Jeff Flake’s new book is not even out and I already hate it. In most cases, a Rino writing a book ahead of a reelection campaign would have drawn zero reaction from me. However, Jeff Flake who has always been a moderate, who leans either left or right with the frequency of a weathervane, trying to speak on behalf of Conservatives is laughable and insulting. It is not just that he invokes Barry Goldwater by stealing the title of his book from that work “Conscious of a Conservative”, which is one of the preeminent books on Conservatism. I could not state the case any better than Brent Bozell, whose father ghost wrote the book.
On behalf of my late father and my family, I am denouncing Sen. Flake and his new book, dishonestly titled, “Conscience of a Conservative.” pic.twitter.com/WwuxuDM1NZ
— Brent Bozell (@BrentBozell) August 1, 2017
While I have not had the opportunity to read the book in full, AZCentral had several exerts of the book available. Despite the small sample size, there are already ideological issues where he is taking a stand on positions that to my mind are diametrically opposed to the fundamental principles of Conservatism.
Please sir, might I have some more Globalism…
“Seemingly overnight, the word globalist became a grave insult among people in my party who also call themselves ‘conservative,'” he writes. “… In this country, we are less than 5 percent of the world’s population. We are 20 percent of the world’s economic output. And if we don’t trade, we don’t grow. Given the alternatives, I’ll take the globalist moniker, thank you.”
Jeff Flake implies with his argument that there are only two positions available when it comes to trade; globalism or protectionism. While I am by no means a protectionist, I do not think President Trump is either. I believe his tough talk on tariffs is more about signaling to other countries around the world that all tools when it comes to trade are on the table when we sit down to discuss and negotiate trade. Tariffs already exist on many products for many countries. While I believe that they are the option of last resort, simply stating that they are always off the table is not a realistic position. There is a vast difference between “free” trade and “fair” trade. While the globalist position, where we overtax our citizens and businesses and then provide foreign aid to countries which then use that money to build up infrastructure and incentives to undercut American companies competitively, can be called “free” trade we can hardly call it “free” trade.
The “globalist moniker”, which he gladly accepts, comes with much more baggage that is ideologically inconsistent with his espoused conservative views. How do massive migration via open border policies that transplants the local culture and undercuts the middle class by lowering wages across the board fit within the conservative view point? The flood of poor migrants and illegal aliens only serves to overwhelm entitlement programs and swell the size of government, both of which run contrary to Conservative principles of smaller accountable government, personal responsibility and respect for the rule of law. While “America First” might be a populous message it certainly resonates with conservatives when put into practice if the focus gravitates to free markets and personal liberty.
Recently we have seen Democrats further isolating those voters that are required if they are ever again to win majorities in either the House or Senate. They ferment divisions, spurn intellectual diversity, their pundits openly insult former Obama voters that switched to Trump and have recently begun advocating for purging the party of anyone who does not dogmatically accept the “Pro Choice” position. Whereas Democrats have recently embarked on a campaign of regressionism that is shrinking their tent; Republicans need to embrace those from the populous movement that are expanding the tent. I am not advocating that any Conservative accept populous positions, only that we now have an opportunity to educate others on not only the principles of Conservativism, but the benefits of governing by those principles. While we are not likely to change everyone’s mind, we have a good shot of growing the numbers of true conservatives as the most recent version of American populism is far closer to Conservativism than Globalism on the political spectrum. Jeff Flake’s version of Conservatism is barely discernible from modern Liberalism and will only lead us down the same path that the Democrats are taking; where we ignore Americans who already feel forgotten and only dream of a fair shot at the American dream.