Can conservatives change the system from within by going along with it?

Last week at the Corner, Mark Krikorian defended Rod Dreher from my criticisms of his role in writing the Dallas Morning News’ editorial essay on the Illegal Alien as “Texan of the Year.” I replied to him in my “Open Letter to Mark Krikorian.” One point I did not deal with was Krikorian’s argument that conservatives need to change liberal institutions from within, and therefore conservatives on the outside, who tend to be uncompromising purists, should not criticize and undercut conservatives on the inside, who play such a crucial role in moving conservatism forward. Laura W. has some thoughts on this.

Laura W. writes:

Mark Krikorian’s point about institutions needing to be changed from within ignores the reality at metropolitan newspapers. There is no culture of dissent at these institutions. It is true that the most important thing a conservative working at such an institution can do is take a stand with his liberal colleagues and become a dissident, even at the risk of his livelihood. However, in this case, Dreher would not have been risking anything. As someone who once worked at a major metropolitan newspaper, I think the likelihood of Dreher’s being fired or even demoted for having declined to write the editorial was almost nil. A lone conservative represents such a small threat. His refusal would probably be ignored.

Nevertheless, his refusal would have been important. It would have said something to his colleagues. They might have thought, “Hey, there must be something real to this anti-immigration stuff if Rod, someone whom we like, stands up for it.”

In what sense is Dreher’s presence at the Dallas Morning News moving conservatism forward if he doesn’t even take minimal risks like refusing to write an editorial he does not support? In what sense does conservatism have any meaning if it carries no personal risk or sacrifice?

However, the point is moot because Dreher has said that he did not mind writing the editorial, which is the same as saying that he agreed with its thrust.

LA replies:

To add a further point that I’ve made before, Dreher wrote at his DMN blog that he personally agrees with the designation of the Illegal Alien as “Texan of the Year.” And it was that designation, not the content of the article, that has been the main focus of the controversy.

Laura W. continues:

What I said above does not mean that Dreher is some kind of excommunicate. After all, conservatism isn’t a club or an organization.

It does mean that he missed a golden opportunity and may miss others in the future. Then again, he may completely turn around and pick up the good fight.

James W. writes:

The idea that conservatives can change an institution from within is literally unsupportable, and even careless.

Robert Conquest’s Law rightly allows no exceptions: Any organization not explicitly right-wing, sooner or later becomes left-wing.

It takes no time at all to think of innumerable examples, but you are welcome to search all day for a left-wing organization becoming less radical, let alone conservative. They have, on occasion, flamed out of existence, but then sent their parts to infect other organizations not explicitly right-wing. Communist didn’t just disappear in 1991.

Why do we underestimate them? Because we treat them as we would ourselves expect to be treated. The only disadvantage of an honest heart is credulity. It is a stacked game.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at January 04, 2008 01:57 PM | Send