Last night I watched this video on Pajamas TV that consist of panels discussions
held at CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) and something I
noticed was quite revealing. A couple of the panelist and even a guest in the
Conservatism 2.0 conference said they were libertarians. Call me crazy but
shouldn't a panel discussion about the future of conservatism consist of
conservatives?
I realize that libertarians and conservatives have much in common. I'm not
one that wants ideological purity in the conservative movement. Hey,
conservatives feel somewhat deflated these days so aligning ourselves with
people who agree with say about 75 percent of the issues is just fine with me.
But when discussing the future of conservatism shouldn't that be a conversation
held among people who aren't embarrassed to call themselves conservatives. If
we are talking about the future of the Republican Party then conservatives,
classical liberals, and libertarians should battle it out for the party platform
just like the Democrat Party has battles between different fractions of its party.
Maybe the reason why libertarians were included in the Conservatism 2.0 panel
because some believe that libertarianism is the future of the conservatism
movement? Which they might have a point. I can see were libertarianism can
be viewed much more appealing to younger people. However, if libertarianism
and conservatism meld together to make a more popular ideology than it's no
longer conservatism. Let's be specific in defining ideology. For example, most
leftist bloggers and even some Democratic politicians don't call themselves
liberals anymore but progressives and they are right to do so. The New Left
barely resembles its predecessors.
After two elections were the American people have chosen bigger government,
I know conservatives need to have a discussion on how to move forward from here.
But am I too stringent to think those included in the dialogue should not be
embarrassed to call themselves a "conservative"?
