paleoconservative

casual user of term?

===

an 5 24

“Off Leash" is not only the name of a podcast started by Erik Prince, former CEO of Blackwater (now part of the security firm Constellis Holdings) and brother of ex-Trump Administration Education Secretary Betsy DeVos. It is also the name of a private far-right group chat Prince hosts via the instant messaging program WhatsApp.

The New Republic's Ken Silverstein describes the group chat in an article published on May 30, noting that former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, GOP activist/organizer Kimberly Guilfoyle (Donald Trump Jr.'s fiancée), Michael Flynn (former national security for the Trump Administration) and House Homeland Security Chairman Mark Green (R-Tennessee) are among the MAGA "cranks" who have been invited to participate.

"Collectively," Silverstein explains, "Off Leash provides an informal virtual gathering place for current and former political officials, national security operatives, activists, journalists, soldiers of fortune, weapons brokers, black bag operators, grifters, convicted criminals, and other elements in the U.S. and global far right…. Prominent figures in the Off Leash crew are well-known for their paleoconservative political views, but the private opinions expressed in the group chat are even more extreme and jarring than we normally see voiced publicly."

According to Silverstein, his investigation of Off Leash conversations via WhatsApp showed that some of the participants have "chirpily discussed the desirability of clamping down on democracy to deal with their enemies at home and regime change, bombings, assassinations, and covert action to take care of those abroad."

Silverstein reports, "The group's overall bloodlust periodically proved to be too much for a few more judicious individual members, who in almost any other setting, would be considered ultra-conservatives but in the context of Off Leash, sound like hippie peaceniks‎…. Many other Off Leash participants have also stated that they don't view the group chat as merely a forum to exchange ideas but want it to become a vehicle to put their theories into action."

Silverstein observes that it isn't uncommon for Off Leash participants to advocate "violence."

"On the roster of Off Leash participants," Silverstein points out, "there was one — a poster with the handle of 'S,' whom it took me weeks to identify — who stood out as a particularly dark character. There were some in the group who expressed more unhinged views and others who more casually called for violence against their enemies; what made S distinctive was his dry, bloodless manner and businesslike espousal of a disciplined worldview that was unmistakably fascist."

READ MORE:['Mother Theresa could not beat these charges': Trump not confident about jury deliberations

*Read Ken Silverstein's full report for The New Republic at this link.

===

During the Cold War, his National Review magazine[114] vowed to stand "athwart history, yelling Stop

http://William F. Buckley, Jr. was an unwitting influence on paleoconservatism.[113] During the Cold War, his National Review magazine[114] vowed to stand "athwart history, yelling Stop."[115] It promoted both Burke and Kirk, along with Frank Meyer's theory of fusionism;[

anti commie and semit together at last:

https://www.alternet.org/2019/06/how-the-media-is-legitimizing-a-century-old-nazi-trope/

no lnx

How the media is legitimizing a century-old Nazi trope

written by Ari Paul / Truthdig June 7, 2019

Since the election of Donald Trump, Brexit and the rise and re-election of other far-right governments around the globe, “cultural Marxism” has become a well-known nationalist buzzword, alongside “globalism.”

When Norwegian right-winger Anders Breivik invoked “cultural Marxism” as the reason for his 77-person killing spree in 2011, many observers placed the notion in the same category as the killer—the fringe. But since the election of Donald Trump, Brexit and the rise and re-election of other far-right governments around the globe, “cultural Marxism” has become a well-known nationalist buzzword, alongside “globalism”: Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro denounces it, and the media empire of former White House advisor Steve Bannon revolved around fighting it.

The phrase is seeping into mainstream media discourse, a far cry from its former days as an extremist catch phrase, and it’s creating a dangerous situation with an ominous historical context.

Doing his usual shtick of a more refined version of Abe Simpson, columnist David Brooks (New York Times, 11/26/19) lamented that today’s youths “tend to have been influenced by the cultural Marxism that is now the lingua franca in the elite academy,” giving them a “clash of oppressed and oppressor groups” worldview. Also in the Times, contributor Molly Worthen (4/20/19) quoted the phrase “cultural Marxism”—not approvingly, but not explaining what it meant, either, just offering it as an example of what “conservatives” were complaining about. A Times story in 2017 (8/11/17) about a former White House aide reported that the aide believed “globalists” would “impose cultural Marxism in the United States”—again, without defining for the layperson what that might mean.

The Washington Post (like other newspapers) invoked the phrase in its reports on Bolsonaro’s rise to power last year, and even on the hipster styles of the new wave of American white nationalists: In November 2016, the Post (11/30/16) reported that the style of shaved sides with long hair combed back is “worn by men who feel their whiteness has been infringed upon by the ‘cultural Marxism’ of the Americas.” And opinion-haver Andrew Sullivan took to New York (2/9/18) to denounce “cultural Marxists” for inspiring social justice movements on campuses.

What does cultural Marxism mean for the far right? In the modern iteration, in spaces like Breitbart or Infowars, it is the belief that a failure by communists to topple capitalism through worker revolt has led to a “Plan B” to destroy Western society from the inside. By tearing down the gender binary, de-centering Christianity values, championing the weak over the privileged and creating a multicultural society, revolutionaries have unanchored traditional Western order. Everything from gay rights to Muslim immigration is, in the language of the far right, part of a plot to finish the job that radical worker organizing could not.

Suffice it to say, this is a most paranoid fantasy. Most Marxists don’t speak in these terms, and people who do advocate for immigration, multiculturalism or secularism do so out of a certain regard for human and civil rights. But the far right still obsesses that this is a historical cultural struggle.

Like others on the right, the National Review (8/9/18) saw proof of the plot in the Frankfurt School, which

was born out of a psychological need to explain why communism had failed to take root, initially in Germany but more broadly in the West. The answer that Herbert Marcuse,Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer and others settled on—after borrowing some ideas from Freud and Nietzsche—was that the structure of capitalist society (which they perversely and ludicrously equated with fascism) was even more totalitarian than they had realized. In other words, communism couldn’t take root because fascism already had.

It’s far from a cultural grappling with the Frankfurt School’s actual ideas, which live mostly in academia. As Spencer Sunshine, an associate fellow at Political Research Associates, points out, the focus on the Frankfurt School by the right serves to highlight its inherent Jewishness. “A piece stands in for the whole,” he said.

This isn’t one of those “yeah, it could be interpreted as antisemitic” things—it’s straight from Nazi ideology, with just enough cosmetic changes to make it acceptable for the modern right. “Cultural Bolshevism” was the term used by Nazi critics of modernist art, which they believed to be rooted in Jewish decadence and thereby, according to Nazi logic, connected to the communist specter. As Dominic Green (Spectator USA, 3/28/19) wrote in a conservative critique of conservatives’ complaints about “cultural Marxism”: “For the Nazis, the Frankfurter School and its vaguely Jewish exponents fell under the rubric of Kulturbolshewismus, ‘Cultural Bolshevism.’”

It came into the American sector through paleoconservative writers William S. Lind and Paul Weyrich, who in a series of articles recraftedthe Nazi idea of “cultural Marxism” as a scare tactic for the American right. “These guys were all Jewish,” Lind told a Holocaust denial conference in 2002; Lind would be later be cited as a prominent influence on Trump’s nationalist agenda.

As Sunshine noted:

It is deeply disturbing that it is used by mainstream conservatives when it’s clearly antisemitic…. They attribute it to all these things, anything from Black Bloc to Hillary Clinton, any kind of social liberalism.

It’s not too surprising that the nationalistic right still clings onto such fascist anachronisms; it’s clearly helping them at the voting booth, from the United States to Europe to Brazil. It’s an important mobilizing call for the far right, depicting things like immigration and secularism not simply as liberal values, but as far-left revolutionary tools.

What should be shocking is the cavalier way some traditional media, like the Times and the Post, are allowing it to live on their pages. Brooks rebrands cultural Marxism as mere political correctness, giving the Nazi-inspired phrase legitimacy for the American right. It is dropped in or quoted in other stories—some of them lighthearted, like the fashion cues of the alt-right—without describing how fringe this notion is. It’s akin to letting conspiracy theories about chem trails or vaccines get unearned space in mainstream press.

And it’s not as if the Times doesn’t know this. In 2018, Columbia University historian Samuel Moyn wrote in a Times blog post (11/13/18):

That “cultural Marxism” is a crude slander, referring to something that does not exist, unfortunately does not mean actual people are not being set up to pay the price, as scapegoats to appease a rising sense of anger and anxiety. And for that reason, “cultural Marxism” is not only a sad diversion from framing legitimate grievances, but also a dangerous lure in an increasingly unhinged moment.

Newspapers should be responsible with such phrases, and it’s easy to do that. It is common—and good practice—for mainstream journalists to avoid imprecise phrases like “pro-life,” and instead call the position “anti-abortion.” Reuters has tight rules for using the word “terrorist,” because the label is too often thrown around. For those with strong feelings about terrorism, it might have seemed insensitive, but for the sake of straight reporting, it was necessary. Brooks shouldn’t have used “cultural Marxism,” not because he should be censored, but because what he meant was “political correctness” and not (we hope) a century-old antisemitic trope.

It would be sensible, when the term is invoked by far-right extremists, to provide readers with a definition of the phrase and its origin. And unless it is invoked in a quote, writers like Brooks should be encouraged not to use it all. “They should define it as an antisemitic conspiracy theory with no basis in fact,” Sunshine said of mainstream news editors.

Failure to do that, as places like the Times and Post are guilty of, has bitter consequences. “It is legitimizing the use of that framework, and therefore it’s coded antisemitism,” Sunshine said.

https://4thgenwar.wordpress.com/2016/07/03/trump-meets-man-who-inspired-2011-terror-attack-deadlier-than-orlando-shooting/

aditionalright.com, shows Donald Trump standing with an even taller, neatly dressed, unsmiling man with a strangely intense gaze: William S. Lind.

In his column, Lind wrote, “At the beginning of this column you will find a photograph of me giving a copy of The Next Conservatism to presidential candidate Donald Trump”.

Lind’s many accomplishments include pioneering a novel theory of warfare that, he suggests, may have inspired al-Qaeda’s grand global strategy ; promoting a conspiracy theory concerning something called “cultural Marxism” — now globally embraced by racist, neo-Nazi, and nationalist right movements — which helped provoke one of Europe’s worst terrorist attacks in decades ; and publishing a 2014 novel that envisions white Christian militias carrying out the ethnic cleansing of North America and restoring slavery.

