Conservative paradigm?

There is a very good article in The American Thinker by Steven M. Warshawsky commenting on the piece by Jeffrey Lord in the American Spectator:

In yesterday’s American Spectator, Jeffrey Lord argued that ”[e]lections are about paradigms, not presidents,” and predicts that Republicans won’t lose control of Congress this year because a “conservative paradigm” currently exists in this country and

“America is not about to sign on to a new liberal paradigm of high taxes, illegal immigration, appeasement, and judicial activism.”

Mr. Warshawsky questions Mr. Lord’s assertion that there is a “conservative paradigm” in this country. Here is a sample of his reasoning:

What does Mr. Lord identify as the major elements of the previous liberal paradigm?
”[A] massive housing program, aid to education, health care, support for farmers, an increase in the minimum wage, and more civil rights legislation.”
Does any of this sound familiar? It should, because it still reflects the heart of the domestic political agenda: public housing programs and massive government subsidies of the private housing industry, an ever-increasing federal role in primary and secondary education, the ever-expanding reach of Medicare and related health insurance programs (steadily moving towards socialized medicine), continued wasteful agricultural subsidies and special-interest legislation of all types (recall the “bridge to nowhere”), a constant push to raise the minimum incomes of lower wage earners (whether through minimum wage laws or tax subsidies), and, always, more and more “rights” and “affirmative action” for women, racial and ethnic minorities, and now sexual minorities (see, e.g., recent Supreme Court decisions on homosexual sodomy and affirmative action in college admissions).

I have heard this idea put forward before in Libertarian circles. It is said that all “conservatives” today are interested in conserving is past liberal gains.

I would disagree with Mr. Warshawsky’s contention that no progress has been made on the question of abortion on demand. Public opinion has tipped in favor of placing restrictions on abortion and I believe that whatever the outcome of the next election we will soon see cracks forming in the edifice of legalized abortion. Continued Republican control of the Senate and White House will help this process along as originalist Justices are appointed.

However his main point is well taken. Consider this:

The Left has been exceptionally effective at moving people towards its positions, by making the most radical ideas—e.g., gay marriage—seem a question of simple human fairness and decency. So while most Americans oppose gay marriage, it’s a “soft” opposition. Voters may vote for ballot initiatives (as we saw in 2004)—but will they support affirmative steps to change the constitution or impeach wayward judges or engage in civil disobedience, etc.? No, they won’t. So the Left succeeds by persuading a few judges or local officials to take that next step, and it nudges the rest of us along. Moving in the opposite direction becomes almost impossible to do. Abortion is another perfect example of this phenomenon, where even partial birth abortion is not heinous enough to mobilize large majorities in opposition to it. The same goes for affirmative action: unpopular but still with us. I believe that liberalism continues to be the default mode in this country.

He concludes that unless conservatives begin to fight for their ideals “America will continue down the same liberal path leading to socialism at home, weakness abroad, and the end of both the American Dream and the American Century.”

I tend to agree.