home  |  book  |  blogs  |   RSS  |  contact  |
  Take the Test!
Monday October 6, 2008 
by Christopher Chantrill

TOP NAV

Home

Blogs

Opeds

Articles

Bio

Contact

BOOK

Manifesto

Sample

Faith

Education

Mutual aid

Law

Books

BLOGS 08

Oct 2008

Sep 2008

Aug 2008

Jul 2008

Jun 2008

May 2008

Apr 2008

Mar 2008

Feb 2008

Jan 2008

BLOGS 07

Dec 2007

Nov 2007

Oct 2007

Sep 2007

Aug 2007

Jul 2007

Jun 2007

May 2007

Apr 2007

Mar 2007

Feb 2007

Jan 2007

BLOGS 06

Dec 2006

Nov 2006

Oct 2006

Sep 2006

Aug 2006

Jul 2006

Jun 2006

May 2006

Apr 2006

Mar 2006

Feb 2006

Jan 2006

BLOGS 05

Dec 2005

Nov 2005

Oct 2005

Sep 2005

Aug 2005

Jul 2005

Jun 2005

May 2005

Apr 2005

Mar 2005

Feb 2005

Jan 2005

BLOGS 04

Dec 2004

print view

After Clinton or Obama, Woman-centered Conservatism

by Christopher Chantrill
December 20, 2007

|

WHICH OF the two Democratic frontrunners would Republicans prefer to run against? That was what Hugh Hewitt asked his listeners last week as the Democratic race began to tighten.

But he was asking the wrong question. The right question is: which Democrat would you prefer to have in the White House in 2009, or more exactly, at the next mid-term election in 2010?

Even if a Republican wins the White House in 2008 they won’t have much of a mandate. If the voters want “change,” whether Obama’s “Change You Can Believe In” or Clinton’s “Ready for Change” or some other kind of change, it will be difficult for a Republican to offer it. There’s a Republican in the White House, and many voters will keenly feel the chill headwind of the mortgage meltdown, the Iraq war, and the high gas prices.

On top of everything Alan Greenspan has now mentioned the “R” word. There’s a 50-50 chance of recession, he says. Whether he is right or not, you can expect an uncomfortable economy in 2008, enough to encourage the Democrats to reprise the Clinton refrain of 1992. “Worst economy in 50 years,” they said, just after the mildest recession since World War II.

Let us not think tactically about how to beat the Democrats in 2008. Let us think strategically about how to storm back into power when the voters next get fed up with Democrats.

Today the Republican program of reform is dead in the water. Whenever Republicans suggest what Mark Steyn helpfully calls the “teensy-weensiest little tweakette” of reform to the welfare state the Democrats say: Over my dead body.

We are never going to reform the welfare state in a set-piece battle. The time to reform entitlements is when Democrats are on the run or playing possum after an election like 1980 or 1994.

Both elections, in 1980 and in 1994, were elections in which a surging Republican Party cold-cocked the incumbent Democrats. You can’t win that kind of election when a Republican is in the White House.

So the long-term view would be to ask which Democrat you’d like in the White House when Republicans come storming back after two or four years of a lackluster Democratic administration.

On this view, which of the two, Clinton or Obama, would be better for Republicans?

Clinton is the more experienced, and the more cunning. We could expect her to excel at creating stealth programs to advance the Democratic vision of Life as a Defined Benefit, craftily doling out to Democratic voters dollars taken from Republican taxpayers.

An Obama administration would be more likely get pushed around by the permanent government of the Democratic Congress, the Democratic bureaucracy, and the Democratic activists. Whatever Obama may say about change, the permanent government is devoted to the continuation of the Democratic vision of Life as a Defined Benefit.

It’s a tough call. But after a couple of years of another President Clinton we can anticipate eruptions of acid reflux among the voters.

Under any president the long term challenge for conservatives remains the same. How do you persuade the moderate white middle-aged woman voter to sign onto reform? You are asking her to change a government school system that is all she has ever known. You are asking her to agree to health system changes that will confuse and annoy her aging mother. Women just won’t step out into the unknown like that.

You must provide them with an alternative. That’s what Margaret Thatcher said.

