(Author’s note:  this originated as an information page on my website.  I decided to post it as an “essay” after receiving repeated inquiries from folks who had not seen the info page and wondered what exactly is a “traditional conservative?”)

Traditional Conservatives – some call us Old Right or Paleo-Conservatives – could be thought of as the closest intellectual, moral, and political living kin of America‘s Founding Fathers.  That is not to say we yearn for the past; rather, that we understand history is much more than ancient facts or ideas.  History is, in reality, a roadmap to the future.

No doubt you have heard the saying, “Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.”  Traditional conservatives do not assume, as do so many today, that we are wiser than our ancestors.  While we know human knowledge has increased exponentially since 1776, we, like our Founders, also know from the simple observation of history, politics and culture that human nature has not changed since the dawn of man.  Therefore, history – ours as well as that of other nations and peoples – can teach us about the mistakes of the past and how to avoid them.

This is how Thomas Jefferson expressed it in his Notes on the State of Virginia, Query 14, 1781:  “History, by apprising [citizens] of the past, will enable them to judge of the future; it will avail them of the experience of other times and other nations; it will qualify them as judges of the actions and designs of men; it will enable them to know ambition under every disguise it may assume; and knowing it, to defeat its views.”

Traditional conservatives believe we stand on the shoulders of those who have gone before us.  And so it is our ancestors, our kin and our culture which give us our sense of self and place and history, a sense that has been described as “both collective and personal.”  We revere God, national sovereignty, cultural identity (both national and regional), community, republicanism (with a small “r”), and self-restrained capitalism.

Thus unlike all of today’s various shades of liberalism – progressivism, statism, socialism, fascism, Nazism, Marxism, communism, etc. – traditional conservatism is not an ideology but a way of life, and of thinking about life.  And it is the biggest political tent of all because unlike every one of those other “isms,” it does not demand its followers adhere to any strict code of thought, speech or action.

Traditional conservatism does have parameters, of course, encompassing all of what President Ronald Reagan once described as the three-legged stool of true conservatism:  strong free-market economic policies, strong defense and strong social values.  And as with liberalism, there are variations.  Some are minor while others are significant.  Many who consider them selves conservative embrace only one or two of those “legs.”  We believe the stool cannot stand without all three.

The group referred to as neo-conservatives, for example, agree with traditionals on the need for a strong national defense, but that is where the similarities end.  Traditionals see neo-conservatives as pro-defense liberals or progressives who have shifted what is thought of as conservatism to the Left.

Traditionals also share beliefs with Libertarians.  But we believe in what the late Russell Kirk called a “transcendent moral order,” while Kirk says libertarians see “no transcendent sanctions for conduct.”  Libertarians also see the individual as the primary focus of all political activity.  While traditional conservatives agree with the need to protect individual rights and freedoms, we also know man is a social creature whose nature derives true fulfillment from faith, family, kin and neighbors.

For the vast majority of traditionals, faith holds the dominant place in our private lives.  And we believe faith can be expressed freely in the public arena without “imposing” it on others.  But we reject the idea that any government – or group of activists – can tell us what we can or cannot believe, force any faith upon us or require us to abandon our beliefs in the name of “political correctness.”  Traditionals believe our Creator has given us “unalienable rights” which no earthly person or organization can limit or take from us, an idea stated clearly in our Constitution.

We believe – as did America‘s Founders – that the content of our individual and social characters is more important than the accumulation of money, possessions or political power.  And we believe the content of character is more important than the color of skin.

We believe above all else, the most essential institution which must be conserved is the family, and conserved as our Creator intended.  We believe the family is the natural and basic social entity and must be based in marriage between one man and one woman and committed to bringing new life into the world.

We believe culture is more important than politics or economics and that the nation can be saved only by restoring America’s specific culture – as well as its regional cultures – based on its own historical experiences, involving its own institutions as well as its own beliefs and values.

