The
Atlantic recently published an excellent
piece by Professor Peter Beinart, discussing the divisions within the
American Republican party over policy towards Russia. It makes a distinction
between ‘ideological’ conservatives, primarily loyal to liberal-democratic
values, and ‘civilizational’ conservatives, who prioritise the defence of Judeo-Christian
culture and civilisation. The former, which include the likes of George W.
Bush, Mitt Romney and John McCain, tend to be suspicious of Russia and other
countries with authoritarian leaders, and desire to spread the
liberal-democratic form of government around the world. The latter group, which
contains figures like President-elect Donald Trump and his chief strategist Steve
Bannon, are primarily interested in defending ‘Western’ culture and
civilisation from external threats, chiefly ‘radical Islam’ (or Islam itself),
and see Russia under Putin as an ally in this struggle.
Professor Beinart’s analysis can, I think, be
expanded beyond the American Republican party to cover Western conservatism in
general. Admittedly this is not a totally fresh perspective. It has long been
argued that conservatives can be divided between populists and free-market
liberals. Between ‘nationalists’ and ‘globalists’. This analysis may be
somewhat simplistic, but it is also extremely useful.
All Western conservatives want to preserve and
enhance Western civilisation. But there is a key disagreement on what
constitutes the core of this civilisation. For ‘ideological’ conservatives, who
were until quite recently the overwhelmingly dominant body, its liberal-democratic
values. They attribute the success of Western nations to democratic
institutions and practices, the rule of law and market economics. They also
tend to believe, at least to some extent, that these values are potentially
universal and exportable, and thus often favour an interventionist foreign
policy. By contrast ‘civilizational’ conservatives define Western civilisation
primarily in cultural terms, with Judeo-Christian values at its core. This is
usually combined with a dose of nativist nationalism, and sometime (as in the
case of Trump) with some focus on white identity politics. Civilizational
conservatives tend to be much more suspicious of foreign influences, which
could erode their countries Judeo-Christian values, and are correspondingly
less interested in foreign interventions unless undertaken in naked
self-interest.
Until quite recently ‘ideological’ conservatism
was so dominant within the mainstream conservative movement, or its elite at
any rate, that those who adhered to ‘civilizational’ conservatism could largely
be ignored or dismissed as cranks and bigots. This is no longer the case. As
someone who believes the core of Western civilisation is liberal-democratic
values and institutions, making me an ‘ideological’ conservative, the revival
of this rival breed of conservatism over the past couple of years has been
something of a shock. Over the next few years, it could well become rather more
than this.
The revival of ‘civilizational’ conservativism has
many parents, and has been going on, partially hidden from view, for longer
than a lot of people realise. For some time now a significant section of the
public, in both Europe and America, have clearly been concerned with the level
of cultural change taking place due to immigration. The ‘ideological’ right,
like the centre-left, have largely failed to address this concern. Both are
fundamentally pro-immigration, and less concerned about cultural change. For
the left this is primarily due to internationalist principles and a belief in
individual rights. For the ideological right immigration is seen as useful to
business, and is supported on free market principles. In addition the
ideological right belief that liberal-democratic values are universalist means
they tend to believe that immigrant communities can be integrated into Western
societies with relative ease.
The civilizational right disagree. They are
suspicious of immigrant communities’ ability to assimilate into Judeo-Christian
civilisation, and so tend to view substantial migrant flows as a threat. And
like it or not, and on the whole I don’t, a significant proportion of the
general public agrees with them. Meaning that views which were once on the
fringe of conservatism have moved into the mainstream.
We can see the rise of ‘civilizational’
conservatism across the West. Most prominently it has recently triumphed in
America, with the election of Donald Trump running on explicitly anti-Hispanic
and Islamic immigration platform, and promising to promote Judeo-Christian
culture (and attacking anything which seeks to undermine this as ‘political
correctness’). The picture is similar in Europe. Civilizational conservative
parties (usually described as ‘populists’) are gaining ground across the
continent. In Eastern Europe they are already in Government in both Poland and
Hungary, with the governments of both countries portraying the 2015 refugee
surge from the Middle East as a threat to Christendom.
In Western Europe the situation is similar, with
civilizational conservative parties topping polls in France, Austria and the
Netherlands in recent months. Even in the UK civilizational conservatism has
seen a resurgence, with some (though far from all) ‘Leave’ campaigners making
explicit reference to it during the EU referendum debate. The focus on Turkey
joining the EU for example, was clearly responding to concerns which go quite a
bit beyond raw numbers. My personal experience when campaigning during the referendum
was that, for a section of ‘Leave’ voters, the vote became a change to voice
their displeasure at the level of cultural and demographic change which has
taken place in the past 30-40 years. More free-market orientated ‘ideological’
conservatives would be mad to ignore this.
In short ‘civilizational’ conservatism has made a
strong resurgence in recent years, in response to immigration levels and
associated cultural change, and could well grow further in the next few years.
More traditional conservatives such as myself, as well as the left, need to
recognise and acknowledge these concerns, or risk being swept away by them.
There is no shortage of ideologies in the dustbin of history. We need to make
sure ours isn’t next.
If you found this piece interesting
you might like to follow me on Twitter @JBickertonUK.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.