What David Cameron Can Teach the GOP

American Republicans have all but destroyed their brand during this election cycle. Their once-and-future Tory allies across the pond can teach them how to build it back up.

BY ALEX MASSIE | MARCH 12, 2012

When British Prime Minister David Cameron visits the United States this week, there will be the usual garlands of praise hung around the neck of the "special relationship" between the United States and the United Kingdom. We will hear, ad nauseam, that no two countries are closer and no two peoples (save perhaps the poor forgotten Canadians) have more in common. Like much political blather, there is some truth to this. The transatlantic cousins are, and will remain, close. There is too much history, too much culture, for it to be otherwise.

But with election season in full swing in the United States, one can't help but notice the widening gulf between Cameron's Conservative Party and its American counterparts on the right as the latter undergo a grueling primary. Despite periodic bouts of 1980s nostalgia on the campaign trail -- Newt Gingrich has never met a problem a "Reagan-Thatcher" strategy can't solve -- memories of that era are fast fading. British Conservatives and American Republicans were genuinely close then; they are very much more distant today. So much so, in fact, that in many respects many British Tories are closer to the right wing of the Democratic Party than they are to the mainstream GOP.

Although the United States and Britain face many similar problems -- a middle-class adrift, faltering social mobility, uncomfortably high unemployment, increased health-care costs, and a crisis of confidence in politics and political institutions -- it is striking how few ideas Cameron's government has borrowed from the American right. Tellingly, Sweden, not the United States, is the inspiration for the prime minister's flagship school-reform program. Meanwhile, Cameron's approach to budget-balancing includes cutting defense spending while his government's enthusiasm for "green energy" is firmly within the European mainstream and a long way from the GOP's "drill, baby, drill" approach. Indeed, Cameron has sharply increased taxes on oil companies.

Moderation was once a conservative -- or at least a Tory -- virtue. But from a British perspective, the Republicans appear to have abandoned the conservatism of Edmund Burke in favor of a repressed and vindictive scorched-earth brand of right-wing politics that owes little to any of conservatism's more distinguished forefathers and rather more to the bile-strewn splutterings of ratings-chasing talk radio hosts (Rush Limbaugh's recent troubles notwithstanding).

That is, doubtless, a feature of the fact that the present campaign for the Republican Party's nomination appears dominated by cultural factors and a race to the bottom to see which candidate can portray President Barack Obama as some kind of fifth columnist actively seeking to undermine or, worse, destroy the United States. Seen from afar, this appears an unpersuasive review of the president's time in office.

Moreover, again when viewed from the Atlantic's eastern shore, the distemper afflicting the American conservative movement seems somewhat disproportionate. To put it another way: Mitt Romney's Massachusetts health-care plan would, in outline anyway, be more than acceptable to the faction of Tories who are unpersuaded by the infallibility of government-run health care -- considered well to the right on the British political spectrum. Or take taxing and spending: British conservatives want to reduce spending, but they're prepared to raise some taxes to help pay for it. If they were American, these right-wing Tories would be apostates or RINOs -- Republicans in name only.

This is a matter of temperament as much as policy. Although it was once possible to see trace elements of George W. Bush's "compassionate conservatism" in Cameron's vision of "The Big Society" -- a plan to transfer control of services from government to local associations, including faith groups -- the truth is that Cameron's localism has its roots in British, not American, politics. (More to the point, it hasn't achieved much yet.) In any case, Bush's tarnished legacy continues to hurt the Republican brand outside the United States.

Stefan Rousseau - WPA Pool/Getty Images

 

Alex Massie writes for the Spectator.

AND REW

10:43 AM ET

March 12, 2012

The Republican Part of 2012

The Republican Part of 2012 is the laughingstock of the Western world and an embarrassing reality about America.

The GOP nowadays has in common more with the Israeli right wing (which itself is becoming more and more fascistic) than the West's conservatives.

