What begins as a manifesto, ends with a fizzle. Bill Kristol thinks we’ve reached a moment of ‘re-founding.’ As in, it is time for the country to do-over the basic governmental framework established by the Founding Fathers. He tells us that this is what the Tea Party is here to facilitate. I could almost follow along, especially with this part:
As established political parties are wont to do, both remain constricted in their views, attached to business as usual, and invested in established modes and orders—too much so to easily come to grips with a moment like the present.
That would be an accurate description of the criticism the government is receiving from both the left and the right. It would be accurate, that is, if that was all Kristol said, or if he wasn’t attempting to suggest that the Tea Party has solutions to our country’s problems. It’s ironic, but the genesis for Kristol’s article was a conversation about the wacky ideas he heard at the Fourth of July tea party on Independence Mall in Philadelphia.
I was telling a friend about the Philly Tea Party, noting a few eccentric proposals from some of its participants. He commented, “Well, that’s better than talking points.” He’s right. At this moment, bold and seemingly impolitic or impractical ideas are more useful than the diligent repetition of mostly sensible short-term critiques and proposals. At a moment like this, talking points are not enough.
Yeah, maybe. What’s considered practical and politic at the moment is pretty constrained, and it’s preventing us from making bold moves to provide jobs that people desperately need. It’s preventing us from moving as quickly as we need to to change how we use energy in this country. It’s making it near impossible to craft a sensible immigration policy. It’s keeping us from forcing a settlement on the Palestinians and Israelis. But the truth is that solutions that cannot be achieved are not solutions. And, for the Tea Party, ideas that are ‘eccentric’ are not solutions either. They’re just insane.
Kristol tells us we’ve reached a moment of crisis for which the two major parties are ill-equipped. Okay, but then he says this.
That’s the challenge for the Republican party. It is of course a real, existing political party, with real existing responsibilities. So it has to do the day-to-day work of a loyal opposition—helping Generals Petraeus, Mattis, and Odierno to win the wars we’re fighting and which we certainly can’t afford to lose, resisting foolish Obama administration programs and appointments, proposing legislation and amendments that would improve public policy or at least highlight the difference between the two parties.
But the GOP can be the party of the future as well as the present. It can be the party of fundamental reflection and radical choice as well as the party of day-to-day criticism and opposition. This isn’t easy. It can lead to mistakes and missteps, tensions and confusions. But it’s what the moment requires.
So fear not the Tea Parties. Be open to fundamental reforms. Belt-tightening and program-trimming, more transparency and greater efficiency, are not enough. The danger for Republicans isn’t that they will address the current crisis too boldly. It’s that they won’t be bold enough.
Kristol wants change to come from one of the two major parties after all. But he wants the GOP to become the party of ‘radical choice.’ He doesn’t actually express a single radical idea that the GOP should promote, probably because he considers them crazy or impractical. He starts out quoting Alexander Hamilton and telling us we need to basically redo the Constitution which is now as flawed as any Articles of Confederation. He ends by telling us that the GOP needs to be open to the fundamental reforms espoused by people he thinks are loons.
And the essay seemed to have so much promise.