We believe that if our culture is to be saved, it will be accomplished only by adhering to what have been called the “Permanent Things,” ancient moral truths which have been the bedrock of healthy societies throughout history and which must govern our everyday lives.

We believe in the Small, the Local, the Old and the Particular as opposed to the Big, the Global, the New and the Abstract.  And so we are as suspicious of big business as we are of big government and believe small government and small business are much more efficient and therefore better for individual freedom as well as the economy.

Traditionals believe in self-government:  of taking care of oneself, one’s family, one’s property.  But we also believe those who truly need help should get it.  Both ideas are part of the Judeo-Christian ethic which has made this country the most generous in human history, as well as the wealthiest.

We believe self-government must include government of the self: personal restraint and humility.  We believe that includes good stewardship of the natural world to achieve a balance between the judicious use of natural resources and the ongoing replacement of those which can be renewed.  Thus, we are conservationists, not environmentalists.

We believe that private property is the bedrock of a free society.  Among other things, ownership teaches responsibility, encourages integrity, raises work to a level higher than drudgery, and allows us to rise from poverty to security.

We believe in Capitalism, the only economic system ever devised which democratizes wealth.  But we also prefer a “distributist” (small business) approach to capitalism.  And we believe with our Founding Fathers that the true purpose of wealth is the spiritual and intellectual improvement of the individual.

Traditionals agree with President Ronald Reagan that America should be the “shining city on a hill,” but we see our nation as an example for others to emulate and aspire to, not as an instrument for spreading democracy.  We realize certain cultural and institutional conditions are necessary for our form of government to take root, conditions which simply do not exist in most countries.

Traditionals believe in American sovereignty and secure American borders and that American troops should be used to protect America.  We believe Republics should mind their own business; that their citizens and government have more than enough to do to take care of them selves.

Therefore, we do not believe America is the world’s policeman.  Rather, it should heed the advice of President George Washington in its dealings with other countries:  to trade with all, but “to have with them as little political connection as possible.”  This would allow us to base American foreign policy solely on American national interest.

Harry Beadle is a former news anchor for the CNN Radio Network.  His essays are posted at http://harrybeadle.com

You see and hear the question all the time on bumper stickers, social media, personal and organizational websites and posed on radio and television talk shows:  What Would Reagan Do?  This invocation of the name of the late President Ronald Reagan always is asked to challenge the latest Liberal-Progressive fantasy that has been unleashed on the American people.

And whether it is intended or not, the question also implies certain standards to which Conservatives will adhere.  But if we are to have such standards, whose could be better to adopt than those of the men who created the American Republic?

So the question that should be asked is:  What Would the Founders Do?

Liberal-Progressives – or whatever they want to be called this week – no doubt will argue we cannot know what the Founders would do because they lived so long ago.  Unfortunately for the Lib-Progs, the Founders left behind thousands upon thousands of official documents, newspaper articles, essays, letters and notes explaining every concept covered by the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

The Founders’ creation of a system of government which puts the vast majority of political power into the hands of the governed was indeed a revolution.  Their creation of a Constitution which protects the smallest of all minorities – the individual – was a political and cultural miracle.

Our abandonment of the principles they espoused and which they enshrined in our governing documents would be nothing short of a betrayal of the lives and fortunes sacrificed for the American founding.  In the eyes of the Founders themselves, it would be nothing short of treason^[1].

An expanded version of this essay is posted on my website … http://harrybeadle.com

Two recent events have given the Left an excuse to launch a new broadside of “hate” charges against Conservatives.  One is the order from the White House to the Department of Justice to no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act.  Another is the repeal by the recently-replaced lame-duck 111^th Congress of the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy for homosexuals.  A number of Conservative organizations already are working to reverse both.

If Conservatives had to face nothing more than name-calling, it would not be so troubling.  But the Left has a powerful ally, an ally which has all but turned standing up for traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs into a criminal activity:  hate crime laws.

