Opinion: What Is Conservative American Nationalism? - - PressFrom - US

Opinion What Is Conservative American Nationalism?

17:05  21 october  2019
17:05  21 october  2019 Source:   nationalreview.com

Author Jennine Capó Crucet responds after white college students burn her book

  Author Jennine Capó Crucet responds after white college students burn her book Jennine Capó Crucet spoke about her book and white privilege at Georgia Southern University followed by a discussion with students and later saw some burned her book. "This book began as an act of love and an attempt at deeper understanding," Jennine Capo Crucet said in a statement released Friday on Twitter.

National Review. What Is Conservative American Nationalism ? Critics believe they understand that broad tradition. But they don’t. As I suggest in a new book, Age of Iron, conservative American nationalism is the country’s oldest foreign-policy tradition.

What Is ‘Ethno- Nationalism ’? It has nothing whatsoever to do with racist nationalism . The website Quartz claims that “the distinction between nationalism and white nationalism may seem like splitting hairs from a liberal perspective”—an odd claim, since a nationalist would claim that our government

Editor’s note: The opinions in this article are the author’s, as published by our content partner, and do not necessarily represent the views of MSN or Microsoft.

a close up of a flag© Pixabay

Underneath all of the day-to-day tumult, for both critics and supporters the Trump presidency has come to represent nothing less than a resurgence of American nationalism. Critics believe they understand that broad tradition. But they don’t.

As I suggest in a new book, Age of Iron, conservative American nationalism is the country’s oldest foreign-policy tradition. Designed to preserve American self-government, it always has been based on a recognition that the United States is an independent nation-state. This means that the material integrity, security, prosperity, and health of the U.S. as a nation ought to be of real concern. It also means that in formulating U.S. public policy, the interests of American citizens come first. One might think this is obvious. And for previous generations, across party lines, it was. But in our own time, a great many public intellectuals — along with the now-dominant progressive wing of the Democratic party — have together decided otherwise.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg responds to report he’s been meeting with conservatives

  Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg responds to report he’s been meeting with conservatives The report in Politico helped spur the #DeleteFacebook hashtag.The sex tech companies aren't happy.

2.1 Current national conservative parties or parties with national conservative factions. National conservative parties in different countries do not necessarily share a common position on economic policy: Their views may range from support of a planned economy to a centrist mixed economy to a

Often this involves stressing what are now conservative views of free market economics and belief in Conservatives were the first to embrace nationalism , which was previously associated with liberalism American conservatism is a broad system of political beliefs in the United States that is

In addition to protecting the country’s sovereignty, American nationalism has its own unique qualities. Ever since the founding, the U.S. sense of identity has been bound up with a sort of civic nationalism or distinctly American creed emphasizing the rule of law, constitutionalism, individual freedom, and limited government. These features are classically liberal in the 19th-century meaning of the word. And it’s American progressives, over the past 100 years, who’ve most consistently challenged that classical foundation, casting it as out of date.

With regard to foreign commitments, America’s conservative nationalist tradition goes back to George Washington’s Farewell Address, along with Thomas Jefferson’s confirmation of it, urging the country to avoid permanent entangling alliances. This was the mainstream and consensual U.S. foreign-policy tradition for most of American history, well into the 20th century. Its central premise might be summed up in three words: freedom of action.

High court weighs whether teen sniper deserves re-sentencing

  High court weighs whether teen sniper deserves re-sentencing WASHINGTON (AP) — Liberal and conservative justices seemed split on whether to grant a new sentencing hearing to Lee Boyd Malvo, who as a teenager was one of two snipers who terrorized the Washington area, killing 10 people. The Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday on whether Malvo was wrongly sentenced in Virginia to life without parole. Malvo was 17 at the time of the killings. His attorneys say he deserves a new hearing because of recent Supreme Court rulings barring mandatory life sentences for juveniles.

“ Conservatives used to oppose identity politics for being hostile to individual freedom,” he writes. “ Nationalism is the superimposition of one form of identity politics over various When it comes to the United States, however, we should recognize nationalism for what it really is: un- American .”