 

JUNGHOKIM

2:43 PM ET

March 12, 2012

Self-destruction of the Republicans can't happen fast enough

The Republican party has clearly become a party of rabble-rousers who know nothing of governance, co-operation or serving their country. At best, they are cynics who wouldn't mind a little desolation in the United States if they got to rule it. What makes everything worse is that they are probably not even that - I don't think the Tea Party Republicans that now hold such sway within the party are even intelligent enough to see it in such terms. They are imbued with a fanatical religious fervour, and they are ready to sacrifice babies on the altar of ideological purity.

It is also equally depressing that there are millions upon millions of Americans who support this mockery of a political party. 2012 mid-term elections for the Senate and the House have a high chance of seeing Republican majorities in both. While the animus of the country is quite anti-Republican, all the crazies are involved with politics, while the sane but weak-minded moderates are not and wallow their voices away in indifference and an ill-advised revulsion for all things political.

The United States gave modern democracy to the world; now it is proving that universal franchise might not be such a good idea after all.

 

APOTHECARY364

4:56 PM ET

March 14, 2012

Which is sad...

Because there ARE elements of conservatism that would appeal greatly. Self-determinism, keeping government out of the financial lives of its' citizenry (ask anybody who has ever had to deal with the TSA of today, for instance) are sentiments many people would agree on. It's a shame they cannot extend that outlook to the personal (read: religious) lives of said citizens, or to those that want to come to this country to make a better go of it.

 

SQUEEDLE

11:46 AM ET

March 15, 2012

Republicans aren't conservative

The very word "conservative" when applied to the GOP today is a total joke. They are neo-Liberals promoting policies and behavior that undermines economic stability, community, social cohesion, efficiency and the middle class. They advocate for radical changes in law and public policy. One of Nixon's former advisors in an interview several years ago said that the Republican party today is about socialized risk and centralized reward. These people who tout "drill-baby-drill," charge up the credit card, run up the national debt, and drive huge gas guzzlers, fly in the face of real American values - about the 1st Amendment, wealth created through honest work, humility, and moderation. As far as I'm concerned, the label "conservative" today implies the very opposite of "conserve" and has done so for the last fifteen years.

The sad part is, I have friends - smart, college-educated friends - who are so attached to their idea of themselves as "Republicans" and "conservatives," that they bend over backwards rationalizing the direction the GOP has gone. It's pure insanity and I want nothing to do with it.

 

KUNINO

3:10 PM ET

March 12, 2012

A more honest article on Brit politics might stress ...

... that the Conservatives were able to form a government only because the Labour government was in a state of virtual collapse, and only in alliance with another political party -- the Conservatives didn't get a majority. This does not seem a happy alliance.

Such an article might also stress how the Brits themselves think about the Cameron administration after its first year in office. It frightens many of them, including folks who voted Conservative in the last election, and it has not created widespread trust that it knows best how to turn the local economy around.

A leading London newspaper -- the Conservative-favoring Telegraph -- has reported in recent days that the Conservatives are planning to deny Christians any right to display the Christian cross or a crucifix in their clothing while out in public. Whether this is true or false we'll all see soon, but from the Telegraph there can be no suggestion that the report is a fabrication by government foes. No Brit I'm aware of voted Conservative to stop the citizenry wearing representations of the Christian symbol in their everyday lives. Perhaps in Washington, some enterprising reporter can ask What Will David Cameron Do? WWDCD? Interesting to watch.

In more general terms, it's worth pointing out that no foreign conservative government becomes smart or correct just because it's unlike the current confused and internally destructive GOP.

 

WIDGET

12:21 AM ET

March 13, 2012

As one of those people who

As one of those people who voted for the tory's and is disappointed your post is pretty pertinent.

However, Cameron through away part of the detoxifying efforts in the run up to the election by switching back to some more traditional policies. As to the coalition they didn't make things easy by tripling university fees (an anathema for the student dependant Lib Dems).
Secondly the Christian cross thing is a red herring, even if it is true voters in the UK are by and large not motivated by religious issues when they choose who to vote. The economy, the actual candidate they're choosing for MP and issues like immigration are far far more important.

Asto the GOP it is literally beyond parody, put the policy positions in front of most Europeans and they genuinely don't think a party short of a borderline fascist far right extremist party would propose them

 

DOM WYNN

8:35 PM ET

March 13, 2012

To be fair

Your point does kind of reinforce the drift of the article. The swing the conservatives achieved a net gain of 97 seats - second only to 1931 which equated to a swing of 5.1 % which was close to the record; when Thatcher toppled Callaghan in '79 (5.3%).