The concept first appeared as federal law in the U.S. in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Congress has passed several more specific pieces of legislation in the years since and the legal definition of what is considered a hate crime has been broadened each time.  Efforts to expand the definition further also currently are under way in several states.

The stated purpose of such laws is to punish those who commit crimes against others because those others are different.  Their actual effect is to criminalize thought and speech.  In doing so, they undermine the rule of law and violate the most basic spirit of the U.S. Constitution.

It is the rule of law which separates this nation from those which persecute, prosecute and often execute any who challenge the whims or beliefs of the person or group in power.  It is the rule of law which prevents the whims or beliefs of those in power in the U.S. from being imposed as “law.”  It is the rule of law which focuses punishment on the actions of the accused, not on what they think or say, however vile those thoughts or words might be.  And it is the Constitution upon which the rule of law is based.

In reality, hate crime laws punish only those whose thoughts and speech do not conform to the predominant culture, even if they deem that culture immoral or illegal.  The true intent of those who propose and support such laws is to force their opponents to conform to a particular view of the world.  No doubt you have heard of a number of closely-related political systems which use thought and speech control as basic tenets:  Marxism, Nazism, fascism, socialism and communism.

It is ironic, of course, that states in which hate crime laws get the strongest public support, in which the population generally is the most liberal, are among those which record the highest numbers of such crimes.  According to the latest FBI report – released in late November – California, New York and New Jersey lead that list and have for some years.

To be fair, the number of such incidents in each state must be compared to its population.  Even so, it should be noted that Texas, which has nearly 6,000,000 more people than New York, reported only about a fourth the number of hate crimes.  And Mississippi, Alabama and Georgia – the Deep South – were among the states which recorded the fewest such crimes.  Please note those are states which the Left insists are populated with hate-filled Conservatives, those who revere the Constitution.

Supporters of hate crime laws cloak themselves in the self-righteous claim of protecting those who have been wronged unjustly.  All victims of crime have been wronged unjustly.  And it could be argued that in some sense, all violent crimes are hate crimes.

Of course attacking someone simply because they are of a different race or religion or are homosexual is a heinous act.  But is anyone who has been robbed, maimed, raped or murdered during an assault any less a victim?  Do they deserve less protection under the law?  Do they deserve less justice?

It is very easy to accuse those who oppose hate crime laws of being bigoted, racist or homophobic.  But that is the tactic used, rather than take on the impossible task of explaining why those crimes cannot be prosecuted under the same laws which protect everyone else.

By giving special protections to specific groups of people, hate crime laws effectively penalize all others, violate the equal protection clause of the 14^th Amendment – not to mention 1^st Amendment rights of free speech and religion – and weaken the rule of law and the Constitution.

Some years ago I met a young Pakistani.  Anwar had been a pharmacist at home – and well-to-do – but immigrated to the U.S. because he wanted more political and economic freedom.  In summer, he loved to watch young women in skimpy running clothes training for a well-known road race.  When I teased him, he said, “Oh!  In my country you can be executed for what I am thinking!”

In the U.S., you cannot be executed for what you think.  Yet.  But hate crime laws have taken us far down that road.

Harry Beadle is a former news anchor for the CNN Radio Network.  His essays are posted at http://harrybeadle.com

Recent exposes involving Planned Parenthood and its support of abortions for underage girls have ignited a political firestorm among social conservatives and breathed life into a nation-wide campaign to eliminate taxpayer funding for the “family planning” organization.

Pro-life members of Congress also have introduced legislation to bar government subsidies for abortions and – with narrow exceptions – health plans that cover abortions.  State lawmakers around the country are pushing to ban or to put strict limits on such procedures as well.

Coincidentally, January 22^nd marked the anniversary of Roe vs. Wade, the case in which the U.S. Supreme Court infamously ruled there is a “right” to abortion.  But there is a distinct difference between having the ability to do a thing and having the right to do it.