In the website photo, Trump is smiling, and, according to Bill Lind, he holds Lind’s 2009 book The Next Conservatism, co-written with his friend and close working colleague the late Paul Weyrich – who is generally credited as one of the top three co-architects of the contemporary American religious right.

The Next Conservatism, reported to have been circulated within the Trump for President team, not only anticipated most of the positions Donald Trump campaigned on – it maps out a bold new path for conservatism that bears uncanny resemblance to Trump’s 2016 election campaign platform.

William Lind is widely acknowledged by relevant scholars as by far the most important promoter of the “cultural Marxism“ conspiracy theory concerning the alleged origin of “political correctness” – a plot Lind alleges was launched, nearly a century ago by Jewish Marxist intellectuals from the “Frankfurt School”, to destroy America and Western Christian civilization.

In 2002 Lind told attendees at a Holocaust denial conference, concerning the architects of the alleged cultural Marxism plot against America, that “These guys were all Jewish”

Lind’s writing on the “cultural Marxism” conspiracy theory helped directly inspire one of Europe’s worst terrorist attacks in decades – the 2011 slaughter of 77, mostly teenagers, and wounding of 319 in Norway. According to the neo-Nazi perpetrator Anders Behring Breivik, he intended his terrorist attack as a “marketing method” to publicize his political manifesto that featured, as it core thesis, the “cultural Marxism” conspiracy theory.

In addition, Lind has suggested that his ideas on non-traditional “Fourth Generation” warfare (4GW) may have helped inspire the grand strategy behind al-Qaeda’s devastating September 11, 2001 attacks on America. “al-Qaeda understands 4GW and is using it,” concurs one relevant military strategy expert.

In 1999 Lind claimed, “The real damage to race relations in the South came not from slavery, but from Reconstruction, which would not have occurred if the South had won [the Civil War]. Then, in 2014, he published a novel (which he had originally written in the 1990s) that outlined a vision for violently restoring the American slavery regime overthrown in the Civil War.

William Lind’s 2014 novel (written under a pen-name) “Victoria – A Novel of 4th Generation War” favorably depicts white Christian militia groups overthrowing the federal government, helping out a resurgent Southern Dixie regime by vaporizing the black insurgent-controlled center of Atlanta with a tactical nuclear weapon, and carrying out the ethnic cleansing of African-Americans (see chapter 27) and other ethnic groups such as Puerto Ricans.

African-American families are driven out of cities into forced sharecropping on white-owned lands in the country. Towards the end of the novel, the protagonists launch a final crusade against Islam.

According to sociologist, retired Senior U.S. Army Analyst, and authority on the Tea Party and the American militia movement Dr. James Scaminaci, William S. Lind has authored the “blueprint for the development of the patriot militia movement” which hopes to one day overthrow federal authority; and in a key 1989 article that may have inspired al-Qaeda, he forecast that “The next real war we fight is likely to be on American soil.”

In his 2009 book The Next Conservatism, William Lind suggests a new mechanism for domestic counterterrorism – by harnessing the manpower of local anti-government militia groups which “might report to county sheriffs”.

Such county sheriff / militia alliances have already begun under the auspices of a national sheriffs group called the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA), and by late 2016 top Trump for President campaign staff and surrogates had established contact with CSPOA leadership.

In the last weeks of the 2016 presidential campaign, an extraordinary pattern emerged that was wholly unnoticed by media or even seasoned watchdog groups tasked with tracking the American far-right – dozens of top Trump campaign advisers and surrogates appeared as guests on a relatively obscure far-right radio show, the Liberty Roundtable.

The Liberty Roundtable radio show frequently features, as a guest, the co-founder and current leader of CSPOA and Liberty Roundtable show host Sam Bushman has himself served on the CSPOA board.

The CSPOA, closely associated with the Christian right, has been advertised by its founder and head Richard Mack as “The Army To Set Our Nation Free” and has promoted anti-Obama “birther” conspiracy theories also promoted by Donald Trump. CSPOA events have featured speakers who advocate for Southern Secession.

The Secret Life of “Political Correctness”

In his campaign speeches, including Trump’s New Hampshire speech following the June 2016 massacre of 49 people at an Orlando, Florida nightclub, Donald Trump has repeatedly attacked “political correctness”.

“I refuse to be politically correct”, Trump told his New Hampshire audience. “I’m so tired of this politically correct crap,” he complained to South Carolina business leaders back in September 2015. “This country, political correctness is killing us,” Trump charged in a February 2016 interview on NBC’s Today show.

Throughout the primary season Donald Trump has attacked “political correctness” so much, it might have raised the question – was he aware of the dark new conspiracy theory association that the term “political correctness” has taken on, over the past decade and a half, for many on the American right ?

If he wasn’t, he probably is now.

Portrait of Donald Trump as a Paleocon

William S. Lind is an influential arch-conservative ideologue of the Paleoconservative right — a tendency that runs from the nativist populism of Pat Buchanan and the “libertarian” Christian Reconstructonism-tinged politics of Ron Paul over to overtly racist, white nationalist, neo-Nazi, and theocratic Christian groups (both in the small but heavily influential Christian Reconstructionism movement but also in some of the more nativist streams of Christian dominionism within the vastly larger charismatic movement.)

Paleoconservatives like Buchanan, Paul, and Lind tend to oppose U.S. interventionism and “nation building” – which they consider to be typically stupid, ineffective, and costly. They view immigration – especially Muslim and Hispanic immigration – as an existential threat which could destroy the nation.

They decry the deindustrialization of America and oppose globalization and neo-Liberal free trade policies. They regard Wall Street’s financial machinations as parasitic and detrimental to the economic well-being of average Americans. And, they are partial to conspiracy theories in which secret elites, typically Jewish, scheme to rule or conquer the world and enslave humanity.

Despite the extremity of his political and social views, Bill Lind could hardly be called a fringe crank.

From the 1980s, Lind was for three decades a major fixture at what some consider to have been the emerging new conservative movement’s most intellectually and ideologically influential think tank, Paul Weyrich’s Free Congress Foundation.

And, Lind has extensive connections in the U.S. military due to his pioneering work as a seminal theorist of something called Fourth Generation Warfare (4GW), a theory of asymmetrical warfare that’s especially attractive to insurgent and terrorist groups, a theory which, he’s suggested, may have given al-Qaeda strategic inspiration prior to 9-11

During their meeting, Lind gave Trump the 2009 book that he co-authored with the late Paul Weyrich, titled The Next Conservatism, which includes extensive discussion of Lind’s “cultural Marxism”/”political correctness” conspiracy theory.

The book also reads as if it had been specifically commissioned as a strategic template for Trump’s presidential campaign :

The Next Conservatism calls for stopping illegal immigration, controlling the U.S.-Mexico border, the ethnic and religious profiling of legal immigrants, making English the official national language (a less noticed Trump suggestion), protective tariffs, rebuilding American industry – to bring back well-paying jobs, investing in infrastructure (such as roads, bridges, and public transit), and pulling back from interventionist American foreign policies.

Did Donald Trump read The Next Conservatism prior to launching his devastatingly effective campaign for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination ?

We’ll probably never know, but Trump could have derived most of his 2016 primary positions from a two-hour session with Lind’s and Weyrich’s book, by simply dog-earing pages and underlining key bits of text with his signature golden Sharpie.

And that would have been quite smart, on Trump’s part, given the importance of who Lind’s co-author was — the late Paul Weyrich, a key movement architect who coached and brokered the entrance of religious right into national politics, a man known for being typically a few years ahead of his time.

William S. Lind has himself noted the close resonance between Donald Trump’s positions and the ideas laid out in The Next Conservatism. After meeting Trump and giving him the book, Lind wrote,

“Trump’s views on avoidable foreign wars, free trade, political correctness and a number of other subjects have much in common with The Next Conservatism. If he reads it, our book might be helpful to him in fleshing out his agenda.”

The Architects

The book is billed as Paul Weyrich’s “last will and testament”. It was his (and William Lind’s) vision for rebuilding a conservative movement that, near the end of his life, Weyrich thought was running off the rails.

Weyrich, who one longtime observer of the America right has described as “the connective tissue of the modern conservative movement”, played a central role launching much of the movement’s early infrastructure including the Free Congress Foundation, the Heritage Foundation, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), and a succession of conservative evangelical activist groups and coalitions – first Christian Voice (formed from several California anti-gay and anti-pornography groups), then the Moral Majority, then the Christian Coalition.

Weyrich may have been a traditionalist, but he was no classic conservative. In the 1984 book Ominous Politics – The New Conservative Labyrinth, author John Soloma quoted Weyrich as having stated,

“We are no longer working to preserve the status quo. We are radicals, working to overturn the present power structure of this country.” (p.49)

Following his death in December 2008, an LA Times story quoted Weyrich as having declared, on fighting the American culture war,

“It may not be with bullets and . . . rockets and missiles, but it’s a war nonetheless… It is a war of ideology, it’s a war of ideas, and it’s a war about our way of life. And it has to be fought with the same intensity, I think, and dedication as you would fight a shooting war.”

In line with those statements, Weyrich’s Free Congress Foundation promoted a radical, even revolutionary, form of meta-politics intended to shift the underlying culture and which appeared to incorporate William S. Lind’s concepts of Fourth Generation Warfare. In his seminal 1989 Marines Corps Gazette article on 4GW, Lind and his co-authors had predicted that,

“Television news may become a more powerful operational weapon than armored divisions.”

4GW TV

Countless observers have noted the role of Roger Ailes’ Fox Network – as a conduit for right-wing propaganda, for its ability to generate an alternative reality, and for its attacks on the legitimacy of government and other institutions. As such, Fox can be considered an example of Fourth Generation warfare in practice.

But the success of Fox was paved by two prior, related media ventures. The first iteration of the idea, of an explicitly right-leaning media network, was the Coors family-financed, New York City-based Television News, Inc. (TVN), launched in 1973 – an effort that, as Joseph Coors told a Denver, CO paper, was explicitly aimed at countering “liberal-left” network news. It was a short-lived affair that folded in 1975.

But TVN did bring together two rising stars: Roger Ailes, a who during his time as a Nixon Administration media consultant had proposed a White House-run news network, and Paul Weyrich – who would soon begin to launch key infrastructure of the nascent Christian right.

