CONRADO
LUJAN DE FRANKENBERG
1/31/02
POL.ECO. OF
INT’L CRISIS
Alan
Crawford, Thunder on the Right: The ‘New Right’ and the Politics of Resentment,
New York: Pantheon Books, 1980
Thunder
on the Right: Chapter 1
The
New Right Network
America was moving to the right for a number of reasons:
Much of the American population-mainly the lower-middle class- felt that these issues were not being tackled appropriately. Hence this brought upon distrust, which weakened the 2 major political parties and Americans were now turning to new leader who would address their worries.
The New Right with its newly self-appointed leaders was ready to take full advantage of the situation. They were able to build a political & organizational network that sought for radical & social change. Until the 60s there had basically been no significant right wing organization in America. According to John B. Roche(President of Americans for Democratic Action), “ with no institutional base, no party, no real understanding or serious interest in the political process, fear of the radical right would rank 23rd b/w the fear of being eaten by piranhas and the fear of college presidents.”
However by the 70s the right had evolved into a well organized, financed, institutionalized and disciplined movement. Through the anger and insecurity of the blue-collar workers & house-wives they were able to collect millions in small contribution.
The New Right sought to veto what ever went against their principles:
They were for:
They exploited social protest and encouraged class hostility by riling up the lower middle class. They supported whoever sought for political change and resented the status quo, which all the more demonstrates that the New Right is far from being conservative. Fringe array
The New Right is made up of:
They used direct–mail solicitation to reach the voters and they were able to gain much support and along with it money to mobilize their political action. The New Right doesn’t work for a single purpose nor do they work at cross-purposes. They’ve been able to unite into a national network in response to specific concerns when necessary.
This network was named the “New Right” in order to distinguish its leadership from what they consider to be a weak conservative leadership. There was a constant struggle for power b/w the New Right and the traditional conservatives with the New Right edging ahead. Many traditional conservatives fear that the New Right will cause a great set back to American conservatism. They feel that the members of the New Right are anti-intellectual, insensitive to questions of civil liberties and hostile to reform. They also believe that the New Right is more interested in using the political process for social protest than actually improving the quality of life in America.
The American Conservative Union (ACU-founded in 64 to institutionalize the Draft Goldwater movement) was considered the most vigorous and responsible of the right-of-center umbrella groups. It was originally run by traditional conservatives who now play a much smaller role due to the rise of the New Right. There are still a number of conservatives who try to preserve it and the National Review as an “outpost” of traditional conservatism.
ACU with about 300,000 members and a growing budget opposed the Panama Canal treaty in 77 &78. They spent million on commercials, ads and mailings to fight against what they felt was, “ the surrender of American property,” and on Reagan’s campaign in 76. Their efforts were quiet beneficial and they gained support since they were able to increase fund raising revenue and add affiliates.
ACU has found success on building coalitions with liberal organizations on certain issues, a method that New Rightists may consider equivalent to betrayal. It was an effective method that in 1977 helped pass the Airline Regulatory Reform Act.
ACU is for strong national defense & free-market economics and trains young right-of-center writers & future political leaders. With the exception of the Panama Canal treaty ACU has always been more responsible and moderate than most New Right groups.
FROM CONSERVATIVE TO NEW RIGHT
Traditional conservatives wanted to reduce the influence which New Right leaders had. They were convinced that the New Right leader wanted to dominate the ACU. One of the top New Right leaders tried unsuccessfully to purchase Human Events, which had close ties with ACU and eventually he created his own magazine named Conservative Digest.
The New Right leaders were very eager to control the organization. They would finance right-wing organizations that were tax exempt in order to put forth their political projects. In other words they would run their business “tax free.”
The Heritage Foundation was formed by New Right leaders and to the shock of many it became a reputable institution. It published the Policy Review, which featured articles by important authors and provided many solid studies. The problem with the foundation was that their studies were not balanced and they were only a tool to support the opinions of the New Right. They never published a study that failed to support the conservative position.
The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC-put together by Juanita Bartnett an Illinois Republican activist) was a right-of-center-organization, which was also targeted by New Right leaders. When the members of the Heritage Foundation were able to get the necessary funds they dismissed Bartnett. According to Barnett, “ they really wanted to get rid of me because I knew what they were trying to do with the organization and they knew I would have no part in it.” She had realized that they wanted to use the tax exemption status to could conduct their political activity. Barnett was witness to the misuse of state funds for ALEC and not for official state business.
In 75 a letter written to the IRS by ALEC’s attorney had stated that their organization would make no attempt to oppose or support pending legislation other that providing research and that they would not devote funds to the support or opposition of any pending legislation. In 78 they contradicted themselves when ALEC’s Washington headquarters urged its Pennsylvania office to reject the District of Colombia voting right amendment.