The electoral mountain that Cameron had to climb was enormous; ignoring the fact that Blair was an election winning machine that had a fairly hefty majority out of 2005 (66?), and the inbuilt bias to Labour re the election boundaries, Cameron had to persuade a country that the brand wasn't toxic.

The fact he got the swing he did, was a mxture of his efforts and how damn awful Brown was. A leader makes his own luck however; he'll be facing Ed Milliband in 2014 and will probably hit a landslide given both the fact that he's got the previous substantial swing, plus that Ed is emminently unelectable (unless UKIP splits the vote which in a general election is unlikely). The fish rots from the head. Cameron understood that in 2007. Milliband will discover that in the next election, and I'm sure the US public will make it's feelings felt about the GOP in the none too distant future.

 

FEYD

1:52 AM ET

March 13, 2012

@WIDGET

Fascism?
Mussolini said “Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State”. Those are the goals of liberals: public health system, public school system, Medicare, Medicaid, high taxes, big government. Tea Party wants government to leave people alone and they have been called fascists by the same people who want government to control every aspect of their life. Of course this is understandable, people who oppose communism have been labeled as fascists since Bolshevik revolution. It seems that fascist is just everyone who opposes marxism.

Maybe there is something wrong with europe and liberals. It seems that can't stand people who disagree with them. Where is the tolerance? Since 40-60% of the people dont want public health care maybe we should give them freedom to choose? In democracy most important issues requires unity, important agreement all other freedom.

The problem is that for the democratic party Europe is an example to follow. French people said NO to constitution, let's rename it and dont ask them again. Another solution would be to force them to vote again. In Irealand they just had to vote again and again until they did it right.

 

AJD_NYC

4:48 PM ET

March 13, 2012

It was also Sinclair Lewis

It was also Sinclair Lewis who said that when fascism arrived in America, it would be wrapped in an American flag and carrying a cross. Regardless, fascism today is little more than an epithet and in and of itself is irrelevant to modern politics.

However, the kinds of tendencies that were the basis of fascist movements are definitely more prevalent on the American right today:

1) Intolerance for minorities: Gays, Muslims and Hispanics are the most frequent targets for hate speech and discriminatory laws
2) Rhetoric that suggests a need for national renewal that takes the country back to an imagined past: The Tea Party imagines that the Founders wanted to set up the US as a real-life Ayn Rand novel, while the religious right (which has significant overlap with the Tea Party) imagines that they wanted the US to be a Christian theocracy
3) Populist, "us vs. them" rhetoric: Angry rhetoric about "the liberals" and "East Coast elites" comes to mind
4) Aggressive nationalism: Obama is portrayed as weak for preferring diplomacy over war, while GOP candidates seem to default to war as a way to deal with international disputes

 

FEYD

12:38 AM ET

March 14, 2012

@AJD_NYC

Could you elaborate more about your "Christian theocracy" theory?

@MJKT
Global warming is nothing more than a new age religion. I have my master's in physics and I know how much research is needed before we can say that we know something. "Global warming" is just a theory, not a scientific fact?

What is good about legalizing same-sex marriage and government provided health care?

 

AJD_NYC

9:55 AM ET

March 14, 2012

When the religious right

When the religious right talks about America being a "Christian nation," they're not stating the fact that a majority of U.S. citizens and residents profess Christianity; they mean that Christians should be in charge of the country and that Christianity should be the basis for all of its laws and institutions. Non-Christians would be second-class citizens, at best. Look up something called "Dominionism" or its even scarier cousin, Reconstructionism.

Regarding your response to MJKT, I find it interesting that you claim to have a master's degree in physics, yet you say that global warming is a "theory" and not a "fact." A theory IS a fact, like the theory of evolution, the theory of gravity, etc. As a physicist, you should know that.

As for same-sex marriage, uh, how is it not good? Perhaps you can do a better job at explaining this than the defendants in the recent Proposition 8 trial, who had all the opportunity in the world to show why same-sex marriage is bad, yet couldn't produce a single credible expert witness or solid evidence to make their case.

