Thread by @NiskanenCenter

THREAD: A growing group of intellectuals on the right is using acute cultural fears to overturn liberal democracy. Call them “reactionary conservatives,” “Reocons,” or whatever you will...they’re pioneering reactionary politics at its most explosive. 1/ niskanencenter.org/meet-the-reoco…

They include William Barr, Patrick Deneen, Michael Anton, and others...all of whom have produced books, speeches, or articles that are explicitly anti-liberal. Here are some examples: 2/

claremontreviewofbooks.com/digital/the-fl…

amazon.com/Why-Liberalism…

This sort of thinking does not represent the thoughts and beliefs of all those who call themselves conservatives. The reactionary, anti-liberal strain we’re seeing actually represents a debate/split on the Right, typified by the @DavidAFrench/@SohrabAhmari debate. 3/

.@DouthatNYT explains. 4/ nytimes.com/2019/06/04/opi…

.@cjane87 sums up the implications for conservatism nicely: 5/
vox.com/2019/6/5/18637…

.@lkatfield writes that what specifically characterizes the reactionaries (Barr and others) is (2) their insistent fear and paranoia that the American Left poses an existential threat and (1) a serial vagueness about the future. 6/
niskanencenter.org/meet-the-reoco…

For example, Bill Barr has been vocal about the danger posed by the left (quotes below), and @SohrabAhmari has gone as far as to say that for him, politics is about war and enmity. 7/

They’re not wrong to point out newly emerging majorities and cultural shifts that involve competing moral claims. But they’re wrong to equate these ethical questions and emerging forces with nefarious coercion. 8/

“If one thing is certain, it’s that the paranoid reactionary attitude has explosive justificatory power, and the Reocons plan to use it,” writes @lkatfield. It’s clear that they’re not happy about the present. But what an ideal future looks like to them is unclear. 9/

But we’ve seen brief glimpses of what such an illiberal future might look like: 10/

We’ve seen Americans’ loyalty scrutinized because of their country of origin (and because they’ve disagreed with those in authority). Diversity is seen as a liability rather than an asset, as @jtlevy notes. 11/ washingtonpost.com/outlook/theres…

We’ve seen a concerted effort to close the country’s borders to trade and migration: 12/ niskanencenter.org/free-society-o…

And we see a lack of tolerance for those with different beliefs. The rights of some are minimized so that society reflects the tastes of those in power. 13/

The examples could continue. As @GabeSchoenfeld says, “there is a dark and dangerous side to nationalism which is precisely the essence of Trumpism. The many disturbing signposts are visible for all to see.” 14/ niskanencenter.org/is-there-a-ben…

So what is liberalism? What are the values that we, as a liberal democracy might aspire to and the Reocons seem to disdain if convenient? As @Lkatfield gets to a few of them in her @bulwarkonline piece: 15/ thebulwark.com/what-the-react…

Fear and paranoia is no basis for a free, prosperous, forward-looking society. In the end, the war the Reocons want to fight isn’t about the future of conservatism. It’s about the future of liberal democracy. 16/16 niskanencenter.org/meet-the-reoco…