Last Updated on 07/09/2024 by Arun jain
The modern American political landscape exhibits a stark imbalance. The 21st century progressive movement has a mainstream core that secures most practical political victories but also embraces a more radical set of leftist beliefs. Although leftists often identify as open communists, violent Antifa members, or revolutionary hero activists, they remain accepted within the movement. Rather than facing abolition, these radical elements are often elevated by the mainstream and given prestigious positions in critical institutions such as universities. Radical vanguard leaders and ideas flow easily into the mainstream, energizing the liberal elite.
In contrast, the American right shuns or actively destroys anyone who steps outside its mainstream. The range of acceptable opinions within conservatism is narrow, and aspiring members must strictly adhere to a limited set of pre-approved ideological statements. The right rarely cultivates young talent or supports institutions that can nurture emerging intellectual movements.
The right desperately needs the vitality, leadership and cultural influence that only its vanguard can provide.
Worryingly, the biggest threat to a right-wing figure pushing the boundaries of acceptable opinion often comes from within the conservative movement itself, as members seek to eliminate competition and earn accolades from the corporate left-wing media.
Every viable political movement has an acceptable mainstream and a more radical vanguard. The mainstream serves as the vanguard of the movement, presenting the most popular and acceptable positions while achieving practical political victories. Everything in the mainstream should be practiced, polished and presentable. Optics are key, and reputation is closely guarded. The mainstream may seem too cautious or calculating at times, but this is good and necessary. These are political operatives whose aim is to sell a platform to the masses.
The vanguard operates in productive tension with the mainstream, acting as the heart and mind of the movement. Because Vanguard does not directly confront the public, it can explore new and challenging ideas. It consists of the most passionate activists, who are often willing to try new tactics and lines of attack. Maintaining a pristine and presentable reputation is less important to the Vanguard, which allows it to take more risks, since its members generally do not face the same scrutiny as mainstream figures. Due to the experimental nature of its ideas and tactics, the vanguard cannot earn a living like mainstream political actors and therefore relies on institutions to patronize and fund its work.
Dialogue between the mainstream and the vanguard of a movement is critical to its survival and success. Vanguard needs the mainstream to fund its operations, push its agenda, and do the practical work of winning political victories. While mainstream can be great for presenting a practical and professional exterior, it is bad at cultivating new leaders or animating ideas. The mainstream depends on the vanguard for both intellectual and emotional energy.
In American politics, the left fully embraces its vanguard. No one is publicly written off for being too left-wing, and no promising progressive talent is kicked out of the movement for his radical past. It is not empty. Even a former radical left-wing terrorist like Bill Ayers can become a beloved mentor with a prestigious, well-paid university job. Radical ideas from the left vanguard regularly flow into progressive platforms, reinforcing the mainstream. The mainstream supports the vanguard, and the vanguard, in turn, revives the mainstream.
On the American right, no vanguard exists. William F. Buckley Jr. established a narrow set of acceptable ideas, and, until recently, this was the only position in the conservative movement.
During the post-war consensus, being truly right-wing was seen as dangerous, leading to purges and replacements of the old right. Free trade, endless wars, and a watered-down version of social conservatism created fusionism that pushed out traditional right-wing thought. Although Pat Buchanan’s politics proved more sensible than the neoconservatism of the Bush dynasty, he had to wait decades for those views to be vindicated amid the relentless failures of Conservatism Inc.
The most dangerous threat to promising young right-wing talent does not come from the left-wing media or smear organizations like the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center. Instead, it comes from mainstream conservatives who fiercely protect their position of privilege.
Most mainstream conservatives, whether they admit it or not, understand that repeal is a force wielded by the left. They often co-opt this power and turn it against the right-wing vanguard to eliminate competition.
Mainstream conservatives often dig up old position papers, private messages or past associations to paint talented political operatives as too radical. While no one in a conservative establishment loses their job for being a former leftist, many promising careers have been destroyed because one held views on immigration, nationalism, or foreign policy that were deemed too extreme.
This is why much of the work traditionally done by Vanguard has shifted to the online right, often referred to as the “disaffected right.” The activism and energy that fueled Donald Trump’s Buchanan-style populism had to develop entirely outside mainstream conservative circles. Today, mainstream conservative infrastructure struggles to absorb and redirect that energy, often with mixed results.
Political theories, literary trends, art, music, and other cultural elements important to political movements are created online or in small communities. These efforts remain under siege by establishment conservative institutions. The moment people deviate from Reagan-era orthodoxy, they are labeled dangerous by the very people who should be supporting them to forge a new path forward.
Mainstream conservatism needs to reconcile with its vanguard. The New York Times will never like you, and that’s okay. This is the time to listen and support the exploration of ideas that may not immediately align with yours. America is facing a critical period of social and political upheaval, and the conservative movement, in its current rigid form, is unfit to lead. The right desperately needs the vitality, leadership and cultural influence that only its vanguard can provide. If Conservatism Inc. If the protection of its privilege continues to be a priority, the left will continue to dominate the landscape.
Post How the left feeds radicals while the right eats its own appeared first The Blaze.