John Dean, of Watergate fame, as much as admits that the title of his book, Conservatives Without Conscience, is wrong. These are not the conservatives of his youth, but authoritarians. Conservatism used to be a theory of government that aimed at the public good. What we have now on the right is the intention of tearing down government so that it cannot help anybody but the rich and powerful, and indeed harms those that the Right judges unworthy and dangerous. It has turned into a War on Everybody, with none of the constraints that we expect in persons with a conscience.
Do Republicans lack conscience? Certainly not all of those who have one have been driven out, because we continue to hear of some of them finally deciding that it is too much, and denouncing the GOP publicly as they depart. I wrote about some such cases in a Diary not long ago, Conservatives With Conscience. So which ones are we talking about, in what ways? John Dean has offered to take us on a guided tour and explain his understanding of what we know scientifically about the matter.
What does it mean to lack conscience? Well you may ask.
We are not talking about selling your soul to the Devil, are we, and doing its work without reservation? Well, not literally, although Barry Goldwater told Dean in 1991
Goddamit, John, the Republicans are selling their soul to win elections.
There is a reason why such legends exist, of people putting common greed for wealth, power, sex, and other things above any consideration of other people, and letting that greed grow without limit. Similarly for exalting assorted fears and hatreds, puffing up one's status, and other mental states that others find abhorrent, and that lead to unconcern about harming others, or even delight in doing so.
It turns out that all of these behaviors are typical of authoritarian personalities, and that we can distinguish several kinds of authoritarian by the mix of such behaviors they show. It further turns out that historical forces have combined to concentrate them ever more strongly in the Republican party, but other historical forces are coming together to remove them from power, even the power to obstruct. Up to now in this series we have been examining scientific evidence about how Republicans think, and how it drives their actions. With John Dean, still a Goldwater Conservative, we get a guided tour inside the Republican Party informed by the Stanley Milgram research on obedience, which we looked at last week, and also by the Robert Altemeyer research on the various kinds of authoritarian personality, which we will look at in more detail next week. I am adding Altemeyer's free book The Authoritarians to our Grokking Republicans Book List.
Conscience commonly means internalized rules inculcated by a society about whom we should not harm in various ways, although in general those rules also specify whom we should harm and how, and who doesn't matter one way or the other. Furthermore, as Stanley Milgram showed, in the presence of accepted authority most people can rein in their consciences quite effectively and carry out horrific actions when told to.
A Christian or Buddhist conscience entirely devoted to loving one's neighbor as oneself, or to compassion for all sentient beings, or any analogous ideal from any other religion, is also possible but a rarity. Some are brought up in the narrowest possible notion of what in-group counts for purposes of conscience, and others in broader versions. Some people develop conscience beyond what they are taught, and others pull back.
Dean's book was provoked by events surrounding another book, Silent Coup, allegedly by conspiracy nut Leonard Colodny and "journalist" Robert Gettlin, with the help of Watergate convicts and rightwing talk show hosts Gordon Liddy and Charles Colson. Dean found out later that it was really ghostwritten by freelancer Tom Schachtmann on contract with St Martins Press. Silent Coup alleges that Dean ran the entire Watergate burglary and coverup, and that a family friend was running a call-girl operation inside the Democratic National Committee, which was somehow allegedly the reason for the burglary. Their chief source for this lurid fantasy was Phillip Mackin Bailley.
Dean sued. Bailley's psychiatrist testified that Bailley could not distinguish fact from fiction. Dean and his wife Mo got "a satisfactory settlement" which, however, does not allow him to say any more than that. The story of course continues to circulate in the Right wing echo chamber, echoed this year in the even sleazier White House Call Girl: The Real Watergate Story by Phil Stanford, from Feral House.
Dean originally planned to write Conservatives Without Conscience in collaboration with Barry Goldwater, author of The Conscience of a Conservative long before. Goldwater's declining health and death made that impossible, but the book is dedicated to
In memory of Barry M. Goldwater (1909–1998)
a conservative with conscience
I would not agree with that assessment, because of Goldwater hiring Strom Thurmond's campaign consultant Harry Dent, jr, the architect of the Republican Southern Strategy, to run a severely racist States Rights campaign for him. But on some issues, particularly of the Religious Right, Goldwater was nothing like as bad as those who came after him. He seem to have squared his support for minorities and women with the racist 1964 campaign on the basis of States Rights, so that he was right to get the Arizona National Guard desegregated, but Congress was wrong to pass the Civil Rights Act.
At any rate the question for Dean was how such people as he and Goldwater were complaining about came to be the mainstream of Conservatism in America. He put Conservatives Without Conscience on the shelf until after writing Worse Than Watergate: The Secret Presidency of George W. Bush.
The serious deterioration and disintegration of Conservative principles under Bush and Cheney, in all branches of the Federal government, with the striking shift toward a very un-American authoritarianism, compelled me to complete the project I had begin with Senator Goldwater.
