The Future of Conservatism
Yesterday I spoke at Princeton University on a panel with Ross Douthat, Daniel Larison and Virginia Postrel to address this very question. You can read a real-time summary of the discussion on Fausta's Blog here and near-real-time blogger reaction to the event on the League of Ordinary Gentlemen site here.
Among the very best moments:
Virginia Postrel produced a small quilted hatbox on stage, then opened it to reveal... an ordinary incandescent light bulb. Surely (she said) all strains of conservatism could agree that it was wrong for government to outlaw this bulb?
As a Princeton undergraduate, Virginia had sat in the very room in which we were speaking and been taught by some of the inventors of the cap-and-trade idea. They argued then that government should get out of the business of prescribing solutions to problems - like banning light bulbs to fight global warming - and instead set general rules that enabled people to experiment with the best solutions.
A generation later all that wisdom had been forgotten - and by a Republican administration. It was George W. Bush who had signed the ban. Twelve Republican members of Congress voted in favor of it.
I could add as a footnote that I understood why they had done it. It was a characteristic Bush administration maneuver: fight to oppose any large action on climate change (carbon tax, cap-and-trade) but yield on a small symbolic act. Yielding was all the easier since almost all the relevant major industry groups quietly favored the ban. The incandescent bulb is a low-margin item, usually manufactured in China. Very nice to have government prod every factory, shop and home into converting to a more lucrative substitute!
Cynically, some might wonder were the tea parties against this Republican-signed act of government outreach?
On the other hand: It's not too late to organize them now!