Populist Conservatism and Constitutional Order

Summary

Imprimis Podcast Summary: "Populist Conservatism and Constitutional Order"

Podcast Information

• Title: Imprimis
• Host/Author: Hillsdale College
• Episode Title: Populist Conservatism and Constitutional Order
• Release Date: November 26, 2024
• Speaker: Kevin Roberts, President of the Heritage Foundation

---

Introduction and Context

In the November 26, 2024 episode of Imprimis, hosted by Hillsdale College, Kevin Roberts, President of the Heritage Foundation, delves into the resurgence of populist conservatism within the United States and its implications for the constitutional framework of the nation. Adapted from his talk delivered at Christ Chapel during the Drummond Lectures on October 23, 2024, Roberts sets the stage by critiquing the prevailing elitist political paradigm that has dominated American governance since the Cold War era.

Decline of Elitist Top-Down Politics

Roberts begins by highlighting the failures of the top-down, elitist approach in both Republican and Democratic administrations since the Cold War's conclusion. While acknowledging America's material growth and corporate profitability since 1991, he emphasizes the concurrent decline in military strength, fiscal stability, and spiritual vitality. This decline has eroded public trust in key institutions controlled by elites, including political, scientific, journalistic, educational, and religious bodies.

“The top down, elitist brand of politics that has dominated the United States since the end of the Cold War under Republican and Democratic administrations alike has failed.”
— Kevin Roberts, [00:20]

Rise of Populism

Roberts observes a global surge in populism, particularly on the conservative right, paralleling movements in Argentina, Italy, France, the United Kingdom, and Hungary. He notes common characteristics among these movements:

• Economic and Political Nationalism: Emphasizing sovereignty and prioritizing national interests over globalist agendas.
• Cultural Patriotism and Social Conservatism: Upholding traditional values and resisting cultural shifts perceived as detrimental.
• Sympathy for Workers Over Corporations: Advocating for the common person against entrenched corporate interests.
• Anti-Establishment Sentiment: Leaders often possess vibrant personalities that challenge the status quo, undermining institutional authority.

Roberts underscores that the current left rejects populism, favoring expansive roles for big government and large institutions, thereby strengthening these entities against democratic accountability.

“The new populism tends to be economically and politically nationalistic. It tends to be culturally patriotic and socially conservative... It is a rhetorical Trojan horse that unprincipled demagogues use to advance their narrow, selfish ambitions.”
— Kevin Roberts, [04:15]

Historical Context and Erosion of Public Trust

Roberts traces the roots of today's populist discontent back to 1991, the end of the Cold War—a period that should have led to a national recalibration of American policies. Instead, he argues, the Washington establishment doubled down on globalist agendas:

• Global Governance Aspirations: President George H.W. Bush's pledge to a "new world order" under the United Nations.
• Economic Policies: Support for NAFTA and the World Trade Organization, which Roberts contends undermined American industrial regions and economic sovereignty.
• Military Interventions: Engagements in Somalia and the former Yugoslavia, leading to military and strategic overstretch.

These actions, Roberts asserts, eroded the public's trust, culminating in electoral defeats and increasing disenchantment with elite-led governance.

“Our nation has been beset by an unprecedented border crisis, a mental health crisis, and historically low birth rates. The withdrawal from Afghanistan was a national embarrassment.”
— Kevin Roberts, [10:45]

Conditions Favoring Conservative Populism

The deteriorating fiscal situation, public health crises exacerbated by pandemic responses, legal and cultural battles over marriage and gender, and rising national debt have all contributed to disillusionment with elite institutions. Roberts argues that these factors have paved the way for conservative populism by discrediting the very elites that once commanded public trust.