CAMPAIGN TREASURIES
The struggle of power on the right in 74 gave birth to the Committee for the Survival of a Free Congress (CSFC), which was created by top officials of the New Right. Prior to the formation of CSFC they contributed to the Conservative Victory Fund (CVF) of the ACU but official of the New Right realized that the organization was not as efficient as it should be because it employed no representatives in the field. Thus they began to contribute to CSFC, which successfully raised twice as much as CVF did in the same period of time.
CSFC is one of the top financed New Right’s pacs. CSFC doesn’t donate to the campaign of incumbents. The success of CSFC can be contributed to the skillful placement of well-trained representatives in the field.
One can observe the New Right’s ideology with its study of the 77 House of Representatives, which classified 32% of congressmen as radicals and those that are considered very liberal came in 2nd. In the senate similar results were found by the New Right’s study. These results look pretty ridiculous when Robert C. Byrd (former KKK member) was classified as very liberal.
The National Conservative Political Action Committee (NCPAC) is also an important weapon of the New Right, which raised over $3 million in 76. They rely greatly on “in-kind” donations to the candidates it supports. The secret to their success is that they provide campaign experts in all the necessary areas and they insist on providing more than just financial assistance.
NCPAC supports Republicans and Democrats, though only about 10% of the candidates who received contributions in 78 were Democrats. A top official admitted that they will have to recruit in order to get Democrats conservative enough to support.
Citizens for the Republic (CFTR) was the only partisan pac of the right which was against supporting democrats. CTFR was created with the money left over from Reagan’s 76 campaign. Reagan’s marketable name brought much money to CFTR, which became a very effective multicandidate pac. According to the Washington Post, Reagan footed the bill to promote Republican hopefuls.
THE CADETS
In 60 William F. Buckley founded Young Americans for Freedom (YAF), which was very active, and well organized & financed. Though it was originally conservative it was influenced by the ideology of the New Right. Originally housed in New York it protested Nixon’s selling out to Rockerfeller at the 1960 Republican Convention. Later it was characterized as having cannibalistic attitudes, which resulted in conflicts between its leaders. Their leaders are known to pass long resolutions but they avoid certain controversies on which their opinion may actually carry some weight.
It drifted from college campuses and has almost ceased to be young person’s organization. Its members seemed to be getting older and smaller in number. YAF’s interest on educational programs decreased and their attention shifted in the 70s to the progress of its leaders. Its leaders are known to be tame and obedient and not ready to tackle anything of importance.
The official youth weapon of the GOP is the Young Republican National Federation (YRNF), which is composed of the teenage and College Republicans. The Young Republicans were controlled by the right –wingers as early as the Eisenhower years. YRNF was considered anti-Rockefeller, anti-Eastern and anti-liberal. A young leader of YRNF was recruited by a right-winger (Roger Stone-former NCPAC treasurer) to infiltrate several 1972 Democratic election campaigns.
This action gave the YRNF a bad name, which a number of its members were distressed about and ready to clear themselves of the Nixon scandal. In 77 Stone and Richard Evans (right-winger from Kentucky) were competing for the chairmanship of the Young Republicans and in spite his involvement in the dirty tricks of the Nixon campaign Stone was able to win. His success can be attributed to the skillful campaigning of his supporters who were able to portray the Young Republicans as an ideological battle and painted Evans as a follower of the Rockerfeller liberal. Stone put into practice a direct-mail fund raising program which successfully increased revenue greatly. The organization became active in other areas and concentrated on training young political leaders. This led to the New Right domination of the 1979 Young Republican Leadership Conference. Here Pat Buchanan was given an award for “Americanism,” the same person who had advocated that the White House had secretly sponsored a black candidate in 72 to take votes away from Nixon.
Another right-wing youth organization was the Committee for Responsible Youth Politics. It conducted seminars to train the young activist in campaign management, contributed to political campaigns and placed its graduates on Senate and Congressional campaign staffs. A republican who attended campaign management school admitted that they know their business but disturbed by the fact that the professors make it clear enough that they believe some of the dirtier aspects of campaigning are just politics, and to be encouraged on the basis that the other side does it too.
PRO-BUSINESS
GROUPS
By the late 70s the New Rightist had learned about the advantages of fighting on all fronts from the liberals. In the 70s they formed their own public interest law firms in order to expand their area of tax- exempt foundations. The most important to note is the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), which was founded in 73 and has a staff of more than 20 lawyers. According to PLF they came together to represent the public interest, which wasn’t really taken into consideration. At first they tackled issues that had to do with abuses of welfare programs, then they moved into the larger area of governmental regulation.
Another public interest law firm was the Washington Legal Foundation, which was far more political than PLF. For example they unsuccessfully sued to prevent President Carter from implementing the Panama Canal treaties. It also fights to protect business and industry from costly governmental regulations.
