Matthew-Hurtt_anti-war-republican_at White House demo 31 Aug 2013_Hands off Syria

Comment

Comment by Tony Nuspl on September 12, 2013 at 5:23pm

Tea Party primary challenger, Matt Bevin, has been pounding Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell for not taking an identifiable position on Syria. Bevin’s campaign e-mailed around a collection of their candidate’s antiwar comments and contrasted them with McConnell’s silence. “We have no business being there,” Bevin is quoted as saying again and again. “These kinds of police actions we’ve been doing for decades are wrong, they’re unconstitutional,” he told a TV station.

There are a few reasons to hope that the current revival of anti-interventionist conservatism is not as fleeting as it was in the 1990s. Back then, large numbers of Republicans voted for a presidential candidate who thought country was fighting too many foreign wars.

But Pat Buchanan’s most adamant supporters in those primaries were social conservatives, followed by those responding to his economic populism. Ron Paul attracted somewhat fewer voters than Buchanan, but foreign policy and civil liberties were central to their identity.

Second, Paul’s campaigns birthed several grassroots organizations that have so far shown real staying power. This is likely to produce more activists pushing for a less warlike conservatism and to keep them involved in political debates. Some of these groups are involved in primaries, and even regular Republicans compete for their endorsements, donations, and votes.

Third, there is a difference in the leading anti-interventionist members of Congress. There is a critical mass who opposed Bush’s wars as well as Obama’s, a good indication of future consistency.

Potentially the most important difference is that the fiscal conservatives and libertarians who were quietly skeptical of interventionism during the Bush years, but stayed quiet for the sake of party and movement unity, are speaking out. FreedomWorks, one of the largest Tea Party organizations, has come out against the war.

Some of these organizations and activists have a lot of sway in Republican primaries, others are helpful for campaign fundraising. All of them have the potential to create a lasting conservative foreign-policy debate, as opposed to a neoconservative monologue.

source:

Antiwar Conservatism Isn’t Going Away
The GOP's '90s noninterventionism didn't last—but this time is different.
By W. James Antle III • September 10, 2013

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/why-antiwar-conserv...