![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
acroyearRSR was surprised by the following column from George Will:
I don't see Will's comment being that much of a shock.
The modern republican party has always (well, since the 60s) been this unholy alliance between social ("religious right") conservatives and fiscal ("big business") conservatives, each providing a piece (and a bunch of votes) to the traditional Republican core of academic conservatives (the ones who really do believe in state's rights, fiscal responsibility, separation of powers, and a degree of strict interpretation). Where there was minor overlap (the religious right joining the academics over the abortion issue), the union stood for more votes and support, even when their respective reasons for the perceived overlap were utterly different in every way (the religious right want control over people's behaviour, while the academics don't believe "right to privacy" was an accurate reading of the constitution enough to justify the RvW decision).
Big Business's desire for no taxes and environmental freedom to act is similar alliance, since it has trends reflected in a stricter interpretation of the commerce clause that some academics feel is supported, even though Big Business's desire is not constitutional responsibility but rather bigger profits with less effort.
But such alliances can only last for so long before the academic side get exhasperated by the religious side (I don't see a break with big business anytime). Will's quote is very much following that -- they know that true conservatism as he understands it is not what the religious side of the party is interested in, and he wants others in the party to recognize that such an association is going to have consequences that while helping the party from 1994 through to 2004, is going to hurt the party in the longer run.
The storm-tossed and rudderless Republican Party should particularly ponder the vote last week in Dover, Pa., where all eight members of the school board seeking re-election were defeated. This expressed the community’s wholesome exasperation with the board’s campaign to insinuate religion, in the guise of “intelligent design” theory, into high school biology classes, beginning with a required proclamation that evolution “is not a fact.”
I don't see Will's comment being that much of a shock.
The modern republican party has always (well, since the 60s) been this unholy alliance between social ("religious right") conservatives and fiscal ("big business") conservatives, each providing a piece (and a bunch of votes) to the traditional Republican core of academic conservatives (the ones who really do believe in state's rights, fiscal responsibility, separation of powers, and a degree of strict interpretation). Where there was minor overlap (the religious right joining the academics over the abortion issue), the union stood for more votes and support, even when their respective reasons for the perceived overlap were utterly different in every way (the religious right want control over people's behaviour, while the academics don't believe "right to privacy" was an accurate reading of the constitution enough to justify the RvW decision).
Big Business's desire for no taxes and environmental freedom to act is similar alliance, since it has trends reflected in a stricter interpretation of the commerce clause that some academics feel is supported, even though Big Business's desire is not constitutional responsibility but rather bigger profits with less effort.
But such alliances can only last for so long before the academic side get exhasperated by the religious side (I don't see a break with big business anytime). Will's quote is very much following that -- they know that true conservatism as he understands it is not what the religious side of the party is interested in, and he wants others in the party to recognize that such an association is going to have consequences that while helping the party from 1994 through to 2004, is going to hurt the party in the longer run.