Next came National Empowerment Television (NET) – a more radical affair than the Coors’ TVN. As described in the research paper “THE FREE CONGRESS FOUNDATION’S POLITICAL-MILITARY STRATEGY DOCUMENTS“, by James Scaminaci,

“In 1992, the Free Congress Foundation launched its National Empowerment Television (NET) broadcast to 11 million homes. According to Media Transparency, the NET carried Borderline for “conservative views on immigration policy,” the Cato Forum, “which provides the Cato Institute with an on-going opportunity to promote its beliefs concerning the illegitimacy of taxes and government regulation,” On Target With the National Rifle Association, and other right-wing policy shows.”

The Cato Forum may have been within established boundaries, the NRA show perhaps a bit less so. But Borderline went further. Launched in 1996, Borderline was produced by The Federation For Immigration Reform and featured, according to a report on FAIR from the Southern Poverty Law Center,

“a number of prominent white nationalists, including Sam Francis and Jared Taylor. “Borderline” often advanced ideas popular in white nationalist circles; particularly popular was the idea that immigrants are destroying American culture or displacing Western civilization with degenerate, Third World ways.”

As described in the SPLC report, Borderline shows in 1996 included discussion of the possibility “that if the U.S. loses its white majority, it will be destroyed” by a civil war. Three years before the Borderline show was launched on NET, FAIR founder John Tanton had mused,

“As Whites see their power and control over their lives declining, will they simply go quietly into the night? Or will there be an explosion?”

The NET Borderline show is especially significant because it demonstrates a working relationship between the Free Congress Foundation – a central organizational hub for the Christian right – and a decidedly racist national anti-immigration group prior to when the Free Congress Foundation began its concerted effort, roughly at the beginning of the new millennium, to spread the “cultural Marxism” conspiracy theory that now serves effectively as a coded vehicle for racist sentiment.

The 4GW War on America

The thesis that elements of the American far right, especially on the Christian right, have for decades been both waging (and preparing for) Fourth Generation warfare — to challenge federal and Constitutional authority, reverse gains by the feminist and LGBTQ rights movements, the environmental movement, and other liberal and progressive constituencies, and even one day impose decentralized government based upon biblical law — has been addressed in depth in the writing of Dr. James Scaminaci, a former U.S. Army intelligence analyst who specialized first in the former Soviet Union, then the Middle East, and lastly in the Balkans.

...

William S. Lind - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_S._Lind

:{:(style="border-color:#006621;;border-style:solid;border-width:5px 4px 0px;width:0px;height:0px;margin-left:3px;top:7.5px;margin-top:-4px;position:absolute;left:0px"):}:

:{:{William S:(style="font-weight:bold"):}:. :{Lind:(style="font-weight:bold"):}:. :{William S:(style="font-weight:bold"):}:. :{Lind:(style="font-weight:bold"):}: (born July 9, 1947) is an American conservative author, described as being aligned with :{paleoconservatism:(style="font-weight:bold"):}:. He is the author of several books and one of the first proponents of fourth-generation warfare (4GW) theory. Director of The American Conservative Center for Public Transportation.:(style="overflow-wrap:break-word"):}:

**Nationality**‎: ‎American

Born‎: ‎July 9, 1947 (age 71); Cleveland, Ohio, ...

Other names‎: ‎Thomas Hobbes

Early life · ‎Views on warfare and US ... · ‎Political career and ... · ‎Other views

The Media Are Legitimizing a Century-Old Nazi Trope - Truthdig

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/the-media-is-legitimizing-a-century-old-nazi-trope/

:{:(style="border-color:#006621;;border-style:solid;border-width:5px 4px 0px;width:0px;height:0px;margin-left:3px;top:7.5px;margin-top:-4px;position:absolute;left:0px"):}:

:{2 days ago - It came into the American sector through :{paleoconservative writers William S. Lind:(style="font-weight:bold"):}: and Paul Weyrich, who in a series of articles recraftedthe ...:(style="overflow-wrap:break-word"):}:

Donald Trump Meets William S. Lind | 4th Generation Warfare

https://4thgenwar.wordpress.com/.../trump-meets-man-who-inspired-2011-terror-attac...

:{:(style="border-color:#006621;;border-style:solid;border-width:5px 4px 0px;width:0px;height:0px;margin-left:3px;top:7.5px;margin-top:-4px;position:absolute;left:0px"):}:

:{Jul 3, 2016 - Lind's :{writing:(style="font-weight:bold"):}: on the “cultural Marxism” conspiracy theory helped directly inspire ... :{William S:(style="font-weight:bold"):}:. :{Lind:(style="font-weight:bold"):}: is an influential arch-conservative ideologue of the ... :{Paleoconservatives:(style="font-weight:bold"):}: like Buchanan, Paul, and Lind tend to oppose U.S. ...:(style="overflow-wrap:break-word"):}:

**Paleoconservatism** (sometimes shortened to **paleocon**) is a conservative political philosophy found primarily in the United States stressing tradition, limited government and civil society, along with religious, regional, national and Western identity.^[1][2]

According to international relations scholar Michael Foley, "paleoconservatives press for restrictions on immigration, a rollback of multicultural programmes, the decentralization of the federal policy, the restoration of controls upon free trade, a greater emphasis upon economic nationalism and isolationism in the conduct of American foreign policy, and a generally revanchist outlook upon a social order in need of recovering old lines of distinction and in particular the assignment of roles in accordance with traditional categories of gender, ethnicity, and race".^[3] Practitioners of this philosophy^[who?]identify themselves as the legitimate heirs to the American conservative tradition.^[1][4]

Elizabethtown College professor Paul Gottfried is credited with coining the term in the 1980s.^[5] He says the term originally referred to various Americans, such as conservative and traditionalist Catholics and agrarian Southerners, who turned to anti-communism during the Cold War.^[6]

Paleoconservative thought has been published by the Rockford Institute's Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture.^[7]Politician Pat Buchanan was strongly influenced by its articles^[6] and helped create another paleocon publication, The American Conservative.^[8] Its concerns overlap those of the Old Right that opposed the New Deal in the 1930s and 1940s,^[9] as well as American social conservatism of the late 20th century expressed, for example, in the book Single Issues by Joseph Sobran.

Paleoconservatism gained renewed attention with the rise of Donald Trump, who won the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

[hide]

Core beliefs:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

Name:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

The prefix paleo derives from the Greek root palaeo- meaning "ancient" or "old". It is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, and refers to the paleocons' claim to represent a more historic, authentic conservative tradition than that found in neoconservatism. Adherents of paleoconservatism often describe themselves simply as "paleo-." Rich Lowry of National Review claims the prefix "is designed to obscure the fact that it is a recent ideological creation of post-Cold War politics."^[10]

The paleoconservatives use the term conservative somewhat differently from some US opponents of leftism. Paleocons may reject attempts by Rush Limbaugh and others to graft short-term policy goals—such as school choice, enterprise zones, and faith-based initiatives—into the core of conservatism. This is mainly due to the paleoconservatives' desire to see these incorporated as long-term institutional goals, rather than short-term victories for the movement itself. In this way, paleocons are generally regarded as taking the "long view" toward US conservatism, willing to suffer temporary setbacks while never taking their aim off the goal of establishing the primacy of conservative thought into US politics.^[11]

Moreover, Samuel T. Francis, Thomas Fleming and some other paleocons de-emphasized the "conservative" part of the "paleoconservative" label, saying that they do not want the status quo preserved.^[12][13] Fleming and Paul Gottfried called such thinking "stupid tenacity" and described it as "a series of trenches dug in defense of last year's revolution."^[14] Francis defined authentic conservatism as "the survival and enhancement of a particular people and its institutionalized cultural expressions."^[15] He said of the paleoconservative movement:

What paleoconservatism tries to tell Americans is that the dominant forces in their society are no longer committed to conserving the traditions, institutions, and values that created and formed it, and, therefore, that those who are really conservative in any serious sense and wish to live under those traditions, institutions, and values need to oppose the dominant forces and form new ones.^[16]

The earliest mention of the word paleoconservative listed in Nexis^[17] is an article by J. Patrick Lewis in the October 20, 1984, issue of The Nation, referring to academic economists who allegedly work to redefine poverty.^[18] The American Heritage Dictionary (fourth edition) lists a generic, informal use of the term, meaning "extremely or stubbornly conservative in political matters." Outside of the United States, the word is sometimes spelled palaeoconservative.^[19]

Conservative heritage:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

Many paleoconservatives identify themselves as "classical conservatives" and trace their philosophy to the Old Right Republicans of the interwar period^[20] which influenced the U.S. not to join the League of Nations, reduce immigration with the passage of the Immigration Act of 1924, and oppose Franklin Roosevelt. They often look back even further, to Edmund Burke, as well as the anti-federalist movement that stretched from the days of Thomas Jefferson to John C. Calhoun.^[21]

Just as paleoconservatives' non-interventionism stems from their skepticism as to what extent—if at all—European culture can be transplanted or forced upon non-Western cultures, paleoconservatives' opposition to immigration is rooted in their skepticism of the ability of non-Western peoples to adopt European culture.^[22] As a result, paleocons are most distinctive in their emphatic opposition to open immigration by non-Europeans, and their general disapproval of U.S. intervention overseas. Sam Francis wrote:

We believe that the United States derives from and is an integral part of European civilization and the European people and that the American people and government should remain European in their composition and character. We therefore oppose the massive immigration of non-European and non-Western peoples into the United States that threatens to transform our nation into a non-European majority in our lifetime. We believe that illegal immigration must be stopped, if necessary by military force and placing troops on our national borders; that illegal aliens must be returned to their own countries; and that legal immigration must be severely restricted or halted through appropriate changes in our laws and policies.^[23]

They are also strongly critical of neoconservatives and their sympathizers in print media, talk radio and cable TV news.^[24] Paleocons often say they are not conservatives in the sense that they necessarily wish to preserve existing institutions or seek merely to slow the growth of modern big-government conservatism.^[25]They do not wish to be closely identified with the U.S. Republican Party.^[24] Rather, they seek the renewal of "small 'r'" republican society in the context of the Western heritage, customs and civilization.^[26] Joseph Scotchie wrote:

Republics mind their own business. Their governments have very limited powers, and their people are too busy practicing self-government to worry about problems in other countries. Empires not only bully smaller, defenseless nations, they also can't leave their own, hapless subjects alone.... Empires and small government aren't compatible, either.^[27]

By contrast, paleocons see neoconservatives as empire-builders and themselves as defenders of the republic, pointing to Rome as an example of how an ongoing campaign of military expansionism can destroy a republic.^[28]

On some issues, many paleocons are hard to distinguish from others on the conservative spectrum. For example, they tend to oppose abortion on demand^[29] and gay marriage,^[30][31] while supporting capital punishment,^[32] handgun ownership^[33] and an original intent reading of the U.S. Constitution.^[34] On the other hand, paleocons are often more sympathetic to environmental protection,^[35] animal welfare,^[36] and anti-consumerism^[37] than others on the US Right.

