Neo-Progressive Republicans: Government Is the Solution, Not the Problem

The Republican National Convention confirms the neo-progressive authoritarian wing of the Republican party is in control.

With the Republican National Convention in the books, we can conclude that the party is now officially a champion of big government. And American workers have been added as a new collective whose alleged “rights” must be protected with tariffs, subsidies and regulations. Speakers from Teamsters president Sean O'Brien (a first for an RNC) to VP candidate J.D. Vance bashed big business and “spoke up” for the working class. It’s quite a change from the days of Ronald Reagan that confirms the party’s turn in an explicit collectivist/statist direction. Gone are the days of at least paying lip service to limited government. 

More ominously, Trump’s selection of said ambitious power-seeker J.D. Vance (read Andy Craig’s chilling analysis) as his running mate confirms the fears that many of us have had since 2016: that the former—and possibly next—president’s emotional populism would pave the way for a more intellectual and authoritarian nationalist, neo-progressive conservative (NeoProgCon) leadership and agenda. Champions of the morally Right—individualism, respect for and protection of individual rights incl. a strict separation of state and faith, limited government and capitalism—are facing a bleak future in the short- to mid-term as both major parties are doubling down on collectivist/statist big government platforms. Comparisons with the 1920s Weimar Republic are overwrought, but one parallel is worth pointing out: just like back then, the fear of leftist power among conservatives is delivering them into the hands of their own authoritarian version represented by the NeoProgCons under the banner of “making America great again.” It’s hard to say if it is due to lack of thinking in principles, acceptance of authoritarianism as long as “my tribe” is in charge, or both. Regardless, the consequences are ominous for our country. 

Just over a year ago, I wrote an article with the title “WANTED: Conservatives for Capitalism, not NeoProgCons” arguing that conservatism has taken a turn for the worse and that it needs to embrace the morally Right. Well, it appears the message didn’t register with primary voters, so I’m republishing it here with the hope that independently thinking Americans take note. Dear reader, do your part by hitting that Share button. 

PS. Thanks to those who have pre-ordered the 3rd expanded ebook edition of “Think Right or Wrong, Not Left or Right” to be released on Aug 15. If you haven’t yet, this is your opportunity.

Cheers!

WANTED: Conservatives for Capitalism, not NeoProgCons 

America needs conservatives that champion capitalism, not neo-progressive conservatives (NeoProgCons) taking the country in an authoritarian/theocratic direction 

It’s no secret that conservatism has taken a decided turn for the worse in recent years. Conservative “thought leaders” such as Adrian Vermeule, Patrick Deneen, Sohrab Ahmari, Yoram Hazony and others are actively advocating for abandoning the Lockean foundation of the American experiment. They cite today’s secularizing, supposedly morally decaying society as evidence that individualism, respect for and protection of individual rights, limited government and capitalism have failed. They argue that the country should adopt a collectivist, authoritarian/theocratic model founded on integralism (removing the separation of church and state), common good constitutionalism (the common good of society, as defined by its rulers, trumps individual rights), and nationalism (the primacy of country over the individual). To achieve these goals, the argument goes, conservatives have to abandon decency and respect for individual rights in favor of using the tactics of leftist progressives, basically by adopting Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals for conservative ends. Say hello to the new progressive conservatives, or NeoProgCons. (For a comprehensive summary of the above (excluding the NeoProgCon label), see William Galston’s article in Persuasion) 

Progressive conservatism is nothing new. Back in the late 19^th/early 20^th century, conservatives often espoused progressive values, primarily a belief in the experts of the administrative state acting as benevolent rulers applying scientific methods of government intervention to improve the life of the citizenry. Teddy Roosevelt is probably its most well-known representative, followed closely by Herbert Hoover. However, with their explicit support for integralism, today’s NeoProgCons appear to have taken progressive conservatism to the next level, adding a theocratic element to its authoritarian vision. 

In the spirit of their predecessors, the NeoProgCons want to employ the state to further their spiritual and material goals, with the individual taking a moral and political backseat. Unsurprisingly, they have found a captive audience among conservative politicians, who find in these theories an instrument for increasing their supposed popularity among, and power over, their constituents. As late as this past Wednesday, four senators—J.D. Vance (OH), Marco Rubio (FL), Tom Cotton (AR), and Todd Young (IN)—spoke at an event on Capitol Hill that highlighted the emergence of a neo-progressive conservative movement. The event was organized around a policy manifesto, called “Rebuilding American Capitalism: A Handbook for Conservative Policymakers,” published by American Compass, a NeoProgCon outfit headed by Oren Cass. Its mission is “To restore an economic consensus that emphasizes the importance of family, community, and industry to the nation’s liberty and prosperity.” The fundamental tenet of the document is that capitalism has gone astray the past 50 years due to a “blind faith in the market,” and that government intervention is required to right the ship. It reads as a conservative central planning manifesto, arguing for more government involvement in areas from international trade, industry and finance, to family, education and labor relations. Contrary to its title, the document has hardly anything to do with rebuilding capitalism, and almost everything with expanding the welfare state. 

What is the answer to the NeoProgCons? Contrary to their assertion, it’s not the failure of capitalism but the increase in welfare statism over the past 50 years that has led to the real and perceived societal problems they want to address. The massive increase in individual rights violating regulations has reduced dynamism, competition, and jobs creation, and slowed economic growth to a trickle. And the massive expansion of the money supply to rescue financial institutions, finance welfare statist programs such as Social Security and Medicare, and provide Covid relief, has stoked inflation, significantly increasing the cost of healthcare, housing and education, and, in the past couple of years, prices on pretty much everything. No wonder a family dependent on a salary or wage for their livelihood may feel that life is spinning out of control. 

The only lasting solution to the problem is to double down on the Lockean experiment: increase respect for and protection of individual rights, limit the size of government, and champion capitalism by gradually dismantling today’s welfare state (see Think Right or Wrong, Not Left or Right for details). This will unleash growth, eliminate inflation and increase real wages and salaries, allowing every able-bodied person to regain control of their life, buy affordable health insurance, save for a comfortable retirement, and put their kids through school without breaking the bank. 

Conservatives have traditionally had an ambivalent view of capitalism. While reluctantly acknowledging its superiority in creating wealth, their allegiance to a philosophy that puts family, faith and nation ahead of the individual inevitably leads to a collectivist outlook on life where individual rights are sacrificed for the common good. And, as I wrote in the book: 

Traditionally, conservatives have been viewed as somewhat less in favor of welfare statism than leftists. In many cases that is still true, but both fundamentally and in practice we’re talking about different shades of gray. For example, few conservatives seriously question the individual right violations of the big three welfare statist programs—Social Security, Medicare, and government (“public”) education—… 

This is why conservatives have always played in the same morally WRONG sandbox as leftists (right column below), only a bit less consistently: 

To address what ails society once and for all, conservatives should unreservedly champion capitalism, moving us in the morally RIGHT direction (left column above), not fall in the NeoProgCon trap, taking us further down the collectivist/statist path towards authoritarianism.