,
13 tweets,
5 min read
Read on Twitter
1. It used to be an article of faith amongst American Conservatives that the National Review was a bastion of thoughtful, intelligent, high-minded conservatism. The NR editor's appearance at CPAC this year is thus, of note. cpac.conservative.org/speakers/rich-…
2. Center-right conservatives have long dined out on the (not entirely accurate) stories of Buckley banishing the Birchers and the KKK from the conservative fold in the early 1960s, thus putting the movement on the path of respectability and reasonableness.
3. This year Rich Lowry, the editor of the National Review, chose to appear at CPAC along w/ Seb "Hamberder Yelper" Gorka, Candace "Hitler *inside* Germany was ok" Owens, Glenn "whiteboard" Beck, Diamond & Silk, Judge Jeanine, Tom Fitton, James O'Keefe, Charlie "🤔" Kirk, etc.
4. I don't share Lowry's politics, but I do think of him as a good faith, evidence-based actor. It's hard to understand, however, how anyone who wants to be taken seriously by the reality-based community would agree to participate in this MAGA mind meld/revival meeting.
5. An important theme in the history of American conservatism has to do w/ the relationship between the mainstream right & the fringier, conspiratorial, less "reality-based" right. Many Nat'l Review readers have thought of it as a key institution that has policed that boundary.
6. That NR cop, it seems, is taking that beat less seriously. I'll leave it to the rising generation of historians of conservatism to assess the extent to which the NR ever effectively exercised that far right policing function in the way its mainstream devotees thought it did.
7. Speaking only from my experience, I know a good number of folks who defined themselves as "thoughtful conservatives" in the 90's and who regarded the NR as a touchstone. Not a single one would be caught dead anywhere near CPAC this year.
8. Lowry's a big boy and I'm sure he has his reasons for being there. If he thinks he can cram all of those other folks on the speaker's list back into the clown car and take control of the wheel, however, then I think he's fooling himself.
9. I get why the politicians go to CPAC. This is their base. I get why the right wing media grifters go there, this is their hustle. But it's hard for me to see how the editor of a magazine that seeks to do more than preach to the MAGA choir would appear on that stage.
10. This is certainly a tough time to be a conservative intellectual. Almost the entirety of the old, conservative intellectual establishment abandoned Trump (and even the GOP) a while ago, leaving behind mostly unprincipled hype men and women, or (even worse) avowed extremists.
11. Some, like Jonah Goldberg, Bill Kristol, Max Boot, Charlie Sykes, and the folks at the @NiskanenCenter and @BulwarkOnline have abandoned the CPAC crowd and are trying to rebuild a new center-right. I find it noteworthy that the NR is still keeping a toehold in at CPAC.
@NiskanenCenter @BulwarkOnline 12. Two people to follow if you're interested in the long history of the National Review and the History of American Conservatism are @Joshua_A_Tait and @cterbeek. I've learned much from both of them. Please chime in with other scholars who are writing (have written) on this.
@NiskanenCenter @BulwarkOnline @Joshua_A_Tait @cterbeek 13. For a hilariously deadpan summary of this year's CPAC, I recommend the threads by @MollyJongFast.