Conservatives must start to build a parallel system to demonstrate the conservative version of the services that women care about. We want those moderate women to start hearing from their friends about a new school that is really helping a child with special problems or a new clinic that is really helping an older women friend with her health problems.

It means making a reality out of the empty slogan Change You Can Believe In. You can believe in it because it already works.

Call it woman-friendly conservatism. The next Republican president must show women the conservative program of limited government and its luxuriant underbrush of mediating institutions actually working for women.

Then they will be ready to believe that the conservative agenda of family, church, and neighborhood delivers a much more woman-friendly world than the heedless bureaucracies of big government.

Christopher Chantrill blogs at www.roadtothemiddleclass.com.  His Road to the Middle Class is forthcoming.

print view


Post a comment:

(missing name)

(missing email address)

1000 characters left

 

 TAGS


Society and State

For [the left] there is only the state and the individual, nothing in between. No family to rely on, no friend to depend on, no community to call on. No neighbourhood to grow in, no faith to share in, no charities to work in. No-one but the Minister, nowhere but Whitehall, no such thing as society - just them, and their laws, and their rules, and their arrogance.
David Cameron, Conference Speech 2008


Faith and Politics

As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person, and she is thereby consciously drawing particular attention to principles which are not negotiable... [1.] protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death; [2.] recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family... [3.] the protection of the right of parents to educate their children.
Pope Benedict XVI, Speech to European Peoples Party, 2006


Never Trust Experts

No lesson seems to be so deeply inculcated by the experience of life as that you should never trust experts. If you believe doctors, nothing is wholesome: if you believe the theologians, nothing is innocent: if you believe the soldiers, nothing is safe. They all require their strong wine diluted by a very large admixture of insipid common sense.
Lord Salisbury, “Letter to Lord Lytton”


Conservatism's Holy Grail

What distinguishes true Conservatism from the rest, and from the Blair project, is the belief in more personal freedom and more market freedom, along with less state intervention... The true Third Way is the Holy Grail of Tory politics today - compassion and community without compulsion.
Minette Marrin, The Daily Telegraph


Class War

In England there were always two sharply opposed middle classes, the academic middle class and the commercial middle class. In the nineteenth century, the academic middle class won the battle for power and status... Then came the triumph of Margaret Thatcher... The academics lost their power and prestige and... have been gloomy ever since.
Freeman Dyson, “The Scientist as Rebel”


Government Expenditure

The Union publishes an exact return of the amount of its taxes; I can get copies of the budgets of the four and twenty component states; but who can tell me what the citizens spend in the administration of county and township?
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America


Conservatism

Conservatism is the philosophy of society. Its ethic is fraternity and its characteristic is authority — the non-coercive social persuasion which operates in a family or a community. It says ‘we should...’.
Danny Kruger, On Fraternity


Postmodernism

A writer who says that there are no truths, or that all truth is ’merely relative’, is asking you not to believe him. So don’t.
Roger Scruton, Modern Philosophy


Racial Discrimination

[T]he way “to achieve a system of determining admission to the public schools on a nonracial basis,” Brown II, 349 U. S., at 300–301, is to stop assigning students on a racial basis. The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.
Roberts, C.J., Parents Involved in Community Schools vs. Seattle School District


Physics, Religion, and Psychology

Paul Dirac: “When I was talking with Lemaître about [the expanding universe] and feeling stimulated by the grandeur of the picture that he has given us, I told him that I thought cosmology was the branch of science that lies closest to religion. However [Georges] Lemaître [Catholic priest, physicist, and inventor of the Big Bang Theory] did not agree with me. After thinking it over he suggested psychology as lying closest to religion.”
John Farrell, “The Creation Myth”


China and Christianity

At first, we thought [the power of the West] was because you had more powerful guns than we had. Then we thought it was because you had the best political system. Next we focused on your economic system. But in the past twenty years, we have realized that the heart of your culture is your religion: Christianity.
David Aikman, Jesus in Beijing


Pentecostalism

Within Pentecostalism the injurious hierarchies of the wider world are abrogated and replaced by a single hierarchy of faith, grace, and the empowerments of the spirit... where groups gather on rafts to take them through the turbulence of the great journey from extensive rural networks to the mega-city and the nuclear family...
David Martin, On Secularization


mysql close

 

©2007 Christopher Chantrill