I'm Conservative, Not Republican

Conservatism and the Republican Party are distinct entities with the difference between the two becoming more prominent.

Creator: GoodIdeas | Credit: Getty Images/iStockphoto

Party Pooper

One of the most interesting conversations I always have is when somebody (that foolishly doesn’t read this newsletter) asks about my politics. My response is usually the same: I am a conservative but not a Republican. Typically, this response catches people by surprise and they usually want an explanation. This is my attempt to explain what I mean.

It’s understandable that people give such a reaction because the Republican Party and the conservative movement have been synonymous for the past four(ish) decades. There have been outliers along the way, and people have disagreed about what exactly conservatism is, but generally speaking the Republican Party and conservatism have been so closely aligned that a distinction hasn’t been necessary. Consequently, the distinction between the two terms has been lost by many people which leads to the puzzled looks that I get when I separate them. However, I believe that the Republican Party and conservatism have become less aligned in recent years; thus, the need to distinguish between the two.

I believe the difference comes down to the respective function that each has within our political system. The goal of the conservative movement has always been to make the country more conservative. For the last 40 years, the conservative movement has decided that the Republican Party is the vehicle through which to best accomplish that goal. As a result, conservatives have used the Republican Party to win elections and push conservative policies.

However, the Republican Party’s goal is simply to win elections. For the last 40 years, the Republican Party has pushed conservative policies because that was the way that they could win elections, but the goal has always been to first and foremost win elections. In other words, the Republican Party is a political organization intent on winning elections, while the conservative movement is focused on promoting particular principles regardless of party apparatus.

To put it simply: conservatives are principles first, Republicans are party first.

I don’t say this disparagingly because both are necessary elements of our political system. Both political parties have operatives within them that work tirelessly to do the practical work of actually ensuring victories for their respective party, not merely sitting around and talking about ideas. On the other hand, both progressives and conservative ideologues uncompromisingly serve as stalwarts that articulate policy positions which politicians can then use for compromises. Both elements are necessary.

Conservatism

The debate over what exactly is conservatism has been ranging for the last century. In fact, this is exactly the topic of a new book by conservative scholar Matthew Continenti (which I haven’t read yet but plan to). I don’t plan on entering this debate right now, but I do think it is necessary to lay out at least broadly what I mean when I talk about conservatism in this context.

Just to keep things simple, I will use the classic three-legged-stool analogy of the Reagan era to specify what I mean. Also called fusionism, this is the idea that the Republican Party was made up of three different coalitions of conservatives: economic conservatives, social conservatives, and defense conservatives (foreign policy hawks). There are disagreements within each “leg” of the stool and there is plenty of overlap between the three “legs,” but the core differences can largely be boiled down to one of emphasizing different elements.

Economic conservatives are usually the more libertarian wing of conservatives that want lower taxes, less government regulation in the economy, reduced welfare state, and less government spending or at least a balanced budget. Social conservatives are usually associated with the Christian right and focus on issues like abortion, gay marriage, natalism, and the promotion of ethical behavior by the government in general. Finally, the defense conservatives are the foreign policy hawks that want greater military spending, tough stance towards communism and other authoritarian regimes, the promotion of democratic institutions in other countries, and maintaining America’s position of the world’s superpower.

The only element that I would add to this description of conservatism is the conservative legal movement that has largely coincided with the establishment of The Federalist Society in 1982. I’m not sure exactly what “leg” it fits within, but I don’t think conservatism can be aptly described without its mention. The conservative legal movement is the promotion of legal theories, like textualism and originalism, that seek to interpret the Constitution and subsequent legislation based on its meaning at the time of its writing, not according to today’s definitions. This often results in less judicial activism and more deferral to the legislative branch for determining what standards of morality are acceptable. It also, I would argue, demonstrates a high regard for and defense of our political system’s constitutional structure.

There has always been and will always be some level of overlap and tension between these elements of conservatism, but this brief description serves my purpose of explaining what I mean by conservatism or the conservative movement.