Hopefully, the recent reading of the Constitution on the floor of the U.S. House prompted some Americans to actually read the document for themselves, many no doubt for the first time.  Of those who did, I hope they noticed something very important:  that among our three co-equal branches of government, Congress is the “first among equals.”

In fact, the Constitution gives Congress more power than the Presidency or the Judiciary – including the Supreme Court – and allows “We the People,” through our elected representatives, to nullify the decisions or rulings of the other branches of government.  In other words, the Supreme Court does not have – nor was it ever intended to have – the final say in what becomes the “law of the land.”  So despite the fact it has ruled there is a “right” to abortion, “We” can say “no!”

Unfortunately, it would require an enormous outpouring by abortion opponents to give even the hardiest of conservatives in Congress the political will to reverse the Supreme Court’s ruling.  It may take a bit less courage to eliminate taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood and similar groups.  And it would make a significant difference.

An expanded and somewhat different version of this article is posted on my website at … http://harrybeadle.com

Principles over Party

By Harry Beadle

Good grief!  The Tea Party movement has actually managed to pull Republicans’ collective fat out of … well, not the fire … more like the political landfill.  The GOP has taken control of the U.S. House and is in a much stronger position in the Senate.  That’s a start; but now what?

Despite the election of a number of apparently serious traditional conservatives to Congress, many who insist Republicans should lean to the left or at least move to the middle still have power inside the party itself.  Others want to use their influence to line their own pockets.  Remember former Senator Trent Lott’s plan to “co-opt” any Tea Party-supported candidates who got elected this year?

So there are lessons to be learned – both from and by the Tea Party movement:  (a) it’s very easy to become involved in politics; (b) you can make a huge difference in a very short time; (c) you cannot leave the running of your town, county, state or country to the political class; and (d) you can win elections by supporting and voting for principles over party.

And of those lessons, the last is by far the most important.  It should teach something to those who’ve been running the Republican brand into the political ground for years, neo-conservatives who in truth are nothing more than pro-defense progressives.  But I doubt they’ll learn.  After all, they consider it their country club and the party’s conservative base just the hired help.

That makes lesson (c) very important as well.  Yes, you vote to elect people to go to city hall, the county courthouse, the state capitol and Washington to do the public’s business.  But you also have to watch elected officials constantly and let them know what you expect of them.  If you vote then don’t pay attention, well, you’ve seen for yourself what you get.

The simple fact is voting is not the end of the political process in our republican form of government, it’s the beginning.  The good news is the American people have sent a clear message to every politician in the country that while they may not have been paying attention before, they are now.  The bad news is we have to keep paying attention … forever.

But that’s the easy part.  We also have to clean up the mess the Left has made of the Constitution, the economy and the culture and deal with GOP insiders who are almost as bad.  The details are far too many to list here.

Former President Ronald Reagan, in his famous 1975 speech to the Conservative Political Action Committee, issued a warning:  “A political party cannot be all things to all people.  It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency or simply to swell its numbers.”  Most Republicans didn’t listen.

Still, the Tea Party movement has shown there are many more Americans with traditional conservative leanings than anyone thought.  It also shows GOP officials and members of Congress who constantly talk of compromise with the Left are out of touch with the Republican base – and shows they can be replaced.

The bottom line is this:  as long as we act on principle – are conservatives first and Republicans second – and always allow principle to determine policy, not only will we win, we will thrive.  Conservative ideas gave the GOP control of Congress in 1994.  Subsequent years have clearly shown when Republicans abandon conservatism and move to the left, they lose both credibility and elections.

So every bill conservatives propose, everything we do, must reflect a return and strict adherence to the principles that have always helped us win strong public support:  low taxes, small government, strong national defense, individual responsibility.

But there’s lots of work to do outside Congress as well.