Human nature, tradition and reason:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

Paleoconservatives argue that since human nature is limited and finite, any attempt to create a man-made utopia is headed for disaster and potential carnage. Instead, they lean toward tradition, family, customs, religious institutions and classical learning to provide wisdom and guidance.^[38]

Thomas Fleming stated this opposition to abstract ideals in a way that critic David Brooks called a "startling crescendo":

Among the most dangerous of our theoretical illusions are the political fantasies that can be summed up in words like democracy; equality, and natural rights; the principle of one man, one vote and the American tradition of self-government. No one who lives in the world with his eyes open can actually believe in any of this.^[39]

Historian W. Wesley McDonald explains the opposition to ideology this way:

In a humane social order, a community of spirit is fostered in which generations are bound together. According to [Russell] Kirk, this link is achieved through moral and social norms that transcend the particularities of time and place and, because they form the basis of genuine civilized existence, can only be neglected at great peril. These norms, reflected in religious dogmas, traditions, humane letters, social habit and custom, and prescriptive institutions, create the sources of the true community that is the final end of politics.^[40]

Along these lines, Joseph Sobran, in his "Pensees", argues that Western civilization relies on civility at the center of the society:

Civility is the relationship among citizens in a republic. It corresponds to the condition we call "freedom", which is not just an absence of restraint or coercion, but the security of living under commonly recognized rules of conduct. Not all these rules are enforced by the state; legal institutions of civility depend on the ethical substratum and collapse when it is absent. And in fact the colloquial sense of civility as good manners is relevant to its political meaning: citizens typically deal with each other by consent, and they have to say "please" and "thank you" to each other.^[41]

Certain paleoconservatives say that tradition is a better guide than reason.For example, Mel Bradford wrote that certain questions are settled before any serious deliberation concerning a preferred course of conduct may begin. This ethic is based in a "culture of families, linked by friendship, common enemies, and common projects." So a good conservative keeps "a clear sense of what Southern grandmothers have always meant in admonishing children, 'we don't do that'."^[42]

Thomas Fleming calls tradition "a body of wisdom and truth and a set of attitudes and behavior handed down from one generation to another. It is our parents' respect for their grandfathers that we reflect when we refuse to think ourselves wiser than our ancestors and do not presume to condemn their shortcomings." By following tradition, Joseph Sobran said that society can maintain continuity with the past, through words, rituals, records, commemorations, and laws:

There is no question of "resisting change." The only question is what can and should be salvaged from "devouring time." Conservation is a labor, not indolence, and it takes discrimination to identify and save a few strands of tradition in the incessant flow of mutability. In fact conservation is so hard that it could never be achieved by sheer conscious effort. Most of it has to be done by habit, as when we speak in such a way as to make ourselves understood by others without their having to consult a dictionary, and thereby give a little permanence to the kind of tradition that is a language.^[41]

Furthermore, James Kalb argues that tradition succeeds where ideology fails because it includes habits and attitudes about things that are hard to articulate rationally. Many aspects of social life resist clear definition, so technocratic approaches to social policy deserve suspicion:

Our knowledge is partial and attained with difficulty. The effects of political proposals are difficult to predict and as the proposals become more ambitious their effects become incalculable. We can't evaluate political ideas without accepting far more beliefs, presumptions and attitudes than we could possibly judge critically.^[43]

Concrete roots:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

Many paleocons also say that Westerners have lost touch with their classical and European heritage, to the point that they are in danger of losing their civilization.^[44]Robert S. Griffin notes that paleocons fear the United States becoming a "secularized, homogenized, de-Europeanized, pacified, deluded, manipulated, lowest-common-denominator-leveled, popular-culture-dopified country"^[45]

The decadence of a civilization by loss of faith and vigour can be observed more than once in history. What is extraordinary about the American situation is the stupidity. The Romans, such is my impression, did not become stupid and incompetent with their decadence. Americans have not lost faith in their cultural inheritance—they have been entirely separated from it. How this happened is one of the few topics still worth exploring in this Twilight.^[46]

Paleocons tend to dislike abstract principles presented without connection to concrete roots, like religion, heritage or traditional institutions. This distaste for universalism includes the doctrinal conclusions by socialists, neo-Thomists and Straussians. For example, Mel Bradford wrote in "A Better Guide Than Reason" (citing Michael Oakeshott) that:

The only freedom which can last is a freedom embodied somewhere, rooted in a history, located in space, sanctioned by genealogy, and blessed by a religious establishment. The only equality which abstract rights, insisted upon outside the context of politics, are likely to provide is the equality of universal slavery. It is a lesson which Western man is only now beginning to learn.^[47]

Some paleocons also profess a conservative value-centered historicism, which Gottfried defines as "the belief that historical circumstances set values." This is distinguished from nihilism, postmodernism and moral relativism. Samuel Francis argued that this position is a "Burkean appeal to tradition."^[48] For example, Edmund Burke wrote in his "Reflections on the Revolution in France."

I cannot stand forward, and give praise or blame to anything which relates to human actions, and human concerns, on a simple view of the object, as it stands stripped of every relation, in all the nakedness and solitude of metaphysical abstraction. Circumstances (which with some gentlemen pass for nothing) give in reality to every political principle its distinguishing color and discriminating effect. The circumstances are what render every civil and political scheme beneficial or noxious to mankind.^[49]

Claes Ryn says that life has "an enduring purpose, but one that manifests itself differently as individuals and circumstances are different."^[50] He writes:

For the conservative, the universal imperative that binds human beings does not announce its purpose in simple, declaratory statements. How, then, does one discern its demands? Sometimes only with difficulty. Only through effort can the good or true or beautiful be discovered, and they must be realized differently in different historical circumstances. The same universal values have diverse manifestations. Some of the concrete instantiations of universality take us by surprise. Because there is no simple roadmap to good, human beings need freedom and imagination to find it. Universality has nothing to do with uniformity.^[51]

Anti-Federalism:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

Anti-Federalism is another key aspect of paleoconservatism, which adherents see as an antitype to the managerial state. The paleocon flavor urges honoring the principle of subsidiarity, that is, decentralized government, local rule, private property and minimal bureaucracy.^[52] In an international context, this view would be known as federalism and paleocons often look to John C. Calhoun for inspiration.^[53]

As to the role of statecraft in society, Thomas Fleming says it should not be confused with soulcraft. He gives his summary of the paleocon position:

Our basic position on the state has always been twofold: 1) a recognition that man is a social and political animal who cannot be treated as an "individual" without doing damage to human nature. In this sense libertarian theory is as wrong and as potentially harmful as communism. The commonwealth is therefore a natural and necessary expression of human nature that provides for the fulfillment of human needs, and 2) the modern state is a cancerous form of polity that has metastasized and poisoned the natural institutions from which the state derives all legitimacy—family, church, corporation (in the broadest sense), and neighborhood. Thus, it is almost always a mistake to try to use the modern state to accomplish moral or social ends.^[54]

Russell Kirk, for example, argued that most government tasks should be performed at the local or state level. This is intended to ward off centralization and protect community sentiment by putting the decision-making power closer to the populace. He rooted this in the Christian notion of original sin; since humanity is flawed, society should not put too much power in a few hands. Gerald J. Russello concluded that this involved "a different way of thinking about government, one based on an understanding of political society as beginning in place and sentiment, which in turn supports written laws."^[55]

This anti-federalism extends to culture too. In general, this means that different regional groups should be able to maintain their own distinct identity. For example, Thomas Fleming and Michael Hill argue that the American South and every other region have the right to "preserve their authentic cultural traditions and demand the same respect from others." In their Southern context they call on citizens to "take control of their own governments, their own institutions, their own culture, their own communities and their own lives" and "wean themselves from dependence on federal largesse." They say that:

A concern for states' rights, local self-government and regional identity used to be taken for granted everywhere in America. But the United States is no longer, as it once was, a federal union of diverse states and regions. National uniformity is being imposed by the political class that runs Washington, the economic class that owns Wall Street and the cultural class in charge of Hollywood and the Ivy League.^[56]

In a similar fashion, Pat Buchanan argued during the 1996 campaign that the social welfare should be left to the control of individual states. He also called for abolishing the U.S. Department of Education and handing decision-making over to parents, teachers and districts. Controversies such as evolution, busing and curriculum standards would be settled on a local basis.^[57] In addition, he opposed a 1998 Puerto Rican statehood plan on the grounds that the island would be ripped from its cultural and linguistic roots: "Let Puerto Rico remain Puerto Rico, and let the United States remain the United States and not try to absorb, assimilate and Americanize a people whose hearts will forever belong to that island."^[58]

Family:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

Paleocons often argue that modern managerial society is a threat to stable families. Allan C. Carlson, former president of the Rockford Institute, argues that

The family is the natural and fundamental social unit, inscribed in our nature as human beings, rooted in marriage, rooted in the commitment to bring new life into the world, and rooted in a deep respect for both ancestors and posterity.^[59]

He calls this a universal rule of human nature, true for Westerners and non-Westerners alike. He also argues that happiness "comes through natural family bonds" and that "the future of any nation shall be by way of the family."^[60] He defines family as "a man and a woman living in a socially sanctioned bond called marriage for the purposes of propagating and rearing children, sharing intimacy and resources, and conserving lineage, property, and tradition."^[61]

To be human is to be familial. Any significant departure from the family rooted in stable marriage, the welcoming of children, and respect for ancestors and posterity—any deviation from this social structure makes us in a way less "human": that is, I think it fair to say, the true message of modern science.^[59]

Joseph Sobran picks up this same theme, saying that heterosexual marriage is hard-coded into human nature:

[Even] the Pope can’t change the nature of marriage. It existed, by necessity of human nature, long before Jesus or even Abraham.... This has nothing to do with mere disapproval of sodomy. Even societies that were indifferent to sodomy saw no reason to treat same-sex domestic partnerships as marriages. Why not? Because such unions don’t produce children.... To put it as unromantically as possible, people who have children should be stuck with each other, sharing the responsibility.^[62]

