David Brooks, as the conservative in residence intellectual at The New York Times (Jennifer Rubin serves the same function at the Washington Post of course) has an article up, grandly titled
"The Conservative Future" where he surveys the "new voices" of the post Romney conservatism.
He concludes, prescriptively as is the wont of the patrician, with a list of authors we should follow for our enlightenment in this new era of Republican "open mindedness. In his words:
"Since Nov. 6, the G.O.P. has experienced an epidemic of open-mindedness. The party may evolve quickly. If so, it’ll be powerfully influenced by people with names like Reihan, Ramesh, Yuval and Derek Khanna."
In the plethora of intellectual elitism on offer one gets the feeling that we are reading a Leninist "what is to be done" menu, and in the end the various formulas on offer are top down.
"Burkean Revivalists. This group includes young conservatives whose intellectual roots go back to the organic vision of society described best by Edmund Burke but who are still deeply enmeshed in current policy debates"
Yes that will resonate with Marx's (Groucho)"Barber of Peru" (Indiana)
That this is clear is readily discerned by the rejection of Reaganism and the attack on the base and there being not a single mention of the Tea party. The fact that the Tea party brought one of the biggest Republican landslides in 2010 whereas the establishment candidates in 2008/2012 lost two presidential elections in a row is also swept under the rug.
"By and large, these diverse writers did not grow up in the age of Reagan and are not trying to recapture it. They disdain what you might call Donor Base Republicanism. Most important, they matured intellectually within a far-reaching Web-based conversation. In contrast to many members of the conservative political-entertainment complex, they are data-driven, empirical and low-key in tone."
In part two, I look to address what I would ask, not prescribe, the grass roots, Tea Party Republican base to consider/dialogue, as the social and economic policy road to 2014 and 2016 is considered
Fair Use Notice
FAIR USE NOTICE:
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.
We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
TITLE 17 > CHAPTER 1 > § 107
§ 107. LIMITATIONS ON EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS: FAIR USE
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.
In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
Copyright issues email to email@example.com