Social conservatives tend to strongly identify with American nationalism and patriotism. Economic liberalism can go well beyond fiscal conservatism's concern for fiscal prudence, to a belief or principle that it is not prudent for governments to intervene in markets.

America’s Founders also hoped, in all sincerity, that the U.S. example of popular self-government would spread overseas. But they didn’t imagine that they could accomplish that by force, simultaneously, in all directions. Nor were they averse to diplomatic alignments with non-democratic powers, if necessary, in order to promote American interests. After all, the United States might never have secured its independence without the help of France, under an absolutist monarchy at the time.

So the prevailing conservative nationalism, at the start of the 20th century, emphasized U.S. sovereignty, material American interests, limited government, hopes for the spread of democracy, freedom of action, and a willingness to engage in normal diplomacy with a variety of foreign regimes. That still left a great deal of room for internal debate over specific policy questions. They included: when and how to engage in the use of force outside existing U.S. territory; how optimistic to be about short-term democratic possibilities in other countries; whether to incur any new U.S. international commitments; and how long to keep those commitments. All these questions were raised, for example, by America’s war with Spain in 1898.

Will Johnson Deliver Brexit or Engxit?

  Will Johnson Deliver Brexit or Engxit? The English nationalism that powers Brexit is repelling the rest of the United Kingdom. It’s not Brexit. Its Engxit—and Engxit not only from the European Union, but Engxit from Britain, too.

That is, speak in concrete terms about American interests and security rather than abstract appeals to American values; invoke Samuel Huntington, whose NEITHER neo- conservatives or Nationalism but Patriotism instead. Unfortunately, what Nationalism means for Nationalists is entirely negative

What is conservative nationalism ? Update Cancel. aFdKgA bbhxhFyjj JHGmTqryEoKmwqpRlLedfIuurspfijVtmuEU. It is a Nationalist Conservative Ideology defining Nation and its people on terms of a religious-cultural theme called Hindutva.

The progressive political waves of the early 20th century, led by Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt, reshaped America’s politics along with its foreign relations. Progressives like Wilson insisted that an ancient constitution was no longer relevant to the modern condition. Early 20th-century progressives further argued that the United States would need to formulate a series of global, binding, multilateral commitments overseas in order to promote progressive ends.

Republicans at the time were often uncertain and divided over how exactly to respond to all of these sweeping proposals. The expression of traditional American nationalism splintered and then shifted in new directions. To a much greater extent than modern progressives, modern conservatives in the U.S. continued to emphasize the need for their country to maintain a free hand in world affairs. At the same time, many were ultimately persuaded of the need to act internationally — and to take up new foreign-policy obligations — against a series of material threats. In both world wars, American conservatives rallied energetically to massive U.S. efforts once their nation entered into hostilities. During the lengthy Cold War struggle, the great majority of conservatives were eventually willing to support U.S. military commitments overseas, in order to contain and counteract the global expansion of Communism. After 9/11, most conservatives supported the Bush administration’s war on terror, to combat an undeniable foe. But eventual disappointments with U.S. counterinsurgency efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan — together with frustrations over globalization — once again raised the question posed right after the collapse of the Soviet Union: To what purpose do American citizens support U.S. engagement overseas?

Justin Trudeau: no plans 'at all' for a coalition

  Justin Trudeau: no plans 'at all' for a coalition The prime minister's Liberal Party retained power in Monday's election but fell short of a majority. On Wednesday Mr Trudeau said he would be sitting down with other party leaders to discuss parliamentary support for his minority government. The prime minister said he remained committed to a controversial oil pipeline expansion project. The general election saw the Liberals' representation in the House of Commons reduced from 177 to 157 seats, 13 short of a majority.

There are Christians who are American nationalists , and some of them believe that America is a “Christian nation,” but they take this as axiomatic and have no program for making it into a “Christian nation”–such nationalists baptise American nationalism with religious language and devotion

And: if nationalism defeated the standard conservatism this year, what does that say about how conservatism is changing? Alasdair MacIntyre famously said that in the West, there are three kinds of liberalism: liberal liberalism, conservative liberalism, and radical liberalism.