Paleocons also question the validity of gender feminism in similar ways, some questioning feminism in both its radical and moderate forms. They say that the push for total gender equality dehumanizes both men and women, damaging the nuclear family and sacralizing abortion. Certain attitudes toward feminism also create room for the managerial state to try engineering sexual equality. Gottfried described this position, which was influenced by scholar Allan Carlson, thus:

The change of women's role, from being primarily mothers to self-defined professionals, has been a social disaster that continues to take its toll on the family. Rather than being the culminating point of Western Christian gentility, the movement of women into commerce and politics may be seen as exactly the opposite, the descent by increasingly disconnected individuals into social chaos.^[63]

Post-family order:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

Allan C. Carlson says that we live in a "post-family order", in which elites no longer accept the centrality of family life.^[64][65] In response, he calls for a pro-active social conservatism that seeks "real alternatives to the centralized ‘corporate state’ that are compatible with liberty and family life." He argues that there is a permanent tension between the family and "individualist, industrialized society."^[66] He says the modern "abstract state" too often sees the family as "its principal rival" and tries to suppress it. It can also hurt family living by the unintended consequences of public policy with good intentions.^[66] He also chides U.S. Republicans "for consistently favoring Wall Street over Main Street."^[67]

As an alternative to the "abstract state", Carlson argues the state must recognize that men and women "are different in reproductive, economic, and social functions", even though they share political and property rights.^[61] He says that churches and other religious bodies must step in and help rebuild "family-centered communities."^[66] As for common people, he says,

Men and women are both called home to rebuild families with an inner sanctity, to relearn the authentic meanings of the ancient words husbandry and housewifery, and to exercise the natural family functions of education, the care of the weak, charity, and a common economic life.^[66]

Carlson argues that the family's greatest challenge in the early 21st century comes from what he calls "soft totalitarianisms", which are "packaged around a militant secular individualism, but still seeking to build a marriage-free, post-family order."^[68] This includes same-sex marriage, the Left's association of family values with abortion,^[69] and "equity feminism".^[61] Samuel T. Francis uses similar ideas to argue that society should regulate sexual behavior, specifically laws against sodomy and gays in the military.^[70]

Polemics:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

Other contemporary luminaries include Donald Livingston, a Professor of Philosophy at Emory and corresponding editor for *Chronicles*;^[71] Paul Craig Roberts, an attorney and former Reagan administration Treasury official; commentator Joseph Sobran (died 2010), a columnist and contributing editor for Chronicles;^[71] novelist and essayist Chilton Williamson, senior editor for books at Chronicles;^[71] classicist Thomas Fleming, editor of Chronicles;^[72] and historian Clyde N. Wilson, long-time contributing editor for Chronicles.^[71] Another prominent paleoconservative, Theodore Pappas,^[73] is the current executive editor of Encyclopædia Britannica.^[74]

The movement combines disparate people and ideas that might seem incompatible in another context.^[75] Such diversity of thought echoes the paleo opposition to ideology and political rationalism, reflecting the influence of thinkers like Russell Kirk^[76] and Michael Oakeshott.^[77]

Pat Buchanan argues that a good politician must "defend the moral order rooted in the Old and New Testament and Natural Law"—and that "the deepest problems in our society are not economic or political, but moral."^[78] On the other hand, Samuel Francis complained that the "Religious Right" focuses on certain social issues and neglects other civilizational crises.^[79]

Kirkian legacy:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

Russell Kirk (1914–94) is a key figure in paleoconservatism, in that several of his books present an outline of a pervasive Anglo-American conservative tradition that exists despite many other distinctions. His own career stretched long enough to for him to defend Robert A. Taft in the 1950s, write for National Review during the Cold War, criticize neoconservatism in the 1980s, and give speeches supporting Buchanan in 1992. One neoconservative writer, Dan Himmelfarb, even refers to Kirk's The Conservative Mind as "the seminal work of paleoconservatism", even though it was first published in 1953.^[80]

Kirk developed six "canons" of conservatism. Gerald J. Russello described them thus:

a belief in a transcendent order, which Kirk described variously as based in tradition, divine revelation, or natural law;
an affection for the "variety and mystery" of human existence;
a conviction that society requires orders and classes that emphasize "natural distinctions;"
a belief that property and freedom are closely linked;
a faith in custom, convention and prescription, and
a recognition that innovation must be tied to existing traditions and customs, which is a respect for the political value of prudence.^[81]

In addition, Kirk said Christianity and Western Civilization are "unimaginable apart from one another."^[45] He said that "all culture arises out of religion. When religious faith decays, culture must decline, though often seeming to flourish for a space after the religion which has nourished it has sunk into disbelief."^[82]

Kirk called libertarians "chirping sectaries", quoting T. S. Eliot, and said that they and conservatives have nothing in common. He called the movement "an ideological clique forever splitting into sects still smaller and odder, but rarely conjugating." He said a line of division exists between believers in "some sort of transcendent moral order" and "utilitarians admitting no transcendent sanctions for conduct." He put libertarians in the latter category.^[83]

Kirk also popularized the Anglo-Irish statesman Edmund Burke as the prototypical conservative—and many paleocons consider him a hallowed ancestor.^[84] For them, he represents a vital link between the American right and the greater tradition of British customs and common law.^[85] As such, his ideas are a touchstone for a conservatism that respects tradition, while rejecting authoritarianism.

Precursors:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

In the United States, the Southern Agrarians,^[86] John T. Flynn,^[87] Albert Jay Nock,^[88] Garet Garrett,^[89] Robert R. McCormick,^[90] Felix Morley,^[91] and Richard M. Weaver among others, articulated positions that have proved influential among contemporary paleoconservatives. Some paleocons enthusiastically embrace the decentralizing tenets of the Anti-Federalists,^[92] such as John Dickinson^[93] and George Mason.^[94] Neoconservative critic David Brooks lists William Jennings Bryan, T. S. Eliot, Allen Tate, John Crowe Ransom, Cleanth Brooks, and Walker Percy as major paleo influences.^[39] The German-born and Calvinist political philosopher Johannes Althusius and his tract Politica, with its core emphasis on the principle of subsidiarity, has proven influential as well.

Paul Gottfried once noted an "occasional paleo association with over-the-top Catholicism."^[95] In fact, counter-revolutionary (Roman Catholic) European precursors to the paleoconservatives include Joseph de Maistre, Charles Maurras, Juan Donoso Cortés, Klemens Wenzel von Metternich, and Pope Pius IX, though they tend to carry influence limited to the Roman Catholic traditionalist subset of paleoconservatism. G. K. Chesterton^[96][97] and Hilaire Belloc^[98] are also popular Catholic forebears of paleo thought.^[99] As for Chesterton and Belloc, Joseph Sobran explained their relevance:

This new, paganized Western society under the comprehensive state would have come as much less of a surprise to us if we’d paid more attention to the two great English Catholic writers of the pre-Bolshevik period.... In 1912, Belloc predicted the rise of a new form of tyranny, which he called "the Servile State", neither capitalist nor socialist, in which one part of the population would be forced to support the other. He was not always accurate in detail, but he was right in principle. He saw that the cellular structure of Christian society was under assault. Chesterton agreed. Together both men resisted modernity in religion, morality, politics, economics, and art. They celebrated the Middle Ages, small private property, and above all Catholicism. In a famous epigram, typically defiant in its simplicity, Belloc proclaimed: "Europe is the Faith, and the Faith is Europe."^[100]

Some non-Catholic paleocons, such as Sam Francis, complained that this tradition is overrepresented among conservative intellectuals, thus putting the movement out of step with Middle America. He reluctantly acknowledged the Southern Presbyterian influence upon his own thinking.^[101] In addition, precursors of a Protestant paleoconservatism can be seen in 19th century figures such as Robert Lewis Dabney, Charles Hodge, Friedrich Julius Stahl, Abraham Kuyper and Guillaume Groen van Prinsterer.

Many paleocons also look to more modernist or historicist sources, such as Machiavelli, Hobbes and even Gramsci for intellectual ammunition. Contrarian Leftists such as Eugene Genovese, Christopher Lasch and Paul Piccone also influenced the movement.^[102] Samuel Francis even explored the nihilistic fiction of H. P. Lovecraft.^[103]To them, such thinkers help explain modernity, power relationships, and show how managerial society subverted Western traditions.^[104]

Some modern European continental conservatives, such as Frenchmen Jacques Barzun, Alain de Benoist, and René Girard, have a mode of thought and cultural criticism esteemed by many paleoconservatives.

Southern tradition:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

The southern conservative thread of paleoconservatism embodies the statesmanship of nineteenth-century figures such as John Randolph of Roanoke, John Taylor of Caroline and John C. Calhoun. It found modern expositors in **Richard M. Weaver** and Mel Bradford. Historian Paul V. Murphy argues that paleoconservatism is rooted in a group of intellectuals fascinated by antebellum culture and the Southern Agrarians, including Thomas Fleming, Clyde Wilson and Bradford. In the 1970s, Fleming, Wilson and Samuel Francis attended the University of North Carolina together, becoming what novelist Walker Percy called "the Chapel Hill conspiracy."^[45]

Murphy wrote that they developed "a particularistic politics of states' rights and localism, which they combine with a cultural and social criticism defined by Christian and patriarchal organicism."^[105] He also says the Southern traditionalist worldview evolved into what appeared in "Chronicles" from the mid-1980s onward, a focus on national identity mixed with regional particularity, plus skepticism of abstract theory and centralized power. They also said the mainstream view of the old South was distorted. For example, Bradford said:

The way to look at the institution of slavery is not backward from 1991 but forward from the hundred years before 1860. Slavery was like the rising and setting of the sun, a fixture of life. In pre-Colonial times, everyone was racist, except a few Quakers. Jefferson thought that Negroes were not capable of taking care of themselves, that they were somewhere between helpless children and orangutans.^[106]

In the 1995 "New Dixie Manifesto", Fleming and Michael Hill argued that Southerners are pelted with ethnic slurs, denied self-government and stripped of their symbols, including the Confederate flag.^[107] Like any other people, they have the right to their history and cultural identity. "After so many decades of strife", they wrote, "black and white Southerners of good will should be left alone to work out their destinies, avoiding, before it is too late, the urban hell that has been created by the lawyers, social engineers and imperial bureaucrats who have grown rich on programs that have done nothing to help anyone but themselves."

