you are adding salt to will not be preserved without enough salt; it will rot and die.
    This seems especially true when applied to nationalism, if you define nationalism positively with gratitude at the center. Without being grateful for the benefits our country has given everyone living today, at least, we will stray from some of the vital, foundational things around which America was constituted.
    Maybe, maybe not.

    Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    Kmregan7

    It's funny to read this today, because I've been reading Sam Tanenhaus. Always a thrill to have even a slight connection in an article.

    Collapse
  10. Matt Mullen

    It is about nostalgia. I think the male moral role models for the Trump wing of the Republican Party are Tony Soprano and Rush Limbaugh. Which explains why they adore Trump. He's a man who takes what he wants and doesn't give a fuck about what anyone else says. And they love that about him. And that's not good. Whatever happened to emulating Jesus? I could respect a Republican party that emulated Jesus.

    Collapse
Load More