Republican Departure

Now, I mentioned that I believe the Republican Party has increasingly moved away from its alignment with conservatism. I don’t mean that every Republican has become less conservative. There are still many Republicans that are very principled conservatives such as Ben Sasse, Mitt Romney, Tom Cotton, Peter Meijer, Liz Cheney, and Dan Crenshaw, just to name a few. This list isn’t meant to be exhaustive so don’t draw any conclusions from names that I excluded.

I also don’t mean to imply that there is not any overlap between more and less conservative Republicans. For example, I think Mitch McConnell is the quintessential Republican Party-first kind of guy, but he is also one of the most committed promoters of the conservative legal movement really of all time. However, I do believe the gap between conservatism and the Republican Party is increasingly widening.

Economically, the Republican Party has stopped talking about reforming entitlement programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. While it is understandable why Republicans promise not to touch these programs, because they are largely popular with the electorate, it is also unfeasible for these programs to remain the way that they are. As a result, budget deficits, under both Democrats and Republicans, have grown astronomically.

Furthermore, government intervention in the economy has become an increasingly more popular position for Republican politicians to take. This was evident during Donald Trump’s presidency in which he implemented tariffs on steel, aluminum, solar panels, and washing machines, just to name a few. In a similar vein, farm subsidies dramatically rose under Donald Trump. It’s not just Donald Trump as other Republicans like Josh Hawley and Marco Rubio have taken up the mantle of promoting protectionism. This doesn’t even include the support that Rubio expressed towards union efforts of Amazon workers and the constant call for government regulation of Big Tech.

The Republican Party has also become less conservative or hawkish in regard to its foreign policy. Donald Trump pushed for withdrawing American troops from Afghanistan, Iraq, and Somalia while he was still president. His administration even signed an agreement with the Taliban which laid out a timeline for American withdrawal. On top of that, a segment of the Republican caucus in the House voted against a largely symbolic measure that reaffirmed the United States’ support of NATO. This isolationism is in stark contrast to the traditional foreign policy positions of conservatives over the last few decades.

Finally, the Republican Party has moved away from the high regard for the constitutional order that is represented by the conservative legal movement. After losing the 2020 Presidential Election, Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the election were thwarted by judges all across the country, including judges nominated by Donald Trump himself. In spite of this, Donald Trump continues to claim that the 2020 election was stolen, ignoring the decisions of even legally conservative judges. This has been picked up by other Republican politicians such as Kay Ivey of Alabama and David Perdue of Georgia.

I will also just mention January 6th, Trump’s emergency declaration for funds to build a border wall even after refusal by Congress, overly broad speech laws that attempt to regulate CRT in schools, and the limited discussion regarding shrinking the size of the administrative state as other failures to promote the constitutional structure by Republicans.

Socially, Republicans are still largely pro-life, but there is limited mention of moral behavior beyond that. For example, Donald Trump was a serial adulterer who degraded all of his opponents but was held in high regard by most Republicans. In fact, anyone who calls for Republican politicians to act with dignity and not degrade opponents is called weak and not willing to “fight.”

I could continue but I need to end this newsletter at some point so I’ll stop there. I hope that it is clear that there is at least a growing strand of the Republican Party that is not closely aligned with conservatism as it has been traditionally defined for the last few decades. Many people view this as a good thing because they believe the “Zombie Reaganism” that defined the Republican Party of the past was due for an update. I couldn’t disagree more.

I believe that the economic, social, defense, and legal conservatism that characterizes this “Zombie Reaganism” is not being “updated” but thrown away by a portion of the Republican Party. It is being replaced by politics of power and grievances mixed with terrible economic and foreign policy ideas. This isn’t an exchange worth making. I continue to believe that traditional conservatism leads to the greatest prosperity and freedom for the most amount of people, so I will continue to say that I am a conservative, not a Republican.

God Bless,

Hunter Burnett