Thomas DiLorenzo revisited the Southern paleo critique of Abraham Lincoln in his book, The Real Lincoln. He gives it a paleolibertarian twist, saying the president followed mercantilism, protectionism and the example of Alexander Hamilton.^[108] He also said that the Civil War was about destroying the right of secession, not freeing slaves. Furthermore, he claims that the praise Lincoln commonly receives from conservatives is misguided:

The Gettysburg Address was brilliant oratory, but it was also political subterfuge. As H.L. Mencken pointed out, it was the Southerners who were fighting for the consent of the governed and it was Lincoln's government that opposed them. They no longer consented to being governed by Washington, D.C. Lincoln's admonition that government "of the people, by the people, for the people" would perish from the earth if the right of secession were sustained was equally absurd. The United States remained a democracy, and the Confederate States of America would have been a democratic country as well. Lincoln's notion that secession would "destroy" the government of the United States is also bizarre in light of the fact that after secession took place the US government fielded the largest and best-equipped army and navy in the history of the world up to that point for four long years.^[109]

As for the 1861–1865 conflict, Clyde Wilson suggest it be referred to as "The War to Preserve Southern Independence." Fleming argues that secession was legal:

Those who hold the opinion (false and easy to refute) that the United States in 1860 were an amalgamated central state believe that the secession of South Carolina and the other Southern states was illegal, an act of wickedness that can be explained only by the desire of evil Southerners to defend slavery. Thus, in the upside-down and fact-free world of leftists like Harry Jaffa, the war was a "civil war" between the citizens of the same state or, better yet, a rebellion. Abolitionists clearly did not believe this, because after the War, they insisted that Southern states had left the Union and needed to be reconstructed. Everybody knew that it is a basic principle of international law, going back to Grotius at least, that in a confederated state the members have a right to leave.^[110]

Francis, while endorsing "authentic federalism,"^[111] stopped short at supporting a contemporary return to Southern secessionism, saying it is impractical and that the main political line of division in the United States is not between the regions of North and South (insofar as such regions can still be said to exist) but between elite and nonelite. He said that Middle Americans in both regions face the same threats.^[112]

David Brooks, a neoconservative critic, says that paleocons do not dream of seeing slavery reborn. Instead, he concludes that they link rural communities to a transcendent order and ancient institutions:

They do not shy away from expressing their true beliefs, and if they supported slavery they would probably say so. They merely believe in the social hierarchies. In those southern communities, they say, social roles were crucial to happiness and ordered sociability. "Aristotle recognized that a well-ordered society protected an ascending order of good through the institutionalization of rank", Fleming and co-author Paul Gottfried wrote in their book The Conservative Movement. They are talking about the social pecking order in old-time towns—the folks who live on the hill, the merchants on Main Street, the village idiot on the green. On a larger scale, the paleocons contrast the virtues of the republic with the corruptions of empire. The empire throws its weight around in the world; the republic minds its own business.^[39]

Fusionism

**William F. Buckley, Jr**. was an unwitting influence on paleoconservatism.^[113] During the Cold War, his National Review magazine^[114] vowed to stand "athwart history, yelling Stop."^[115] It promoted both Burke and Kirk, along with Frank Meyer's theory of fusionism;^[116] it suggested that conservatives and libertarians reduce arguments with one another and present a united front against Communism.^[117] Many first-generation paleocons were National Review supporters,^[118] but slowly grew weary as the journal reflected more and more neoconservative influence,^[119] starting in the 1970s.^[120] Chronicles founder Leopold Tyrmand complained that the movement gave political solutions to cultural problems.^[121]

Open hostility broke out in the mid-1980s and was never resolved.^[119] Some paleocons argued that fusionism failed^[122] and suggested a new alliance on the right to stand outside the neoconservative consensus.^[123] Pat Buchanan's statement that "We are old church and old right, anti-imperialist and anti-interventionist, disbelievers in Pax Americana" reflects this new coalition.^[39][124] William Rusher, former publisher of Buckley's magazine, claims that paleocons are not "representative" conservatives. "The break between the National Review and the paleoconservatives is no tempest in a teapot", he says. "It may well determine the direction of American foreign policy for decades to come."^[125]

One problem, according to Paul Gottfried and Samuel Francis, was that this was an "archaic conservatism." This means it saw too much continuity between ancient traditions and the contemporary West, which was in "mortal combat" with Communists and other enemies. Gottfried says the problem with this mindset, which he finds even in Russell Kirk, is that it missed that "the U.S. was then clearly on its way to becoming a self-identified multicultural society overseen by a post-Christian managerial elite." So these conservatives became too optimistic about modern-day civic virtue.^[126] Looking back, Thomas Fleming remarked that

In theory, the Cold Warriors were protecting the people of Britain, France, and the United States against the expansion of an evil empire, but nations can only be successfully defended by people who believe in nationhood, which is anathema to the liberal assumptions that are the foundation of most Western states.

One notable group, the Intercollegiate Studies Institute (ISI), still follows the old fusionism.^[127] It showcases both neoconservative and Old Right ideas, such as anti-interventionism, limited government and cultural regionalism, in its publications and conferences. While it favors free-market solutions it tends to recognize the limitations of the market, or as economist Wilhelm Roepke says, "the market is not everything." ISI scholarship includes analysis of agrarian and distributist works, along with the idea of an "humane economy."^[128]

Burnham revolution:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

One fusionist, James Burnham, left an important influence on paleocons, especially on Samuel Francis. Paul Gottfried said that the two men believed that social forces create ideologies—and that "moral visions are the mere accompaniments of the process by which classes make themselves economically dominant and try to control other groups."^[129] Burnham wrote in 1967:

In real life, men are joined on a much less than universal scale into a variety of groupings—family, community, church, business, club, party, etc.—which on the political scale reach the maximum significant limit in the nation. Since there is at present time no Humanity or Mankind (socially and historically speaking), there cannot be a World Government—though conceivably there could be a world empire.^[130]

Burnham presented a theory of managerial bureaucracy, presenting a class of elites that gain power in government, business and the media, based on technical skill. Here's how Francis, who said this theory inspired George Orwell's "1984", explained it:

Those who hold such skills are able to dominate the state, the economy, and the culture because the structures of these sectors of modern society require technical functions that only specially skilled personnel can provide. The older elites simply lack those skills and eventually lose actual control over the key institutions of modern mass society. As the new, managerial elites take over, society is reconfigured to reflect and support their interests as a ruling class—interests radically different from those of the older elites. Generally, the interests of the new managerial elites consist in maintaining and extending the institutions they control and in ensuring that the needs for and rewards of the technical skills they possess are steadily increased, that society become as dependent on them and their functions as possible.^[131]

Francis, unlike some other paleocons, argued that the existence of managers alone is harmless. Rather, the multiculturalist ideology they adopted drives it toward tyranny. He said that "white, Christian, male-oriented, bourgeois values and institutions" are the principal restraints of managerial power, which this class seeks to undermine. He explained:

If we could somehow take out the ideology, change the minds of those who control the state, and convert them into paleo-conservatives, the state apparatus itself would be neutral. What really animates its drive toward a totalitarian conquest and reconfiguration of society and the human mind itself comes from the ideology that the masters of the managerial state have adopted, a force that is entirely extraneous and largely accidental to the structure by which they exercise power.^[131]

Francis also said, however, that ideology helps the managerial elite increase its grip on society:

It is in the long-term interest of the overclass (not of anyone else) to managerialize society so that all aspects of life are organized, packaged, routinized and subjugated to manipulation by the technical skill the overclass possesses, and that interest requires the undermining of institutions and norms that are independent of, and impediments to, overclass control.^[132]

International parallels:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

As paleoconservatism germinated as a reaction to neoconservatism, most of its development as a distinct political tendency under that name has been in the United States, although there are parallels in the traditional Old Right of other Western nations. French conservatives such as Jean Raspail,^[133] and British conservatives such as Enoch Powell,^[134] Peter Hitchens,^[135] Antony Flew (whom the Rockford Institute awarded the Ingersoll Prize),^[136] John Betjeman,^[137] and Roger Scruton^[138] as well as Scruton's Salisbury Review and Derek Turner's Quarterly Review,^[139] as well as Australia's Sydney Traditionalist Forum^[140] all emphasize skepticism, stability, and the Burkean inheritance, and may be considered broadly sympathetic to paleo values. For example, Hitchens wrote, in opposition to the Iraq War,

There is nothing conservative about war. For at least the last century war has been the herald and handmaid of socialism and state control. It is the excuse for censorship, organized lying, regulation and taxation. It is paradise for the busybody and the nark. It damages family life and wounds the Church. It is, in short, the ally of everything summed up by the ugly word ‘progress.’^[141]

Note the One Nation movement in 1990s Australia,^[142] Germany's Junge Freiheit,^[143] and Italy's Lega Nord.^[144] And compare the Russian dissidents Andrei Navrozov^[145] and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.^[146]

Heredity and human nature:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

Biology, genes and behavior

While in the past, many paleocons have criticized Darwinism, as such theories become widely accepted in society, many paleoconservative intellectuals have became interested in the findings of anthropology, genetics, and sociobiology for insight into human behavior.^[147] Murphy says that Thomas Fleming was influenced by the works of writers like E. E. Evans-Pritchard and Edward O. Wilson.^[148] While criticizing evolutionary biologists like Stephen Jay Gould^[149] they see evidence for traditional values in these fields. The Rockford Institute even awarded sociobiologist Edward O. Wilson a 1989 Ingersoll Prize.

Thomas Fleming takes a view of human nature that mixes classical philosophy with sociobiology. He said, "the laws and decrees enacted by human government are mutable and sometimes tyrannical", yet "the laws of human nature, worked tight within the spirals of the genetic code, are unchanging and just."^[150] Critic Tony Glaister describes the attitude thus:

For Fleming, human nature is rooted in the biological family; consequently, the extension of state power he sees as thoroughly deleterious. Family adhesion is the glue of our biologically determined natural social environment. From John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau to existentialism (and by implication, nihilism) and social fragmentation, the way is shorter than we think. The principle that society consists of a social bond created contractually between each member and every other, is in accordance with the existentialist belief that existence precedes essence. For the existentialist, man creates his nature and his history by existing and the actions which constitute that existence and not by virtue of a biological inheritance or the unfolding of an inherent "human nature". If there is no God which precedes Man, there is no essence to which his reactions refer. This implies a rejection of essential or immutable human nature.

In this way, Fleming sees both the sexual revolution and abortion as "a revolution against human nature and against the most basic elements of human society."