For all that Dean became something of a national hero for standing up to Nixonian bullying and doing more than anyone but Nixon himself to bring Nixon and his court down, Dean remains seriously un-self-aware about his Goldwater Conservatism, and about a good deal more in the Republican program.
Unlike the consequences of Nixon's secrecy, those of Bush and Cheney have been lethal.
This totally ignores Nixon dragging out the Vietnam War and secretly bombing Cambodia.
Conservatism is not inherently moralistic, negative, arrogant, condescending, and self-righteous.
That was true to a large extent of
Edmund Burke two centuries ago. It was true in part when Eisenhower sent troops to Little Rock, Arkansas, to desegregate the schools while McCarthy shredded the Constitution in Senate hearings, and J. Edgar Hoover at the FBI. But conservatism has been the doctrine of economic elites, whether Republican big business or the reactionary Southern Democratic Jim Crow policies of the self-proclaimed Southern Aristocracy, for a very long time. And everything changed in 1964, when Goldwater and nearly the entire Republican Party responded to LBJ's signing of the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act with the infamous Southern Strategy, making union with the Religious Right inevitable, though Goldwater was blind to the meaning of his own actions.
Conservatives cannot define Conservatism except in meaningless and even false platitudes. William Safire is the worst among those Dean quotes in the book, claiming that Conservatism is empirical and non-dogmatic. Lack of self-knowledge is one of their defining characteristics. Naturally, they reject the findings of social scientists studying them, and easily add that to the rest of their science denial, including Religious Right Creationism, Voodoo Economics and Market Fundamentalism, and Global Warming Denial, all explained with vicious Conspiracy Theories. One can, however, distinguish Conservative issues in any period. Less taxes, less regulation, less equality are perennial.
Goldwater claimed that Conservatives look to the past, and in supposed contrast with Liberals and Socialists supposedly reducing everything to economics, they look at the whole man, economically and spiritually. He also claimed to favor compromise, although he was one of the most ferocious in denouncing Rockefeller Republicans, even at times Richard Nixon for being insufficiently pure Conservatives. He was unquestionably a champion of lesbian and gay rights, though not of Marriage Equality.
Drawing on other material by Goldwater, Dean summarizes his principles as
The solutions to the problems of today can be found in the proven values of the past.
The conscience of a Conservative is pricked by anyone or any action that debases human dignity.
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom that is consistent with the maintenance of social order.
This is what John Dean signed on to, and he claims that Goldwater's values remain his values. But Goldwater later told Dean that government must step in to deal with poverty.
Since none of the principles mentioned above has been an actual Republican value since Eisenhower, I will say no more about them. In fact Goldwater wrote in Conscience of a Conservative that he was for States Rights, against any federal efforts on civil rights, opposed to laws supporting labor and for Right-to-Work (for less) Laws, and against the supposedly Socialist Welfare State.
I am going to skip over Dean's account of the mish-mash of ideas and issues that energized anti-Communists and opponents of the New Deal, and of the struggle to redefine Conservatism after World War II. What actually redefined it was events, such as the overthrow of the elected government in Iran in the Eisenhower Administration, Cold War anti-Communism and support of tyranny at home and abroad, the growth of the Civil Rights movement and anti-poverty programs, which became Conservatism's greatest targets, and the rise of the Religious Right. Dean noted Insight magazine's division of Republicans into ten frequently warring factions. I recently made my own division in A Republican Bestiary. What unites Republicans since then, according to Dean, is "a dark view of human nature" and enemies, especially FDR, Communists, activist judges, and numerous population groups.
The Authoritarian Personality by T. W. Adorno et al. was the first study of the subject. Although its methodology was flawed, it provided important insights that guided later and better-grounded research. Bob Altemeyer came next with his work on Right-Wing Authoritarians (RWA). He focused on those who give authorities that they approve of excessive obedience and submission, and found them to be primarily adherents of Republican economic theories. RWAs may be called authoritarian followers. They are also highly conventional in their beliefs, and very aggressive to others when authorities give the go-ahead. In addition they restrict their social circles to the like-minded. They consider themselves much more moral than others, but hold many hypocrisies and double standards. Note that they feel free to reject authorities that do not meet their standards, as with the Birther movement claiming that President Obama is not really the President, and does not have to be obeyed on anything.
The Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience, by Ronald Sider, reports that Evangelicals believe themselves to have exceptional consciences, but that in fact they lie and cheat more than the average. Evangelicals have higher rates of divorce, promiscuity, and abuse than "sinners" who do not belong to their churches, but they excuse themselves with Catholic confession or the Protestant doctrine of the Elect. Newt Gingrich said so about his affairs and divorces on national TV during the 2012 Republican debates. We observe, however, that in their view Democrats are incapable of confession and receiving absolution or forgiveness. Thus IOKIYAC, and more generally IOKIYAR.