During the 2016 presidential campaign, then-candidate Donald Trump asked that very basic question with unusual force. He did not provide many of the answers. But he tapped into a real dissatisfaction with existing U.S. foreign-policy patterns and conventions.

Trump is no ideologue. Operationally, he’s unpredictable. Yet he works from an instinctive American nationalism and has a definite point of view that he’s been expressing in his own way for more than 30 years. His longstanding belief is that U.S. allies have been free-riding off the United States for decades. He looks to carve out what he views as relative material gains for the U.S., in relation to allies as well as adversaries, on both commercial and security issues. He’s also genuinely skeptical of the need for continuing U.S. military interventions abroad. That’s his version of American nationalism. It isn’t the particular version once championed and incorporated into the GOP by George W. Bush. It is Donald Trump’s, and for now, he’s the one in the Oval Office.

Having said that, an insistence on maintaining a free hand in world affairs is hardly something new for Republicans. George W. Bush made it crystal-clear that he required no international permission slip to act against perceived threats. So did Reagan, Nixon, and Eisenhower. Each of these presidents had his own distinct foreign-policy style and priorities, very different from Donald Trump’s. They also tried to balance domestic responsibilities with international ones. But a certain freedom of action has been one key theme in GOP foreign-policy approaches all along. Trump is not overturning that traditional aspect of conservative American nationalism. He is restoring it — with a vengeance.

Conservatives defend Mulvaney, call for Trump to make him permanent chief of staff

  Conservatives defend Mulvaney, call for Trump to make him permanent chief of staff A group of prominent conservative activists is rallying behind embattled acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney.Mulvaney has been the “acting” chief of staff of for nearly 10 months and has faced constant speculation about his job security. This letter suggests conservative leaders believe his job may now be in jeopardy and it would be a mistake for president to fire him.

Conservatism, political doctrine that emphasizes the value of traditional institutions and practices. Thank you for your feedback. Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

TIP: In America , the two general types of conservatives are neocons and Tea Party Populists. That is what American Republicanism, Democracy, and Federalism and real law and order are about. Oddly, Trump is probably our only hope aside from the few centered-right figures like Kasich, Graham

In practical terms, when it comes to America’s overall military commitments, Trump takes a rough middle position between the GOP’s staunchest national-security hawks and the most ardent anti-interventionists —  between Senators Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) and Rand Paul (R., Ky.), as it were. The president’s specific foreign-policy decisions regularly please or worry one faction or the other. Since Trump has the support of most conservative voters, most congressional Republicans try to support him when they can. But Trump has not ended the great long-running post–Cold War debate on the right over U.S. foreign policy. Far from it. You see this debate recur most recently in the sharp, intense criticism from so many leading Republicans over Trump’s Syrian force withdrawals.

At the other end of the foreign-policy spectrum, the GOP’s non-interventionist wing, best represented in Congress by Senator Paul, feels that Trump has done considerable good in shattering existing orthodoxies and scaling back on at least some U.S. military commitments overseas. If anything, non-interventionists would like the president to go further in that direction. Some favor dismantling America’s forward bases and alliances in Europe and Asia altogether. Full-spectrum non-interventionists do not make up a majority of conservative Republican voters today. But neither do full-spectrum interventionists. The greater bulk of voters — like Trump — are somewhere in the middle.

The current impeachment inquiry by congressional Democrats will continue to affect U.S. foreign policy, but it may have less of a radical effect than people think. Even in the unlikely event that Trump is removed from office by the Senate, and unless Nancy Pelosi plans to somehow catapult into the White House, it’s the vice president who will succeed him. There’s little indication that a President Mike Pence would reject a foreign policy based on core assumptions of American nationalism. On the contrary, Pence might very well pursue a version of that tradition more devout, more self-disciplined, and more strictly conservative.

