Conservatism’s critics often see it as an undifferentiated mass animated by hostility to “big government,” support for social traditionalism and a deep animosity toward liberalism.
But conservatism is a diverse movement with many philosophical threads and tensions. Successful conservative politicians such as Ronald Reagan (and George W. Bush in his first term) kept the peace among economic, social and big-business conservatives while moderating the movement’s public rhetoric.
In opposition, conservatives often manage to bury their differences. But conservatism has flown apart when its components have come into conflict or when extreme rhetoric has come to the fore.
The rise of the Tea Party is a throwback to an old form of libertarianism that sees most domestic policies undertaken by the government since the New Deal as unconstitutional. It typically perceives the most dangerous threats to freedom as the design of well-educated elitists out of touch with “American values.”
In its extreme antipathy to the power of the federal government, this movement may prove to be threatening to the Republicans in what should otherwise be a good year for the party.
Rep. Joe Barton’s apology last week to BP for Obama’s alleged “shakedown” of the company for $20 billion on behalf of those hurt by the Gulf oil spill was embarrassing precisely because it underscored how far the right’s mistrust of the federal government goes.
When faced with a choice between supporting a large British corporation or a federal government battling for compensation of the disaster’s victims, Barton sided with Big Oil.
Barton later withdrew his apology under pressure from Republican leaders, but many in the party and on the right echoed his views.
The language of the new anti-statists, like the language of the 1950s’ right, regularly harks back to the U.S. Constitution and the Founders in calling attention to perceived threats to liberty.
A group called Tea Party Patriots describes itself as “a community committed to standing together, shoulder to shoulder, to protect our country and the Constitution upon which we were founded!”
Tea Party Nation says it is “a user-driven group of like-minded people who desire our God given Individual Freedoms which were written out by the Founding Fathers.”
As the scrutiny of the movement has increased, its critics have noticed how much of this is very old American stuff.
One of the important groups on the right in the mid-20th century took the name Americans for Constitutional Action. The group, as Seymour Martin Lipset and Earl Raab reported in their sociological classic, “The Politics of Unreason,” favored “progressive repeal of the socialistic laws now on our books.”
What’s remarkable is the extent to which the Tea Party movement has displaced the religious right as the dominant voice of conservative militancy.
The religious conservatives have not disappeared, and Sarah Palin, a Tea Party hero, does share their views on abortion and gay marriage. But these issues have been overshadowed by broader anti-government themes.
Thus has Obama revived a venerable if disturbing style of conservative thinking. In the short run, the new movement’s energy threatens him. In the long run, its extremism may be his salvation.
E.J. Dionne Jr. writes for The Washington Post. E-mail address: ejdionne@washpost.com.