We must show Americans it’s the conservative Constitution which truly gives “power to the people” and protects the smallest minority of all:  the individual.  We must show them that to keep power for themselves and out of the hands of a controlling, self-anointed political “elite,” they must demand the Constitution be preserved as the Founders wrote and ratified it, and be interpreted as they intended.

(If you want to know how the Constitution was meant to be interpreted, read – in addition to the Federalist Papers – the Debates on the Constitution.  It’s a collection of essays and articles which reflect how the final document was hammered out, and makes very clear what those who ratified the Constitution understood and intended it to mean.)

We must teach not just the names, dates and places of our history, but the ideas that are America.  We must counter the Leftist self-hatred which has dominated public schools and colleges for decades and replace it with truth about this nation – good and bad – and the exceptional nature of our Republic.

Thomas Jefferson believed one purpose of education was to pass on to younger generations the ideas and ideals he and the other Founders fought for:  “This will give you an enlightened people and an energetic public opinion which will control and enchain the aristocratic spirit of the government.”

The notion of egalitarianism, the equality of all, must be shown to be the lie it is:  a false idol of mediocrity.  Every human being is unique as created by God:  in physical attributes, capacity for learning, talents and abilities.  That is true diversity.  And while those differences may be enhanced or changed to some degree, they are also what make us human and can’t be ignored.  Our Founders correctly saw us as equal only before a just court of law and in the eyes of God.

Conservatives must re-learn how critical it is to teach our values to our children, to show them how and why conservative ideas have always created the most freedom, security and prosperity for everyone, and how and why liberal-progressive-socialist ideas have only created poverty and slavery wherever and whenever they have been tried or imposed.  We must never assume our children will become conservative by osmosis.

We must wrest control of the American legal system from liberal jurists and law professors.  From the very founding of the Republic, nationalist-minded judges – as opposed to federalist – have subverted the Constitution, unconstitutionally imposing their personal beliefs on the country, passing them off as “constitutional law.”

We must show minorities how conservative values are what truly protect them from political and economic domination and which give them the freedom to take advantage of all the opportunities our nation offers.  The simple fact is Capitalism is the only economic system ever devised which democratizes wealth.  This more than anything else will help put an end to the politics of race.

We must appeal to the young.  They, especially, respond to truth and challenge, no matter their race.  If we show them something worth believing in, worth doing, they will join us.

We must continue to organize and pressure even Republican leaders who agree with us.  The Left is correct about one thing:  change does not happen from the top down but from the bottom up.  And if the GOP is to return to its roots and survive as a viable national political party, it must respond to the will of its conservative base.  The Tea Party movement is a good beginning, but only a beginning.

We must communicate.  Conservatives have finally learned how to take advantage of the internet and new media, tools which helped sweep liberals into power in Washington and around the country.  And while we appear to have learned well, we must never fall behind again.

We must be vigilant.  Norman Thomas, a six-time Socialist Party candidate for President, once said:  “The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism.  But under the name of “liberalism” they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation, without ever knowing how it happened.”

Thomas was right.  Look at the inroads socialism made in the U.S. over the past century.  Readers of Russell Kirk’s classic The Conservative Mind are also quickly impressed – and dismayed – by how much socialism has crept into what now passes for conservative thought.

Despite the outcome of these elections, we must realize the political and cultural war we are fighting will never end.  The hard-core Left will never surrender.  And while traditional conservatives may never be a super-majority of the American public, we will win battle after battle if we are conservatives first, Republicans second:  principles over party.

President Reagan’s 1975 remarks recall others spoken several millennia ago by the Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius:  “The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.”

Harry Beadle is a former News Anchor for the CNN Radio Network.

A friend messaged me after Glenn Beck’s Restoring Honor rally at the Lincoln Memorial, complaining that the various networks just didn’t understand what it was really about.

The Restoring Honor rally was about the personal transformation of the individual (faith, hope and charity), and returning to the founding principles that made America great.  To the networks, it could only be about politics, racism and hatred.