 

FEYD

2:38 AM ET

March 15, 2012

@AJD_NYC

"Christianity should be the basis for all of its laws"
- Please tell me more, what kind of laws you are afraid of. Personally i dont see any threat here to people of other religions, but I would like to see how the things look from the other side.

You can compare Global Warming to theories about the extinction of the dinosaurs not to theory of gravitation. If you think that all scientists agree on anthropogenic global warming theory you are wrong. There is discussion ongoing. More scientists support the theory but it does not make them right.

Universal declaration of human rights: "The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State". Did you know that in catholic church people have to sign document stating that they are willing to have children before they are allowed to marry? That is what marriage is, a beginning of family and that is way married people have privileges. John and Bob are just two adults having "sex" and living together, and it should stay that way.

 

SQUEEDLE

12:02 PM ET

March 15, 2012

Feyd, you obviously are

Feyd, you obviously are confused about what a communist, versus a Marxist or socialist is, or you wouldn't be randomly tossing those labels at Democrats. They're just as much in bed with big business as the GOP, and that alone, by definition, prevents them from being any of those things. Just ask an actual socialist, communist or Marxist (like the Daily Show did).

If the Tea Party really wanted change, they'd not have let crazies (read, ultra-wealthy, big-business GOP leadership) hijack the movement and would have separated from the GOP altogether and formed a real party on their own. I can't understand why Tea Partyers think policies promoted by corporate giants are ever going to help anyone who is not fabulously wealthy.

It's just stupid to hamstring government and labor, and give all the power to big business. The American Founders had it right; you set up 3 competing groups under a check and balance system. That means a mixture of free market and socialist policy with the power balanced evenly among big business, labor, and the government, so nobody gets the upper hand and there is healthy competition of interests.

I would also advise that you read your own statements before you level accusations like, "can't stand people who disagree with them." Your comment indicates to me that you have the same problem.

 

MJKT

9:04 PM ET

March 13, 2012

America to the right

I would say that the American Democratic Party would be the center right party in any of the rest of the developed democracies. The American Republican Party has moved so far to the right that it would be more equivalent to a fringe right party in the other developed democracies.

How many mainstream parties on the right in other democracies are running against universal healthcare? How many are running on a religious based platform? How many are running on a platform that man made global warming is a hoax? Even the Tories are moving toward legalizing same-sex marriage. no, the modern Tories have more in common with our center right Democrats than they do with the modern Republicans.

 

ANGRY

1:55 PM ET

March 15, 2012

good

The news has broken and the statements are out. The world’s political leaders have quickly reacted to the death of the world’s most wanted man, Osama bin Laden. NewsFeed has collected their words so you can see how they’ve (mainly) welcomed the historic events.

(More on TIME.com: See the top 10 defining moments of the post-9/11 era)

Afghan President Hamid Karzai:

“We hope that the terrorists’ activities will be stopped after Osama Bin Laden’s death which was his punishment. The war against terrorism is not in the houses of innocent Afghan civilians. The fight against terrorism is not in bombing children and women in Afghanistan. The war against terrorism should be carried out in his safe haven, sanctuary and his training camp, not in Afghanistan, and today this has been proved right.”

Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard:

“We will continue our support for the counterterrorism efforts of the United States and our partners, and we will continue our efforts in Afghanistan to ensure that the country never again becomes a safe haven for terrorism.”

British Prime Minister David Cameron:

“The news that Osama Bin Laden is dead will bring great relief to people across the world. Osama Bin Laden was responsible for the worst terrorist atrocities the world has seen – for 9/11 and for so many attacks, which have cost thousands of lives, many of them British. It is a great success that he has been found and will no longer be able to pursue his campaign of global terror.”

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair:

“My heartfelt gratitude to President Obama and to all of those who so brilliantly undertook and executed this operation. We should never forget 9/11 was also the worst ever terrorist attack against U.K. civilians, and our thoughts are with all those – American, British and from nations across the world – who lost their lives and with their loved ones who remain and who live with their loss.”