“Our $35 trillion national debt is now equal to 124% of our gross domestic product. We spend more every year on interest payments on that debt than we do on national security.”
— Kevin Roberts, [12:50]

Critique of Elite Institutions and Populist Potential

While acknowledging the elite critique of populism—that it may lack substance and be a vehicle for demagoguery—Roberts emphasizes the necessity of integrating populist energy with principled, positive political aims. He cites historical figures like Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon, and Franklin Roosevelt as examples of leaders who successfully channeled populist sentiments into meaningful reforms.

“Legitimate and enduring change in democracies comes neither from philosophers nor rabble rousers. It comes only by strategically fusing populist energy and principled ideas.”
— Kevin Roberts, [07:30]

Constitutional Solutions and Reforms

Roberts posits that the Constitution remains the foundational tool for addressing contemporary challenges. He critiques factions within the populist movement that seek to discard the Constitution, advocating instead for its adherence and application to achieve national renewal. Key areas for reform include:

• Legislative Function: Transforming Congress into a genuine legislative body rather than a platform for moralizing.
• Executive Responsibility: Ensuring the President acts as a competent chief executive rather than exerting authoritarian control.
• Judicial Impartiality: Restoring the judiciary to uphold the Constitution and laws without partisan bias.
• Dispersal of Power: Reducing the concentration of political authority within the Washington establishment.

“None of our problems are beyond our constitutional order's power to solve. What is it we need after all? We need a Congress that acts like a legislature rather than a company of moralizing performance artists.”
— Kevin Roberts, [13:20]

Policy Recommendations and Vision for the Future

Roberts outlines a series of actionable reforms aimed at reclaiming national sovereignty and ensuring government accountability:

• Border Security: Empowering the U.S. Border Patrol to secure borders effectively.
• Economic Autonomy: Reforming trade agreements and closing loopholes that disadvantage American workers.
• Judicial Reforms: Addressing partisan misconduct within the Justice Department and FBI.
• Energy Policy: Facilitating energy development through corporate permissions and investments in nuclear power.
• Education and Labor: Shifting focus from diversity initiatives to trade apprenticeships and workforce development.
• Institutional Overhaul: Defunding and restructuring agencies perceived as anti-American or anti-Constitutional.

He reinforces the importance of the Constitution in guiding these reforms, asserting that true populist success must align with constitutional principles.

“The solution to our problems is not to scrap or transcend the Constitution, but to start obeying and applying it again.”
— Kevin Roberts, [14:50]

Conclusion and Call to Action

Roberts concludes with a compelling vision of conservatism as the "preservation of fire," drawing on Gustav Mahler's metaphor to illustrate the dynamic and forward-looking nature of true conservative philosophy. He calls for a unified conservative populist movement that combines grassroots energy with constitutional fidelity to reclaim institutions and restore national pride.

“Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. The preservation of fire strikes me as a good metaphor for conservatism.”
— Kevin Roberts, [15:45]

Roberts urges listeners to actively participate in dismantling and reforming entrenched institutions, emphasizing that the rewards of prioritizing American families and sovereignty will surpass expectations. He underscores the necessity of a thoughtful and principled approach to populism, ensuring that it serves the nation's enduring values and constitutional framework.

“This is the fight before us. If we thoughtfully and tenaciously combine populist energy with conservative principles, it is a fight we can win.”
— Kevin Roberts, [16:00]

---

Final Notes

The episode effectively underscores the intersection of populist movements with constitutional conservatism, advocating for a strategic, principle-driven approach to political change. Kevin Roberts' analysis provides a comprehensive critique of past policies and institutional failures, offering a roadmap for revitalizing American governance through constitutional adherence and populist energy.

For those interested in exploring the themes discussed, Imprimis continues to offer insightful analyses and discussions aimed at promoting civil and religious liberty within the cultural, economic, political, and educational spheres.