In 77 the Consumer Alert Council was formed, which openly courts financial backing from business & industry. According to director Barbara Keating (ACU board member) they are working with PLF to re-define consumerism and says that both business & the average American will benefit. She firmly believes that the cost of regulating business is always passed on to the consumer trough higher prices. They were funded by citizens’ groups and business & industry.
The National Right to Work Committee (NRWC) and its legal defense foundation were founded in 55, and regarded by the court as a front for business interest. The group claims 1.25 million and spends 2 million alone on maintaining their heavy direct-mail fund-raising operation. The leader of NRWC insists that his organization is only interested in compulsory unionism, but in reality they have been involved in all aspects of the American trade union movement.
Some conservatives described NRWC as a “pro-business lobby” which is more interested in furthering right-wing political causes than fighting compulsory unionism. An employee of NRWC said that it is just another part of the right –wing fund-raising-machine.
The Public Service Research Council (PSRC) devotes its attention to preventing public sector unions. It is a research institution that conducts studies and polls, which affect the issue of public sector unions & illegal strikes. A Public Service pac was formed to prevent union bosses from seizing control of America’s government.
Populist Forum and Initiative America are populist lobbies that are not involved actively in political campaigns. The first attempts to monitor, co-opt, and encourage right-wing populism. The second is specialized in pursuing its populist goals and is for allowing voters to put issues directly on the ballet.
THE
NEW RIGHT’S FOURTH ESTATE
The American Right has a great number of publications and publicist ranging from eminently conservative William F. Buckley and National Review to the neopopulist monthly Conservative Digest. There are publication which cover Capitol Hill and Political Campaigns and then there are those that provide a movement perspective for local readers (right-of-center papers outside of Washington). The broad range of publications that exist ensure that conservative views are well represented in the national news media. There are also a great number of well known commentators and publishing houses that also make sure conservative views are represented.
LAW
AND ORDER INTEREST GROUPS
Single-issue groups also play a major role in the New Right network and have a large impact on electoral politics. The single–minded gun lobby is a growing force within New Right politics. The National Rifle Association (NRA), once assumed to be the leading pro-gun group, had put more stress on gun safety and the environment, which angered many gun-enthusiasts who believed that they were too liberal. This caused a power struggle within the organization, which ultimately benefited two new more militant pro-gun groups.
During this infighting, the Citizens Committee for the Right to keep and Bear Arms was able to double its budget. The second group to benefit was Gun Owners of America. They claim more than 200,000 members. It supports anti-gun-control candidates through the Gun Owners pac.
The Americans for Effective Law Enforcement, which was created in 66 works against the influence of the liberal American Civil Liberties Union. They represent the rights of the victims and of the law enforcement officer.
In 1955 the American Security Council was formed for domestic order and today it is the most influential group on the right dedicated to a strong national defense. It became a modern lobby that promotes more defense successfully as its fund-raising records suggest. It worked to mobilize support for the development of new missile systems and opposed the cancellation of the B-1 bomber.
SINGLE-ISSUE
“FAMILY” LOBBIES
The New Right leaders are grateful that these single-issue groups exist and they work with them as a much as possible. They have found it to be rather difficult to co-opt them into a larger New Right movement. The New Right runs into these difficulties whenever they deal with Right-to-Life and Phyllis Schlafly’s 50,00 member Eagle Forum. While these group are related and overlap with other New Right groups they maintain organizational independence.
Schlaflyn is a right-winger but her Eagle members are only loyal to her. The Right-to –Life movement is a successfully organized national coalition and the New Right leaders have worked very hard to gain control of it without much success. They have even fielded and backed candidates with success for certain elections. Their accomplishment have come about because they haven’t tried to dilute their single-minded members by trying to make common cause with for example the gun & free enterprise lobbies.
It is very obvious to see that the right-to-lifers and the New Right activist have differences. For example, Ellen McCormack, the 76 presidential candidate of the right-to-lifers, favors gun registration, day care centers for the poor and the abolition of capital punishment. All that she represents is far too liberal for the New Right.
Nonetheless, there are efforts to unite the single-issue groups. For example, the combining of the anti-abortion, antibusing, anti-Equal Right Amendment, and anti-gay-rights constituencies under the “pro-family movement.” Bringing the single-issue groups together is a batlle but has proved successful for fighting certain issues.
Interlocking
directorates
The Conservative Caucus was in charge of coordinating the activities of the far-flung ad hoc “home and family” groups. The idea was to have a structure in which people could speak for themselves but this was actually very difficult and it was impossible to bring all single-issue groups under one roof. The project was very costly and when it was near death it was referred to as the “Conservative Carcass.”
The New Right leaders meet regularly to discuss tactics and the strategy of the movement. They were able to reshape the face of Congress. They stalled legislation and pushed through referenda and initiatives. The New Right had its eye on the presidency and it seemed to have the necessary structure to fulfill the promise.