(More on TIME.com: See pictures of Osama bin Laden)

French President Nicolas Sarkozy:

“Osama Bin Laden was a promoter of the ideology of hatred and was the chief of a terrorist organization responsible for the deaths of thousands of victims, especially in Muslim countries.”

German Chancellor Angela Merkel:

“Osama Bin Laden was responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent people. Terror was brought to many countries on his direct orders and in his name, against men, women and children, Christians and Muslims. Osama Bin Laden claimed to be acting in the name of Islam, but in reality he made a mockery of the basic values of his and all other religions.”

Ismail Haniyeh, head of Hamas administration in Gaza Strip:

“We condemn the assassination and the killing of an Arab holy warrior. We regard this as a continuation of the American policy based on oppression and the shedding of Muslim and Arab blood.”

Indian foreign ministry:

“The world must not let down its united effort to overcome terrorism and eliminate the safe havens and sanctuaries that have been provided to terrorists in our own neighbourhood. The struggle must continue unabated.”

(More on TIME.com: See the evolution of Ground Zero)

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu:

“Israel joins in the joy of the American people on this historic day in which Osama bin Laden was killed … This is a resounding victory for justice, freedom and for the joint values of all the countries that fight side by side determinedly against terror.”

Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi:

“This is a great result for the United States but also for all democracies. I think that we should not lower our guard because this could provoke reactions in the world of terrorism.”

Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan:

“We welcome this significant progress in counter-terrorism measures, and I pay respect to the efforts by the officials concerned, including those in the United States and Pakistan.”

Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki:

“The killing of Osama has taken place nearly 13 years after the terrorist bombings in Nairobi that led to the death of over 200 people, in an act believed to have been masterminded by Osama. His killing is an act of justice to those Kenyans who lost their lives and the many more who suffered injuries.”

(More on TIME.com: See a bin Laden family photo album)

NATO:

“This is a significant success for the security of NATO allies and all the nations which have joined us in our efforts to combat the scourge of global terrorism to make the world a safer place for all of us. NATO made clear that it considered the September 11 attacks on the United States an attack against all allies. We remember the thousands of innocent lives lost to terrorist atrocities in so many of our nations, in Afghanistan, and around the world.”

Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani:

“We will not allow our soil to be used against any other country for terrorism and therefore I think it’s a great victory, it’s a success and I congratulate the success of this operation.”

Palestinian Authority spokesman Ghassan Khatib:

“Getting rid of Bin Laden is good for the cause of peace worldwide but what counts is to overcome the discourse and the methods – the violent methods – that were created and encouraged by Bin Laden and others in the world.”

Russia:

“Russia was among the first countries to face the dangers inherent in global terrorism, and unfortunately knows what al-Qaeda is not from hearsay. Retribution will inevitably reach all terrorists.”

Spain’s ruling Socialist Party:

“The government considers the death of Osama Bin Laden … to be a decisive step in the fight against international terrorism. The government reiterates its commitment to co-operating with the United States and other nations in the fight against terrorism wherever it is developed or carried out.”

Turkish President Abdullah Gul:

“Terrorists and leaders of terrorists are captured alive or dead sooner or later. It should teach a lesson that the leader of the world’s most dangerous and sophisticated terrorist organization is captured this way.”

The Vatican spokesman, Father Federico Lombardi:

“Osama bin Laden, as we all know, had the very grave responsibility of spreading division and hatred amongst the people, causing the death of countless of people, and of instrumentalizing religion for this end.In front of the death of man, a Christian never rejoices but rather reflects on the grave responsibility of each one in front of God and men, and hopes and commits himself so that every moment not be an occasion for hatred to grow but for peace.”

Read more: http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/05/02/we-should-not-lower-our-guard-world-leaders-react-to-osama-bin-ladens-death/#ixzz1pDHmYgOD

thanks
Microsoft project 2010

 

HEATH TORTORELLI

5:21 AM ET

April 10, 2012

Vice President Joe Biden

Recently, There are news that Vice President Joe Biden will travel to the battleground state of New Hampshire on Thursday also to discuss taxes. The Obama campaign sees the issue as a weak point for Romney, a former private equity executive and ex-governor of Massachusetts