National Review's 70th anniversary issue features a contentious article critiquing Phyllis Schlafly, a prominent figure in conservative politics. The author, Rachel Lu, attacks Schlafly's influential book, "A Choice Not An Echo," and her legacy within the conservative movement, prompting discussions about the validity of these claims and their implications for the conservative agenda.
1. Background on National Review and Schlafly's Impact: National Review's legacy has shaped American conservatism significantly. Schlafly's "A Choice Not An Echo" was crucial in supporting Barry Goldwater's nomination for the presidency in 1964, empowering grassroots activism against the Republican establishment.
2. Lu's Criticism: In her article, Lu describes Schlafly as mean-spirited and conspiratorial, labeling her work as propaganda. She argues Schlafly fostered a "paranoid style" in American politics that echoes critiques made of William F. Buckley in earlier decades.
3. Comparing Schlafly and Buckley: Hemingway points out that Lu’s criticisms inadvertently mirror those directed at Buckley, who was also seen as propagandistic in his time despite later being celebrated as a conservative intellectual.
4. Hofstadter's Influence: Lu invokes Richard Hofstadter’s concept of the "paranoid style" to reframe Schlafly’s contributions negatively, but this interpretation is criticized as simplistic and ideologically driven, potentially undermining Schlafly's genuine influence on conservative politics.
5. Schlafly’s Legacy: Schlafly's role in shaping the conservative movement, particularly her grassroots mobilization efforts and social conservatism, is acknowledged as foundational despite Lu's criticism. Schlafly's efforts are credited with halting the progression of the Equal Rights Amendment, reflecting her significant political achievements.
6. Populism and its Complexity: Lu argues that Schlafly’s brand of populism contributed to today's political landscape characterized by power struggles and populist leaders like Donald Trump. However, she inadequately acknowledges the positive aspects of this populism in rallying grassroots support for conservative ideologies.
7. Trump's Connection to Schlafly: Lu’s argument is critiqued for presupposing that Trump’s populism detracts from traditional conservatism. Nevertheless, many see Trump’s populism as a continuation of Schlafly’s legacy, particularly in issues like abortion, where he made commitments that resonated with conservative voters.
8. Conclusion of Lu’s Article: While Lu concedes some positive aspects of Schlafly's accomplishments, she questions the truth of Schlafly's defining narratives. This raises doubts about Lu’s qualifications to criticize Schlafly’s legacy, reflected in broader debates about the direction of conservatism.
The article in National Review's anniversary issue has sparked considerable debate, highlighting divergent views within the conservative community regarding Phyllis Schlafly's legacy. While Rachel Lu presents a critical interpretation of Schlafly's contributions, many insiders defend her legacy as a cornerstone of conservative activism. The ongoing discussions reflect the complexities and inherent tensions within the modern conservative movement, as it grapples with its history and future trajectory.
No comments:
Post a Comment