Do not look for parallels in ancient Greek bisexuality (a much misinterpreted phenomenon) or Roman decadence. Ordinary people in the ancient world lived as most ordinary people have always lived, dividing their time between worrying about crops and chasing after the children who are supposed to be tending the livestock or working in the fields. The tiny elite classes might become as decadent as they liked without influencing the rest of us whose lives are shaped by natural necessities. Yes, in 18th century Europe an anti-ethic of irresponsible hedonism reached its peak in figures like Voltaire and Sade, but the sexual antics of the Palais Royal were not being imitated by peasants in the Vendée. Only in the 20th century have we universalized the rebellion against nature and God and communicated it to the common man.^[151]

Differing views exist on the specific question of evolution vs. intelligent design. Fleming says intelligent design is "a boneheaded piece of pseudo-science, almost as simplistic as the naive materialism that Darwinists teach."^[152] Pat Buchanan says that "science itself points to intelligent design", such that the existence of natural laws, such as in gravity, physics or chemistry, implies "the existence of a lawmaker."^[153] Steve Sailer has argued that leftists downplay the "politically incorrect" implications of evolution. Sailer writes, for instance, that Richard Dawkins dances around the real implications of kin selection theory:

[Pierre L. van den Berghe's concept of] "ethnic nepotism" [lead him to] to sociobiology and its bedrock finding: the late William D. Hamilton's theory of kin selection and inclusive fitness—the more genes we share with another individual, the more altruistic we feel toward him. There are no clear boundaries between extended family, tribe, ethnic group, or race. So van den Berghe coined the term "ethnic nepotism" to describe the human tendency to favor "our people." Ethnocentrism, clannishness, xenophobia, nationalism, and racism are the almost inevitable flip sides of ethnic nepotism... [The] genetic basis for ethnic nepotism with each racial group is roughly as strong on average as the etymologically classic case of nepotism among close kin—the uncle-nephew bond. Ethnic nepotism isn't a metaphor. It's a reality. And we'd better accept it—whether Richard Dawkins thinks it would be good for his career or not.^[154]

Eschewing Platonic definitions of race, Sailer argues that a race is better thought of in terms of common ancestry. He argues:

A race is simply an extremely extended family.... [A]s you extend the boundaries of the extended family farther and farther out, you typically find that they start turning in upon themselves. Most families down through history have married almost exclusively within some sort of population that's more restricted than the entire human species. Thus, while traits unique to a family fade with time (forward or backward) and outward to more distant relatives, a racial group's biological traits can remain quite stable over fairly long periods.^[155]

Neoconservatism:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

Pat Buchanan calls neoconservatism "a globalist, interventionist, open borders ideology."^[156] The paleoconservatives argue that the "neocons" are illegitimate interlopers in the conservative movement. In 1986,^[157] historian Stephen Tonsor, who rejects the label paleoconservative,^[158] said:

It has always struck me as odd, even perverse, that former Marxists have been permitted, yes invited, to play such a leading role in the Conservative movement of the twentieth century. It is splendid when the town whore gets religion and joins the church. Now and then she makes a good choir director, but when she begins to tell the minister what he ought to say in his Sunday sermons, matters have been carried too far.^[159]

Further information: Neoconservatism and paleoconservatism

Prominent people:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

Politicians:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

John James Duncan, Jr. – (1947–) Republican US Representative for Tennessee's 2nd congressional district (1988–)^[160]
Virgil Goode – (1946–) Republican US Representative for Virginia's 5th congressional district (1997–2009), 2012 Constitution Party presidential nominee^[161]
Walter B. Jones – (1943–) Republican US Representative for North Carolina's 3rd congressional district (1995–)^[162]
Howard Phillips – (1941–2013) Chairman of The Conservative Caucus and three time Constitution Party presidential nominee in 1992, 1996, and 2000
Tom Tancredo – (1945–) Republican US Representative for Colorado's 6th congressional district (1999–2009), 2010 Constitution Party Colorado gubernatorial nominee^[163]
Donald Trump – (1946–) The 2016 President-elect of the United States. According to political researcher Bruce Wilson, "Trump advances core paleoconservative positions laid out in "The Next Conservatism" — rebuilding infrastructure, protective tariffs, securing borders and stopping illegal immigration, neutralizing designated internal enemies and isolationism."^[164]

Philosophers and scholars:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

Virginia Abernethy (1934–)^[165]
Mel Bradford (1934–1993)^[166]
John Derbyshire (1945–)
Paul Gottfried (1941–)^[167]
Russell Kirk (1918–1994)^[168]
E. Christian Kopff (1946–)^[169]
William S. Lind (1947–)
Donald W. Livingston^[170]
Claes G. Ryn (1943–)^[171]
Roger Scruton (1944–)^[172]
Clyde N. Wilson (1941–)^[173]

Journalists:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

Peter Brimelow (1947–)^[174][175]
Pat Buchanan (1938–)^[176]
Charles A. Coulombe (1960–)
Samuel T. Francis (1947–2005)^[177]
Bill Kauffman (1959–)
Scott McConnell (1952–)
Robert Novak (1931–2009)^[176]
Steve Sailer (1958–)^[174][178]
Joseph Sobran (1946–2010)^[176][179]

Other:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

Bob Conley (1965–)^[180]
Thomas Fleming^[176]

Notable organizations and outlets:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

