Come Together
May 30, 2009
When will all the infighting stop?
Rarely has there been a blood feud more pointless on the battle involving former National Review Online colleagues Mark Levin and Rod Dreher over Levin’s use of intemperate language on his nationally syndicated radio show. This is a fight that neither man can win.
Certainly, I agree with Dreher (and conservative bloggers/Levin critics David Frum and Conor Friedersdorf) that conservative talk radio in general—and Levin’s program in particular—does not need to rely upon shock value in order to convince listeners that the left is wrong and the right is, well, right. Levin and other nationally syndicated superstars are talented and intelligent enough to generate ratings and revenue without having to resort to skits, sarcasm and slurs. However, the constant lamentations over talk-radio incivility serve no real purpose.
Levin, Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity and Monica Crowley aren’t going away anytime soon. While these figures are not above criticism, the reality is that conservatives who spend most of their time finding fault with these hosts will inevitably have their conservative credentials questioned by fans of these programs. Who does that benefit?
The feud between “Reagan conservatives” (the aforementioned talk-radio stars) and “Reform conservatives” (Dreher, Frum, Friedersdorf, Ross Douthat, Reihan Salam, Daniel Larison, etc.) needs to end pronto. Neither side can afford to waste any more time on this silly squabble, not when progressives are unified as never before.
Although the right faces numerous cultural and demographic challenges, these challenges are not insurmountable: when conservatives are united, they usually cannot be defeated. A major problem for the right is that conservatives haven’t been united in quite some time.
Is Levin’s on-air obnoxiousness a problem for the right? Perhaps—but it’s a problem that the marketplace will resolve at some point. If Levin is really as reprehensible as Dreher, et. al. perceive him to be, he will find himself unable to expand beyond his core audience.
Do combatants on both sides of this feud realize how much fun the left is having seeing conservatives attacking each other? Progressives know that a divided conservative movement is a weak conservative movement. While center-right and solidly conservative figures keep denouncing each other, progressives make sure each faction of the left stays on point. That’s one reason Democrats emerged victorious in 2006 and 2008.
If “reformist conservatives” dislike the bombastic style of the top-ranked talkers, they have an option: don’t listen to their programs. It’s an option I’ve exercised: instead of constantly being aggravated by Limbaugh’s criticisms of those who aren’t conservative enough for his particular taste (like William Kristol), I choose instead to listen to such broadcasters as Hugh Hewitt and Michael Smerconish, who have their flaws but aren’t obsessed with ideological litmus tests. Limbaugh’s approach is fine for his listeners; the Hewitt-Smerconish approach is close enough for my comfort.
While I’m probably closer to the Douthat/Salam/Frum/Dreher/Friedersdorf side of conservatism (i.e., the “stop bringing up Ronald Reagan every five seconds” side), the goals of the “reformers” cannot be advanced by tearing down talk radio. Perhaps more “reformers” need to make their presence felt through such venues as Internet talk radio: the “reformers” won’t beat Limbaugh in the competition for listeners, but they could develop their own needed niche.
Can’t someone call a truce between the right’s fighting factions? Imagine how stronger conservatism would be if both sides worked together. A “reformer”-“Reaganite” alliance would introduce new ideas into the movement’s bloodstream and eliminate the generational divide on the right. From this alliance would be born a cleaner, less hypocritical conservatism, a renewed philosophy geared to the present day and the economic interests of working- and middle-class Americans of all backgrounds. If the “reformers” and the “Reaganites” started collaborating, they could also settle the dispute between libertarian conservatism and traditionalist conservatism—the dispute that lies at the heart of the current contentiousness.
Both sides of the right should not forget that there is a larger ideological conflict going on, a war of the worlds between progressivism and conservatism. The progressive forces are united, disciplined, focused on the goal at hand; in this respect, they are wiser than their conservative adversaries. The right needs to smarten up! Enough with these depressing disputes over tacky talk-radio rhetoric and “hard” vs. “soft” conservatism. I have my issues with the Limbaugh-Levin style, but I also recognize both men as brothers in the larger fight against the excesses of progressivism. Both “reformers” and “Reaganites” should have a place at the table. Sadly, that table is currently located in the middle of a house divided against itself.