Russian woman who admitted being secret agent out of prison

  Russian woman who admitted being secret agent out of prison A Russian gun rights activist who admitted being a secret agent for the Kremlin and trying to infiltrate conservative U.S. political groups while Donald Trump rose to power was released from federal prison on Friday, officials said. Maria Butina left a low-security facility in Tallahassee, Florida and was placed in the custody of federal immigration authorities. She is expected to be immediately deported to Russia now that she has finished her 18-month sentence.

But what makes American nationalism even more unpalatable now than when Robert Nisbet famously denounced it in The Present Age: Progress The hope once entertained by Pat Buchanan that a nationalist cause would help slow down immigration and preserve America ’s traditional moral

You can only tell yourself that what you see with your own eyes is a lie for so long. Eventually, you stop believing the narrative that cultural elites in government Finally, a word for my fellow conservative Christians. Assuming that Trump will govern in a way more or less consonant with what we believe

Assuming Trump survives any impeachment process, we can offer a glimpse of what the president’s 2020 reelection campaign will probably look like with regard to foreign-policy issues. He’ll want to run on having renegotiated a variety of allied trade agreements; a commercial cease-fire with China; drawing down U.S. forces in Syria and Afghanistan; bolstered military spending; reduced tensions with North Korea; a hard line on both Cuba and Venezuela; increased U.S. border security; the rolling back of ISIS; and a peace agreement with the Taliban. That’s pretty much what he ran on in 2016. This will continue to shape his decisions over the coming year.

The outlines of a second-term Trump foreign policy, if he wins reelection, are considerably less clear. He might very well keep cycling back to core themes and proposals from 2015–16, especially unfulfilled ones. But in the history of American diplomacy, presidential plans are often disrupted by unforeseen events. If Trump is faced with a truly colossal international military crisis — something that’s not yet happened — that may reshape his foreign policy in ways yet unexpected.

Once Trump does leave office, whether after one term or two, the internal battle inside the GOP over national-security issues will resume in full force. The party’s position will once again be up for grabs. Having said that, anyone who believes that future Republican leaders can simply roll the clock back to the spring of 2015, with regard to foreign policy as well as much else, is kidding himself. The same might be said, incidentally, of trying to roll back the clock to 2002, 1980, 1945, or, for that matter, 1920. Each generation faces its own particular challenges. Circumstances change; core principles do not. A tradition of conservative American nationalism dating back over 200 years is not about to disappear. Nor should it. But its specific expression must necessarily respond to the concerns of the day.

Ultimately, in a democracy those concerns are expressed by voters through their elected officials, not by public intellectuals. As the GOP has incorporated more working-class voters and moved in a culturally conservative populist direction — part of a long-term trend predating Trump —its foreign-policy stance is inevitably affected. A more blue-collar Republican party will tend to be more protectionist on trade and less interventionist in foreign affairs. Or at least it will contain powerful constituencies making those arguments. But the beating heart of today’s GOP, many miles outside the Beltway, is by no means pacifist. Its mantra is held in the words of the black coiled snake on the yellow Gadsden flag: “Don’t tread on me.” Any foreign enemy who persists in testing that reptile will find there is a limit. This snake eventually bites.

What the Trump phenomenon has clarified, above all, is that no version of internationalism can be sustained in the absence of an underlying nation-state felt by its own citizens to be prosperous, sovereign, and secure. And if the nation’s leaders ever forget that again, the voters will be sure to remind them. In this sense, there is really no such thing as “Trumpism.” There is only America.

40 conservative groups sign ethics complaint against Pelosi .
A coalition of conservative groups have filed an ethics complaint against Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), arguing among other charges that she has usurped authority from the executive branch by "weaponiz[ing]" the impeachment process.In a complaint to the Office of Congressional Ethics, 40 conservative groups led by Jenny Beth Martin of Tea Party Patriots Action wrote to board chairman David Skaggs arguing that a vote scheduled for this week on the House's impeachment inquiry was "insufficient" to dispel notions of partisanship from the process, which they argued had been undertaken unilaterally by the Speaker.

—   Share news in the SOC. Networks

Topical videos:

usr: 4
This is interesting!