An Open Debate on Conservatism’s Future Offers a Model for Liberals to Emulate

Twenty of the nation’s leading conservatives gathered last month to discuss the principles and vision of the conservative movement and the role that philanthropy should play in furthering its goals. The session was held by the Hudson Institute’s Bradley Center for Philanthropy and Civic Renewal, in Washington.

What made the meeting so remarkable was not only the candor and outspokenness of the participants but also the fervor, passion, and, at times, contemptuousness that flavored their arguments.

At times, the discussion had the feel of a combat zone, with the speakers emerging as scarred but victorious warriors in a fight for America’s soul. The participants repeatedly and passionately spoke about the war they have been waging against liberals and others who did not share their beliefs. They often mentioned “the enemy” and expressed confidence that they were winning the war. The pointed disdain they expressed for “the enemy” made it seem as though they were engaged in mortal combat with foreign oppressors, not fellow American citizens. Their smugness was notable, their collective arrogance plainly palpable.

While that was disturbing to members of the audience who did not share the speakers’ conservative beliefs, it is noteworthy that this kind of conversation was held in the open and people of all ideologies were invited to watch. No such meetings have been organized by liberal organizations or foundations, and it is hard to imagine that any public discussion would have been so frank.

The participants at the Hudson Institute made little effort to be diplomatic nor did they pull any punches. They began the conversation by enunciating the fundamental tenets of the conservative movement. Not surprisingly, the speakers at the meeting generally agreed that the core of conservatism included the preservation of the Constitution, the primacy of the individual, limited statism or government, free enterprise without cumbersome regulation, and the fundamental importance of theism as the basis for our moral values.

Beyond that, their concerns covered a broad range of issues.

The conversation focused on the Christian-Judeo concept of God, and nobody talked about whether other religious deities were also a legitimate source of moral values. Several speakers implied that agnosticism, atheism, or other secular philosophies were not capable of providing society with an acceptable value system.

Many speakers frequently attacked liberals for trying to stretch the Constitution beyond its purposes, using the courts to undermine constitutional principles, controlling and debasing universities and colleges, and waging a cultural war that has undermined moral values and led to the “sexualization” of American society.

Particularly vehement were the many speakers who condemned universities and colleges as “corrupt,” “intellectually inferior,” and an “embarrassment.” Some called them the last bastions of liberalism, a target for conservative focus and penetration. Those sweeping generalizations were not accompanied by any evidence of intellectual or managerial shortcomings, other than, perhaps, a feeling that colleges were not sufficiently embracing conservative ideology.

Some speakers urged conservative foundations to underwrite academic centers free of liberal ideology, while others suggested that both individual and institutional donors stop giving any money to universities.

The meeting participants felt they had succeeded in spreading conservatism, but several speakers noted one exception: the cultural sphere, where conservatives seemed to be losing the battle against the forces of Hollywood and permissiveness.

Though traditional values were emphasized throughout the proceedings, little attention was paid to such societal values as social and economic justice, poverty, and the growing inequality in wealth and income.

Robert Woodson, president of the National Center for Neighborhood Enterprise, a Washington organization that works with local community-revitalization groups, raised what was probably the most provocative question of the day. If conservatives achieve their objectives, he asked, what will they do for “the least of God’s children,” those who are poor, members of minority groups, and at the margins of society?

He then went on to say that many of his fellow conservatives are not willing to hear legitimate racial grievances and tend to look down on the grass-roots work that his group does.

His question, by and large, went unanswered. One participant said that offering parents a choice of where to send their children to school would help improve education and solve the problems of the poor; another argued that President Bush’s agenda would bring about beneficial changes for the disadvantaged. What rang loud and clear from the muted response was that “the least of God’s children” were not very high on the conservatives’ priority list.

As for philanthropy, the speakers praised foundations that had supported conservative institutions, big ideas, and important intellectuals and advocates. They urged foundations to continue their good work. Like some of the liberal critics of philanthropy, Roger Hertog, vice chairman of Alliance Capital Management and a former chairman of the Manhattan Institute, as well as several other speakers said foundations should be much more innovative and adventuresome than they have been.

Notwithstanding its extreme partisanship, the forum was an exciting event, enabling the public to learn more about the conservative movement and to hear prominent thinkers debate issues frankly and for the record. The Bradley Center and its director, William Schambra, deserve kudos for making it possible.

Perhaps it is time for liberals to sponsor a similar public forum to let us know what beliefs inform the liberal agenda. Better yet, perhaps, might be a meeting of both conservatives and liberals debating the fundamental issues of our democracy. Now that would be really exciting.

Pablo Eisenberg, a regular contributor to these pages, is senior fellow at the Georgetown University Public Policy Institute and the author of Challenges for Nonprofits and Philanthropy: The Courage to Change, which was published in December by Tufts University Press. His e-mail address is pseisenberg@erols.com.