Transcript

[Maggie]

Hi, I'm Maggie, a senior studying rhetoric and media at Hillsdale College, and this is Imprimis. Here is the October 2024 issue Populist, conservatism and Constitutional Order, by Kevin Roberts, President of the Heritage Foundation. The following is adapted from a talk delivered in Christ Chapel at Hillsdale College on October 23, 2024, as part of the Drummond Lectures in Christ Chape. The top down, elitist brand of politics that has dominated the United States since the end of the Cold War under Republican and Democratic administrators alike has failed. Yes, we are materially richer than we were in 1991, and our largest corporations are more profitable. But we are militarily and strategically weaker, fiscally endangered, and spiritually enervated. As a result, public trust in the vaunted institutions that our elites control political, scientific, journalistic, educational, religious has evaporated. And populism, especially on the conservative right, is on the rise. Although I will focus on the US this rise of populism is widespread from Argentina to Italy to France to the United Kingdom to Hungary. There are similarities. The new populism tends to be economically and politically nationalistic. It tends to be culturally patriotic and socially conservative. It tends to sympathize with workers over corporations. It is also self consciously, defiantly, often mockingly, anti establishment. It is not a coincidence that so many of the West's populist leaders Javier Milei, Jair Bolsonaro, Viktor Orban, Giorgio Maloney, and Donald Trump have, shall we say, colorful personalities. Their political swagger may threaten elite politicians almost as much as their policy agendas do, because it punctures the bubble of credentialed institutional authority that insulates elite power from public scrutiny. With few exceptions, the left as we know it today has rejected populism out of hand, embracing instead big government, big big business, big banks, big tech, big pharma, big labor, big agriculture, big media, and big entertainment. For the most part, today's left is hard at work fortifying the power these institutions wield against the rigors of democratic accountability. Thus, the only hope for a sustainable, democratically legitimate populist reform movement today is on the right. The question is whether the leaders of the movement can harness the highly negative energy from which the populism emerges in and channel it toward a coherent, positive politics of national renewal and reform. To see what today's populists are reacting against, think back to 1991. The end of the Cold War appeared to be a great victory for the Washington establishment. Never mind that most leaders of that establishment opposed Reaganism, which was instrumental in bringing down the Soviet Union. Regardless, this victory earned Western institutions a high level of public trust under unimaginable today. In November 1989, for instance, when the Berlin Wall fell, President George H.W. bush's public approval rating hit 70% and would climb to 80 and even 90% in subsequent years. With the Cold War over, one would have expected a recalibration of American foreign and domestic policy. It should at least have been a time for a national debate about these topics. For four decades, we had strung tripwires for nuclear war around the world to contain a foe that suddenly no longer existed. Working families who had invested two generations of blood and treasure during what President John F. Kennedy called the long twilight struggle were ready to focus on problems closer to home. But the Washington establishment had other ideas. President Bush himself, in the lead up to the first Gulf War, pledged allegiance to a new world order that would be governed by the United nations and policed at its behest by the US between that 10 year approach and his backtracking on conservative economic policies, Bush squandered his popular support so badly that he suffered an embarrassing electoral defeat in 1992. In 1993, Bush's successor, President Bill Clinton, led the fight to ratify the North American Free Trade Agreement, which gutted America's industrial Midwest and lit the fuse on an illegal immigration bomb still exploding today. In 1994, Congress passed a law submitting the US to the world Trade Organization, surrendering America's economic sovereignty to globalist bureaucrats. Soon thereafter, a bipartisan majority in Congress granted most favored nation trading status to the People's Republic of China, handing over working Americans multi trillion dollar peace dividend to our greatest international rival. Clinton also sent US troops into Mogadishu to referee the Somali civil war with infamous results in the Black Hawk down debacle, and orchestrated a bombing campaign in the former Yugoslavia. The climax of the White House debate about the latter mission is illustrative. It came when future Secretary of State May Madeleine Albright snapped at General Colin Powell, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. What's the point of having this superb military that you're always talking about if we can't use it? And of course, this was before President George W. Bush led America into the successive