Main article: List of paleoconservative organizations

Periodicals:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

Websites:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

Broadcasting:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

References:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

^ :{Jump up to::(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^a ^b(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism#cite_ref-Scotchie_1-1) For more discussion of defining elements of paleoconservative thought, see Scotchie, Joseph, ed., The Paleoconservatives: New Voices of the Old Right, 1999. Gottfried, Paul, The Conservative Movement, 1993., Gottfried's "Paleoconservatism" article in American Conservatism: An Encyclopedia (ISI:2006), and the "What Is Paleoconservatism?" symposium in Chronicles magazine, January 2001
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "What Is Paleoconservatism?" Archived December 5, 2004, at the Wayback Machine.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Foley, Michael (2007). American Credo: The Place of Ideas in US Politics. New York, USA: Oxford University Press Inc. p. 318.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Woltermann, Chris. "What is paleoconservatism?" Telos. New York: Fall 1993.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Mcdonald Wesley. "Russell Kirk and the Prospects for Conservatism", Humanitas, Vol. 12, 1999.
^ :{Jump up to::(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^a ^b(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism#cite_ref-Gottfried_6-1) Gottfried, Paul. "Paleoconservatism" in American Conservatism: An Encyclopedia (ISI:2006)
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Francis, Samuel (December 16, 2002). "The Paleo Persuasion". Amconmag.com. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Paleocons' Revenge; American Conservative L.L.C. to launch American Conservative magazine". Findarticles.com. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Raimondo, Justin, Reclaiming the American Right: The Lost Legacy of the Conservative Movement, 1993. ISBN 1-883959-00-4.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Reaganism V. Neo-Reaganism", by Richard Lowry; The National Interest, Spring 2005
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "American Conservatism". Opinionjournal.com. Wall Street Journal. October 3, 2002. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Francis, Samuel T., Beautiful Losers: Essays on the Failure of American Conservatism, 1993.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Fleming, Thomas (July 22, 2002) Home Bound, The New Republic
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Conservative Movement, p. xix.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "samfrancis.net" (PDF). samfrancis.net. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ [1] Archived April 4, 2007, at the Wayback Machine.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Search conducted September 8, 2006.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ J. Patrick Lewis (October 20, 1984) "Willing Goodness," The Nation
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Paleoconservatives Explained". Realnews247.com. May 31, 2003. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "There's more to a conservative than meets the eye, by Michael Taube". Vdare.com. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Rockwell, Lew (May 2, 2002) What I Learned From Paleoism, LewRockwell.com
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "The End of Paleoconservatism". Nationalinvestor.com. November 30, 2000. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Francis, Samuel, "Statement of Principles", Feb. 24, 2004 (republished at various journals)
^ :{Jump up to::(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^a ^b(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism#cite_ref-libe193-20021007-06.html_24-1) Kevin Tuma. "The Myth of GOP Conservatism: The Ugly Truth about the Republican Party". Ncc-1776.org. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ American Conservative Union Foundation Archived July 17, 2011, at the Wayback Machine.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ American Conservative Union Foundation Archived April 22, 2005, at the Wayback Machine.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ The Paleo Persuasion Archived March 29, 2006, at the Wayback Machine.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Judis, John B. (October 3, 1999). "The Buchanan Doctrine". The New York Times.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ For example, Single Issues, by Joseph Sobran.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Chu, Jeff (August 20, 2006). "10 Questions for Pat Buchanan". Time. New York. Retrieved May 21, 2010.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Fleming, Thomas. "Ethics 01A.1: Gay Marriage, Democracy". Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture. Rockford IL: The Rockford Institute. Archived from the original on September 27, 2006. Retrieved August 27, 2006.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Why Is Death Row 90 Percent Minority?". Vdare.com. June 18, 2001. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ [2] Archived March 13, 2005, at the Wayback Machine.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Joseph Sobran. "How Tyranny Came to America". Fightthebias.com. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Versluis, Arthur (May 5, 2003). "Strip Malls Across the Fruited Plain". Amconmag.com. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Scully, Matthew (May 23, 2005). "Fear Factories". Amconmag.com. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ [3] Archived August 21, 2006, at the Wayback Machine.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Dr. Enrico Peppe (April 27, 2004). "Thomas Molnar: The Counter-Revolution". Intellectualconservative.com. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
^ :{Jump up to::(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^a ^b(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism#cite_ref-Buchananism_39-1) ^c(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism#cite_ref-Buchananism_39-2) ^d(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism#cite_ref-Buchananism_39-3) Brooks, David (11 March 1996). "Buchananism: An Intellectual Cause". The Weekly Standard.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ russell kirk and the age of ideology by w. wesley mcdonald Archived January 5, 2006, at the Wayback Machine.
^ :{Jump up to::(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^a ^b(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism#cite_ref-f_pensees.htm_41-1) "Pensees – Notes for the Reactionary of Tomorrow". Wildwestcycle.com. December 31, 1985. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ quoted in The Rebuke of History, p. 233
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Conservatism FAQ Archived June 29, 2006, at the Wayback Machine.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Back to Mordor". Archived from the original on September 27, 2006. Retrieved August 26, 2006.
^ :{Jump up to::(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^a ^b(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism#cite_ref-vol5no2.2F52-griffin.html_45-1) ^c(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism#cite_ref-vol5no2.2F52-griffin.html_45-2) "TOQ-Robert S. Griffin-Williamson BR-Vol 5 No 2". Web.archive.org. January 5, 2006. Archived from the original on January 5, 2006. Retrieved April 1, 2016.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Thomas Fleming. "Da Vinci Code Protest". Archived from the original on September 27, 2006. Retrieved September 23, 2006.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Rick M (August 14, 2006). "Eunomia · Bradford on Liberty (II)". Larison.org. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ [4] Archived January 6, 2006, at the Wayback Machine.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "The opening of 'Reflections on the Revolution:{':(style="padding-right:0.2em"):}:". Ourcivilisation.com. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Defining Historicism". Nhinet.org. July 29, 2010. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Where in the World Are We Going? by Claes G. Ryn". Lewrockwell.com. April 2, 2006. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Conservatism FAQ Archived June 29, 2006, at the Wayback Machine.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Rescuing Calhoun by Andrew Young". Lewrockwell.com. July 30, 2005. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Thomas Fleming. "Anarcho-Tyranny Rockford Style". Archived from the original on September 27, 2006. Retrieved October 7, 2006.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Russell Kirk and territorial democracy". Publius September 22, 2004
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "League of the South". Dixienet.org. Retrieved April 1, 2016.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Stagnaro, Carlo (July 24, 2000). "Pat Buchanan on the American Future". The Laissez Faire City Times (Vol 4, No 30). Archived from the original on October 8, 2008. Retrieved November 19, 2015.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Let Puerto Rico Remain Puerto Rico", Pat Buchanan Archived August 26, 2006, at the Wayback Machine.
^ :{Jump up to::(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^a ^b(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism#cite_ref-thc_acc_ffus.htm_59-1) "THC Allan Carlson, Ph.D.: Speeches: The Howard Center". Profam.org. January 19, 1999. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "THC Allan Carlson, Ph.D.: Speeches: The Howard Center". Profam.org. February 15, 2006. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
^ :{Jump up to::(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^a ^b(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism#cite_ref-thc.acc.051117.legatus.htm_61-1) ^c(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism#cite_ref-thc.acc.051117.legatus.htm_61-2) "THC Allan Carlson, Ph.D.: Speeches: The Howard Center". Profam.org. November 17, 2005. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Ronald N. Neff, www.thornwalker.com (August 5, 2003). "Sobran Column – Is the Pope Square?". Sobran.com. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Gottfried, Paul. "The Trouble with Feminism".
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "THC Allan Carlson, Ph.D.: Speeches: The Howard Center". Profam.org. October 26, 2001. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Thomas Fleming. "Ethics O1A.2: Gay Marriage". Archived from the original on September 27, 2006. Retrieved September 14, 2006.
^ :{Jump up to::(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^a ^b(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism#cite_ref-thc_acc_dectnf.htm_66-1) ^c(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism#cite_ref-thc_acc_dectnf.htm_66-2) ^d(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism#cite_ref-thc_acc_dectnf.htm_66-3) "THC Allan Carlson, Ph.D.: Speeches: The Howard Center". Profam.org. Archived from the original on July 7, 2013. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "THC: The Howard Center: Press Release". Profam.org. May 13, 2007. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "THC Allan Carlson, Ph.D.: Speeches: The Howard Center". Profam.org. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "THC Allan Carlson, Ph.D.: Speeches: The Howard Center". Profam.org. February 11, 2006. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Sex and consequences", The Washington Times, February 2, 1993.
^ :{Jump up to::(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^a ^b(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism#cite_ref-Yr2006_71-1) ^c(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism#cite_ref-Yr2006_71-2) ^d(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism#cite_ref-Yr2006_71-3) "Contents". Chronicles Magazine. August 2006. Archived from the original on October 12, 2006. Retrieved November 5, 2006.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "The Thirty-Year War For Immigration Reform -Thomas Fleming Replies To Peter Brimelow". Vdare.com. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ a former Chronicles managing editor
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Redesigned Britannica Site Serves Enjoyment with Enlightenment". Encyclopædia Britannica. December 8, 2005. Archived from the original on November 11, 2006. Retrieved November 3, 2006. – EB corporate site mentioning Pappas
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Wilkinson, David. "Voices in The Wildreness".
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Richert, Scott P. (July 2004). "Review: Russell Kirk and the Negation of Ideology". Chronicles. Archived from the original on December 14, 2006.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Patrick West. "The Poverty of Multiculturalism". Spiked-online.com. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Pat Buchanan Responds To Lenora Fulani'S Resignation – Buchanan Campaign Press Releases – theinternetbrigade – Official Web Site Archived October 5, 2006, at the Wayback Machine.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "samfrancis.net" (PDF). samfrancis.net. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Abrams, Elliott (September 22, 2008). "Time For Obama To Embarrass His Own VP?". Commentarymagazine.com. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Russell Kirk and territorial democracy". Publius. September 22, 2004.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Higher Education: Uniting the Great Books and Faith". Thomas Aquinas.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Libertarians: Chirping Sectaries". Emp.byui.edu. Retrieved April 1, 2016.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Presser, Stephen B. (2001). "Law, Morality, and Religion". Chronicles Magazine. Archived from the original on April 4, 2007.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ McDonald, W. Wesley. "Russell Kirk's Conservative Mind".
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Judis, John. "The Conservative Crackup".^[dead ^link]
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Stromberg, Joseph. "War, Peace, and the State".
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ McMaken, Ryan. "The Helpful Persuasion".
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Raimondo, Justin. "Garet Garrett: Exemplar of the Old Right".
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Rothbard, Murray N. "Life in the Old Right".
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Stromberg, Joseph R. "Felix Morley: An Old-fashioned Republican".
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Rockwell, Llewellyn H., Jr. "Down With the Presidency".
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Galles, Gary. "John Dickenson, Founder and Revolutionary".
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ DiLorenzo, Thomas J. "Standard Weekly Lies".
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Parallel Lives: William F. Buckley vs. Samuel T. Francis". Vdare.com. February 24, 2015. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ [http://www.theenglandproject.net/documents/secret-people.html^[dead ^link]
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ See ISI's scholarly analysis of him in Modern Age and Intercollegiate Review
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Francis, Samuel T. "Men Against Leviathan".
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Harvey, Theodore. "Counterrevolution in Rockford".
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "sobran". Secondspring.co.uk. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ American Renaissance News: Parallel Lives: William F. Buckley vs. Samuel T. Francis Archived August 22, 2006, at the Wayback Machine.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Conservative Movement, p.154
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ American Renaissance News: Sam Francis Archived August 24, 2006, at the Wayback Machine.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Russell Kirk and the Prospects for Conservatism", W. Wesley Mcdonald; Humanitas, Vol. 12, 1999,
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Rebuke of History, p.218.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Mr. Right: Texas Monthly March 1992 Archived September 30, 2007, at the Wayback Machine.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ leagueofthesouth.net Archived September 26, 2007, at the Wayback Machine.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Getting Lincoln Half Right and Half Wrong by Thomas DiLorenzo". Lewrockwell.com. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Claremont's Court Historians by Thomas J. DiLorenzo". Lewrockwell.com. October 12, 2002. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Archived copy". Archived from the original on September 27, 2006. Retrieved September 25, 2006.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "Judicial Tyranny". Thenewamerican.com. April 14, 1997. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ An Infantile Disorder, Chronicles, February 1998.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Gottfried, Paul. "Parallel Lives: William F. Buckley vs. Samuel T. Francis".
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Francis, Sam. "William F. Buckley – Unpatriotic Conservative?".
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Introductory statement in the November 19, 1955 issue.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Peppe, Enrico. "Frank Meyer: In Defense of Freedom: A Conservative Credo".
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ for example, Meyer, Frank S. (1962). In Defense of Freedom: A Conservative Credo. Chicago: Henry Regnery Co.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ The influence of future paleocons on the Buckley circle can be seen in William F.Buckley, ed. (1970). Did you ever see a dream walking? American conservative thought in the twentieth century. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.
^ :{Jump up to::(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^a ^b(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism#cite_ref-Buckley_dispute_119-1) The paleocons' dispute with Buckley is described in Paul Gottfried's 1993 edition of The Conservative Movement
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Nuechterlein, James (May 1996). "The End of Neoconservatism". First Things. Archived from the original on December 14, 2006.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Conservative Movement, p.50.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Francis, Sam (March 2004). "(Con)fusion on the Right". Chronicles. Archived from the original on April 4, 2007.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Buchanan, Patrick J. "The Old Right and the Future of Conservatism".
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "What is Left? What is Right?". The American Conservative
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Early and often. "WND – A Free Press for a Free People". Worldnetdaily.com. Archived from the original on December 4, 2007. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "How Russell Kirk (And The Right) Went Wrong". Vdare.com. Nov 4, 2004. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "The Rising Right" (PDF).
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ For example, Roepke, Wilhelm (1998). A Humane Economy: The Social Framework of the Free Market. Wilmington DE: ISI Books.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "After Liberalism", p. g3
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Francis (August 23, 2001). "James Burnham, The New Class, And The Nation-State". vDare.
^ :{Jump up to::(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^a ^b(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism#cite_ref-vol3no2.2Fsf-gottfrieda.html_131-1) "Power Trip". The Occidental Quarterly. 3 (2).
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ quoted in David Brooks, "Buchanan Feeds Class War in the Information Age", Los Angeles Times October 31, 1999
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Williamson, Chilton, The Conservative Bookshelf, 2004, pp. 265–70.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Buchanan, Patrick J., State of Emergency, 2006, pp. 187–90.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Hitchens, Peter: The Abolition of Britain from Lady Chatterley to Tony Blair Quartet Books: 1999
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ Antony Flew, "'Social' Justice Is Not Justice", Chronicles, July 1999.
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ George Watson, The Idea of Liberalism, 1985, p. 54: 'Sir John Betjeman, a real conservative unimpressed by the promise of Neo-Conservatism, reserved the term "business executive" for his moments of bitterest disdain.'
:{Jump up:(style="user-select:none;top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:^ "*The Joy of Conservatism: An Interview with Roger Scruton*"., p. 4. Scruton says of himself,

"...I suppose I am more of a paleo than a neo-conservative, since I believe that the conservative position is rooted in cultural rather than economic factors, and that the single-minded pursuit of competitive markets is just as much a threat to social order as the single-minded pursuit of equality."