The Death of Conservatism

July 6, 2009
The arguments are more surprising than the conclusions in this slender book that simultaneously celebrates and mourns the end of the harshly ideological strain of conservatism that reached full flower during the presidency of George W. Bush. Tracing the movement's intellectual history from Edmund Burke to Rush Limbaugh, Tanenhaus (Whitaker Chambers
), editor of the New York Times Book Review
, argues that the “contemporary Right define itself less by what it yearns to conserve than by what it longs to destroy”—and that pragmatic Democrats like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama have usurped the Republicans' once winning focus on social stability. Tanenhaus argues that Republicans must moderate their focus on ideological purity if they are to return from the political wilderness and offers trenchant criticism of the liberal excesses that previously led to a long Democratic exile from the White House. Tanenhaus's positions are not entirely consistent, however; he aligns Nixon with George W. Bush and his destructively “revanchist course” before praising Nixon's “prodigious gifts” and “sheer intellectual ability.” But the author recognizes the need for two strong parties to compete in American politics, and his impeccably well-written book insightfully summarizes the highs and lows of American conservatism over the decades.

August 1, 2009
Despite its attention-getting title, this isnt a hectoring polemic or a funeral knell for what is, after all, one of the polar dispositions of mainstream American politics, and as such, not about to die. Nor is Tanenhaus, the excellent biographer of Whittaker Chambers (1997), hostile to conservatism. His subject is actually what is called, by political types in and outside of it, movement conservatism, which is the only conservatism most Americans under 60 have ever known, and which is again in the predicament Chambers said it was in the 1950swithout a program and out of touch with reality. Then, however, it was aborning; now its a spent force. Tanenhaus soberly traces its life from its origins among the Ivy League right-wingers and ex-Communists who staffed William F. Buckleys National Review, through its rise to control of the Republican Party, to its present snarling, ideologically correct impotence. In conclusion, Tanenhaus cogently suggests that the movement has expired in part because the most mainstream-conservative president since Eisenhower currently occupies the White House. A political weather-watchers delight.(Reprinted with permission of Booklist, copyright 2009, American Library Association.)