catastrophes of Iraq, the global financial crisis of 2008 and the great Recession. In the decade and a half since then, America's fiscal situation has deteriorated. Americans suffered under the COVID pandemic while government bureaucrats, aided by the media, censored and demonized anyone who challenged the official and provably false pandemic narrative. The Supreme Court redefined marriage, establishing the legal predicate for the trans fanaticism now responsible for destroying women's sports and mutilating children. Across the country, the Justice Department, including the FBI, has shown brazen political partisanship in support of the elites and against the populace. Our nation has been beset by an unprecedented border crisis, a mental health crisis, and historically low birth rates. The withdrawal from Afghanistan was a national embarrassment. Wars rage on two continents, Anti Semitism is on the rise on college campuses, and China is now financing its own Cold War against the US with money and technology American executives gave the Chinese in exchange for corporate profits. Our $35 trillion national debt is now equal to 124% of our gross domestic product. We spend more every year on interest payments on that debt than we do on national security. These are the conditions that have rightfully discredited the elites and given rise to conservative populism. Despite being discredited, the elites do offer a critique of populism that deserves to be taken seriously. The claim that populism is all style, lacks substance, and cannot be trusted. Populism, according to this view, is a rhetorical Trojan horse that unprincipled demagogues use to advance their narrow, selfish ambitions. And to be sure, history is full of corrupt tribunes of the people who abuse their power and enrich themselves at their nation's expense. The lesson to be drawn from this critique is that legitimate and enduring change in democracies comes neither from philosophers nor rabble rousers. It comes only by strategically fusing populist energy and principled ideas. That is what Ronald Reagan did in the 1980s. He harnessed popular frustration, frustration with Washington incompetence, Soviet aggression and economic stagflation to a positive agenda of conservative reform. Richard Nixon before him and Bill Clinton after him also channeled populist frustrations and aspirations toward their policy aims going back through history. So did Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal, Theodore Roosevelt's early Progressivism, Abraham Lincoln's unionism and abolitionism, and Jacksonian and Jeffersonian democracy. Indeed, what was the Founding itself and the Constitution in particular, but the thoughtful harnessing of populist frustration on behalf of clear, positive political principles. Speaking of which, it is still the case that legitimate and enduring change in the US Will only be accomplished through the Constitution. It's too bad that this point needs to be made, but there are anti establishment voices within the populist movement, especially among the young and online, who reject the Constitution as an artifact of liberal Enlightenment errors that must be replaced with a pre Enlightenment form of government. But the American people are not interested in thrones and altars. They want a secure border, safe streets, economic autonomy and opportunity, a family friendly culture and a government that works for them instead of the other way around. It would be a strange populism that haughtily dismisses the values of the populace. It would be a strange nationalism that promises citizens sovereignty only to turn around and rule them like subjects. Indeed, that is precisely what the elite establishment does today and why it is failing. None of our problems are beyond our constitutional order's power to solve. What is it we need after all? We need a Congress that acts like a legislature rather than a company of moralizing performance artists. We need a President who acts like a responsible chief executive rather than a drunken king. We need a judiciary that acts impartially in accordance with the Constitution and the laws of the land rather than in a partisan manner. And we need to disperse the political power that is now concentrated in the hands of the Washington establishment. In short, the solution to our problems is not to scrap or transcend the Constitution, but to start obeying and applying it again. Under that document, we the people already possess every power. We need to re establish majority rule, minority rights, democratic accountability, equal justice under law and national sovereignty. Writing my recent book on this topic, I kept coming back to a quotation from composer Gustav Mahler. Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. The preservation of fire strikes me as a good metaphor for conservatism. It's not rose tinted nostalgia of an idealized past. It preserves the best of the past and applies its lessons to the present, maintaining a controlled burn as a way to a better future. The greatest challenges we face today are fairly straightforward. The necessary solutions, as Reagan said, may not be easy, but they are simple. It is clearly possible for a nation to control its borders, to prosecute criminals, to reclaim its sovereignty as it pertains to war, peace and trade, and to protect and promote the values that most Americans espouse. Step back from the left's Oz like faux authority and think for a moment about its legal fragility. Almost everything organizations of the left do is either funded by taxpayers or ignored by prosecutors. A principled populist conservative government could undo huge swaths of it with, in the immortal words of President Barack Obama, a phone and a pen. The supposedly unfirable bureaucrats of the federal deep state are nothing of the sort. The president could reclassify, reassign, or simply dismiss thousands of them. Moreover, agencies that have gone all in on woke claptrap in the last decade have advertised their own irrelevance to budget conscious congressional appropriators. The U.S. border Patrol could secure the border today if the President ordered them to. Energy companies already know where to drill. They just need permission. We already know which treaty loopholes China exploits to steal our jobs and trade secrets. The loopholes could be closed. Or we could withdraw from the treaties altogether. Cities and states that refuse to prosecute crimes or protect girls privacy can be disqualified from federal aid. Corporations that practice ideological discrimination can be prohibited from federal contracting. The Justice Department, now harassing Christians and conservatives, could start exploring Big Tech's deliberate attempts to addict children to harmful online content. We could reform the tax code to prioritize families and workers. Instead of globalist corporations, we could do the same with education, labor, housing and transportation policy. Instead of funneling more money into DEI offices on campus, we could invest in trade apprenticeships. Instead of wasting money on global green energy boondoggles, we could build nuclear power plants. We could reclaim our sovereignty by withdrawing from the World Trade Organization and the United nations and by clarifying our strategic alliances and the institutions we need to revive. Marriage and family, church and community, private enterprise and public spirit already exist. Like flowers in a garden choked by weeds. They just need room, light and water to grow again. Returning to my metaphor of a controlled burn, we will need to ignite several of those to fix institutions like the Department of Homeland Security, the epa, the Federal Reserve, the FBI, the Department of Education, the military industrial complex, and apparently now fema. Today these institutions function as anti American, anti constitutional predators, serving their own interests at the expense of the national interest. Their institutional status quo is inconsistent with freedom and self government. America must break and reform them before they break and destroy us. Not only in America, but across the west, not so silent majorities today consist of citizens that the elites by nature and ideology look down on and treat as deplorables those who believe in the rights of the individual, the virtue of local communities, the centrality of the family and the sovereignty of the nation state. This new conservative populist coalition is not as ideological as past iterations. But conservatism isn't supposed to be ideological. Yes, America was founded on the basis of ideas, but it is a people and a nation first. American conservatism exists to serve the people and the nation through the Constitution. This includes defending them against enemies, foreign and domestic. And the fact is, elite institutions have become the people's and the nation's enemies. They are openly waging cultural war on those they ostensibly serve. They cannot be negotiated with or accommodated. They must be defunded, disbanded, and disempowered. The rewards for doing so, for putting American families first again, will be greater than we can know. This is the fight before us. If we thoughtfully and tenaciously combine populist energy with conservative principles, it is a fight we can win. To sign up for a free lifetime subscription to Imprimis, delivered to your mailbox or your inbox, go to hillsdale.edu lifetime.

[Larry Arn]

Foreign.

[Michael Ward]

Show Hillsdale College President Larry Arn sits down with C.S. lewis scholar and theologian Michael Ward for a one on one conversation.

[Larry Arn]

Well, I think belief in objective value is necessary to our humanity, so you can't be a Christian unless you're a human being first, obviously. So Lewis, I think, is saying in the Abolition of Man, let's try to work out what it is that makes us human. Once we've agreed on that, well, then we can go on to discuss these other questions about which God these human beings should worship. And it is belief in objective value that establishes our humanity and distinguishes us from the other animals.

[Michael Ward]

Listen to this exclusive interview with Michael Ward right now, only available on the Larry Arn Show. Find it on the Hillsdale College Podcast Network at podcast hillsdale.edu or wherever you get your audio and subscribe to receive new episodes delivered right to your device. That's Podcast Hillsdale Eduardo.