by K. Alan Snyder
Published in The Plain Dealer, Cleveland, OH (5 April 1984)
American conservatism has a heritage, and it
is time for modern conservatives to pinpoint their ancestry, to develop a
deeper appreciation for the characteristics which have been transferred to
this generation.
Surprisingly, American conservatives have a rather foggy
notion as to the source of their beliefs. Often a conservative will extol
the virtues of Thomas Jefferson and consider him as the basis for
conservatism, 1980s-style. On the surface this might seem plausible
because Jefferson certainly did preach the merits of small government and
the free market. Much of what Jefferson advocated, however, would seem
foreign to conservatives of the Reagan era, if they only knew him better.
Let's start at the beginning. The Constitution was
written in 1787 and Washington was inaugurated as the first president in
1789. The 1790s were a time of great controversy, during which the
politically aware divided into Federalists and Republicans. The
Republicans hailed Thomas Jefferson as their leader, and although the
historian must be careful not to make too sweeping a generalization, it
can safely be said that they were the liberals of their day. (See how the
labels change.)
Yes, they were free market and limited government in
ideal, but their overall tendencies gravitated toward what we term
libertarianism nowadays, rather than toward the tenets of the New Right.
For example, in the matter of religious freedom,
Jefferson's concept was less the freedom to worship than it was the
freedom whether to worship. There is a world of difference in the
attitudes which inspire both positions. Jefferson also edited the Bible
and produced his own "authorized" version, devoid of any hint of
the supernatural.
In contrast, a large segment of modern conservatism is
based on the traditional Christian beliefs, complete with acceptance of
the reality of the supernatural. Jefferson would have been uneasy in the
company of Jerry Falwell—and vice versa.
Jeffersonian Republicans were also in the forefront of
support for the French Revolution. This revolution was the one that
decided to de-Christianize France and enthrone reason as the new deity.
Approximately 5,000 priests were executed and 20,000 chose to abdicate
their clerical offices because of the persecution.
Republicans in America formed Democratic Societies to
promote the ideals of the revolution and frowned upon Federalists who had
a hard time being inspired by the events in France. One society member got
carried away and wrote a letter to a Federalist newspaper, declaring,
"May the guillotine become a favorite instrument in America, its
influence be disseminated in every direction, and the neck that swallows
or emits such heresies (i.e., Federalist beliefs), the American
victim."
The French Revolution is the prototype for all
subsequent class revolutions and has become anathema to conservative
thought.
If that isn't enough, there's also the matter of
national defense. Conservatives consider a strong defense to be the first
responsibility of a government, for without it there would be no
government. Jefferson, on the other hand, took his idea of limited
government to the extreme in the defense policy. Soon after assuming the
presidency in 1801, he dismantled what navy America had, reduced the army
(2,500 strong), and embarked on a defense that relied on a few small
gunboats roaming up and down the Atlantic seaboard—apparently an attempt
to frighten European warships in the same manner a mouse presumably
frightens an elephant.
This unpreparedness cost America dearly in the early
going of the War of 1812. By way of contrast, modern conservatives—well,
you probably understand the point by now.
The true heritage of contemporary conservatism has more
solid roots in the Federalist camp. Federalist values—the primacy of
religious belief, the importance of gradual change to ensure societal
stability, the need for an adequate defense—form the foundation of the
new conservatism.
True, the Federalists were the big-government advocates
of their time, but again historical perspective is essential. For them the
government existed primarily to protect traditional rights, liberties and
cultural bonds. |