There are also authoritarian leaders, measured on a scale called Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). This work began with Felicia Pratto and Jim Sidanius. SDOs are very economically conservative and believe deeply in inequality. They are also hard, tough, ruthless, and unfeeling toward others, and believe in cultivating the ability to look another person in the eye and lie convincingly. SDOs enjoy having the power to hurt people who anger or disappoint them. Remember Romney saying he liked being able to fire people? SDOs also believe there is no morality, only what you can get away with, and are usually not very religious. They are attracted to police and prosecutorial work, and are overrepresented at the highest levels of politics.
Then there are Double Highs who score high on both the RWA and SDO scales. Altemeyer explains that their high obedience scores reflect how they want others to obey and submit to them. RWAs and SDOs are generally prejudiced, but Double Highs are much more so, and are willing to pursue radically destructive policies that they think will lead to their complete dominance in society. Although ordinary SDOs are not very religious, Double Highs are commonly Fundamentalists.
Here is Dean's extensive but obviously incomplete list of Conservatives Without Conscience, that is Authoritarians (in order of first appearance in the book):
David Duke, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Richard Nixon, Leonard Colodny, Robert Gettlin, Philip Mackin Bailey, E. Howard Hunt, Gordon Liddy, Chuck Colson, Tom McCormack, Tom Schachtman, John Ehrlichman, Monica Crowley, James Rosen, Brit Hume, Kenneth Starr, Barbara Olson, Newt Gingrich, Tom Delay, Joe McCarthy, the John Birch Society, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Ronald Reagan, George Wallace, Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, Ann Coulter, John Derbyshire, Rush Limbaugh, William Bennett, Jonah Goldberg, John Bolton, John Cornyn, Bill Frist, Karl Rove, Bob Haldeman, guards at Abu Ghraib, Scooter Libby, Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith, J. Edgar Hoover, Spiro Agnew, Phyllis Schlafly, Paul Weyrich, Richard Viguerie, Howard Phillips, Tim LaHaye, James Dobson, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, Samuel Alito, John Boehner, Jack Abramoff, Rick Santorum, Grover Norquist, Bill Frist, Trent Lott, C. W. Bill Young, Donald Rumsfeld, Dennis Hastert, David Addington, John Yoo.
and Conservatives With at Least Some Conscience According to Dean:
Barry Goldwater, Norman Ornstein, Johnny Rhodes, John McCain, George Will, Pat Buchanan, Henry Kissinger (at least compared with the Neo-Cons), Brent Scowcroft, Cal Thomas, Ed Dobson, John Danforth (at least in the Terry Schiavo case), Lindsey Graham (at least on torture), Jack Goldsmith.
However, Dean's list of personality traits of Conservatives With Conscience is delusional, in fact describing Liberals on all but a few points.
Those who have attempted to define Conservatism, and according to Dean failed to produce more than platitudes, principles long abandoned, outright absurdities, or in a few cases apologies for Authoritarianism:
Edmund Burke, John Adams, Abraham Lincoln, Ramesh Ponnuru, Russell Kirk, George Nash, Bill Buckley, John Micklethwait, Adrian Wooldridge, William Safire, Mike Deaver, Frank Meyer, Russell Kirk, Michael Oakshotte, James Burnham, George H. Nash, Harry Jaffa, Daniel Boorstin, Clyde Wilson, Clinton Rossiter, Philip Gold, John Eastman, Austin Bramwell, Sarah Bramwell, David Horowitz, Kenneth Janda, Jeffrey M. Berry, Jerry Goldman, Lewis Gould, Charles Dunn, J. David Woodard, Joseph de Maistre, Peter Viereck, Mark Noll.
I cannot even list all of the research that Dean consulted about the psychology of Conservatives. Here, at least, are the names of the leading researchers.
John T. Jost, Stanley Milgram, Robert Altemeyer, George Lakoff, the seven authors of The Authoritarian Personality, Alan Wolfe, Felicia Pratto, Jim Sidanius, Fred I. Greenstein, Christian Smith.
All of the above are easily found on the Web, if you want to delve into the subjects of specific Authoritarians, the limitations of conscience, or the psychology of the Right more deeply. I didn't have time to make links for all of them.
Perhaps 20%–25% of the US population is authoritarian on the scales these researchers have developed. They form the core of the Republican base and a large fraction of its leadership, and if they were not often at odds with each other they might control the entire party. We do not know what will happen to them as the Republican Party shrinks to irrelevance due to demographic and generational shifts all across the country. We can hope that they will eventually retreat from politics once they have no more significant effect on it except in local enclaves. Many Evangelical Christians thought politics too dirty and worldly for them until Jimmy Carter was elected. His Liberal policies proved to be a grave disappointment to them, so they turned to Ronald Reagan as the champion of the Culture Wars.
If they do withdraw, leaving Democrats in charge, there will still be significant numbers of other Authoritarians in politics. We shall see.
