There has been a lot of talk lately about how conservatives such as Meghan McCain, Rick Moran, and, yes, myself, are “eating our own” when we criticize media figureheads like Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, Bill O’Reilly, or Rush Limbaugh. Criticism of these figures is “falling into the Democrat [sic] trap“, being “jealous” of their success, or indicative that the commenter is really a liberal in disguise who is busily astroturfing, as the reactions to Moran’s comments on Hot Air seem to indicate. There are two questions that come to mind when I hear these criticisms of conservative media personalities; are they necessary, and, to a lesser degree, why do I bother.
Obviously, given my own past commentary, I believe that such criticisms are necessary. Which means that I therefore have to answer why I believe that they are necessary. The why is, as are most things in life, more complex that I would prefer. First of all, the conservative movement is fragmented to a degree that is simply not present among liberals. I do not mean to say that there are not “kooky” factions on the left, there certainly are, but not to the degree that conservatives are fragmented. Because of this fragmentation, and the accompanying lack of clear leadership, more fanatical members are able to shout loudly enough to be perceived as leaders, or at least promoted as leaders by the left. To be sure, the left has its own fanatical members (Bill Ayers and Noam Chomsky anyone?), but because the left is more unified and has a strong, centralized, leadership, perpetuating the idea that people like Ayers and Chomsky are “leaders” of the liberal movement is not tenable (and, to be clear, would not be accurate even if it were tenable).
Because of strong, central leadership, Chomsky, Ayers and their compatriots can function as gadflies; their valuable ability of occasional alighting on a salient argument missed by the center is used, but their radical antics are repudiated. The conservative movement currently lacks this leadership. Because there is no centralized “voice” for conservatism, the portrayal of people like Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, and others like them as the “central voice” of conservatism becomes a tenable attack. Without a more centrist leadership, the more radical positions of Beck and his ilk are easily misrepresented as the views of “all conservatives” in the opposition’s propaganda. Gadflies are essential when there is strong and coherent leadership, but when there is a power vacuum, such as the conservative movement is currently facing, gadflies allow the opposition an all too easy method of caricaturing (and thereby weakening) the very ideologies that these gadflies wish to strengthen.
This reasoning alone is not enough, because it contains within it the hidden assumption that the opposition’s propaganda matters, which must itself be defended against the (sizable) contingent of conservatives who tend to believe that what other people think doesn’t matter. This is, for me at least, an especially powerful objection as I am sympathetic to this view in most aspects of my own life. In a perfect world, the truth will always win out and what other people think doesn’t matter if it’s not true. Sadly, this is not a perfect world and we do not live in Lake Wobegon; all of the children aren’t above average.
Conservatism must grow, and the only available way to grow is to grow towards the center. The more that conservatives attempt to polarize the electorate, the more we serve only to encourage our own marginalization. Because conservatism’s growth depends upon moderates, the ability of the left to paint conservatism as an extreme movement is critically dangerous to our long-term political viability. It does us no good to say that it shouldn’t matter what others say about us because the simple fact is that it does matter within the constraints of our goals. We cannot legitimately expect to be taken seriously as an intellectual position while simultaneously embracing publicly people who talk seriously about seceding from the United States.
The only way that conservatism can regain any footing as a legitimate intellectual position is for us all to begin repudiating the radical element that has gained such excessive prominence of late. However much some of us may admire the fact that Beck, Coulter, O’Reilly, and Limbaugh are willing to tilt at windmills, we would all do well to remember that this usually hurts the one who tilts more than it hurts the windmills.
As for why I bother? Well, perhaps this is a windmill of my own.