There are two ways for authentic conservatives to deal with CPAC. You can eschew it because it is an unfaithful representation of the real thing, or you can attempt to represent the real think at a meeting of the unfaithful masses. I noticed both these approaches on Facebook prior to the event.
Looking at the 2013 CPAC lineup I can’t help but be totally unimpressed by this pathetic bunch of ‘respectable conservatives.’ None of them represent me. They really have no ideas and nothing to offer. Southern nationalism should eclipse the US conservative movement as a political force in Dixie. We actually have solutions to the problems faced in Southern suburbs, towns and countryside.
I tend to favor the latter aproach. If we are the authentic expression of conservatism, then we should go to ostensibly conservative gatherings and act like we belong. I’m not sure what acting like a put upon dissident gets you.
Well Heimbach and company sure did manage to throw a monkey-wrench in the CPAC aura of unanimity.
I don’t know all that was said at this encounter, so I am not necessarily saying I support all that was said. I will say that the common conservative movement trope that the Democrats are historically the party of segregation and that Republicans are the party of civil rights may be somewhat technically true, but it is misleading. All those Dixiecrats and their voters became Republicans over time as the parties essentially switched roles in many respects. This seems to be one of the issues that was challenged by Heimbach and company.
At any rate, I say the best response for authentic (paleo) conservatives to deal with CPAC is to represent rather than eschew. Thoughts?