George H. Nash. Reappraising the Right: The Past & Future of American Conservatism. Wilmington: ISI Books, 2009. xix + 446 pp. $27.95, cloth, ISBN 978-1-935191-65-0.

Reviewed by Jason Stahl

Published on H-1960s (March, 2011)

Commissioned by Ian Rocksborough-Smith (University of Toronto / University of the Fraser Valley)

We are now past the time when it could be the past thirty-fve years, he has operated as an suggested that academic historians have failed to “academic without portfolio”--an independent take seriously the American political Right as a scholar who has written prolifcally on the subject movement of historical import as the last twenty of the history of American conservatism. years have seen a proliferation of books and arti‐ His new book, Reappraising the Right, repre‐ cles on the subject. Most interestingly, many of sents a seemingly exhaustive collection of his these academic studies have been written by po‐ scholarly and non-scholarly output over this thir‐ litical historians who would identify personally ty-fve-year career. Through fve parts and thirty- with the liberal/Left but who nevertheless take two chapters consisting of every type of writing their conservative subjects of inquiry seriously as from articles and book chapters to op-eds, lec‐ a political force in American life. However, such tures, book introductions, and even book reviews, serious scholarly inquiry was not always the the editors at the Intercollegiate Studies Institute norm. When George H. Nash frst published his (ISI) have not held back, even when they should book The Conservative Intellectual Movement in have, in presenting the totality of Nash’s career.[1] America since 1945 in 1976, he was something of How does one best characterize this sprawl‐ a lone practitioner in the “feld” of American con‐ ing totality? For the purposes of this review, it is servative history. This academic seclusion was un‐ best to think of Nash’s career in two ways which doubtedly exacerbated by Nash’s own personal stem directly from the title of this book. First, we conservatism, a political identity that placed him have Nash the scholar of American conservatism-- outside the dominant liberal/Left currents in the concerned primarily with The Past of American academy of the mid-seventies. Such a position led Conservatism. This is the Nash who wrote The him immediately out of academia after graduate Conservative Intellectual Movement in America school in 1975 and he has never looked back. For H-Net Reviews since 1945 and many of the essays in this book. wants to create a present and future conservative This Nash is insightful, nuanced, and steeped in movement and no one should begrudge him this the historiography of American conservatism. He fact. However, the essays in this volume that is a superb storyteller and someone who can serve this purpose are fatter possibly because make you truly understand individuals, their mo‐ they are by their very nature designed to fatter. tivations, and their philosophies even if you do They only sometimes challenge conservative per‐ not agree with them politically. ceptions of themselves and thus are much less nu‐ Second, we have Nash the conservative politi‐ anced, and much more interested in creating con‐ cal activist--concerned with The Future of Ameri‐ servative “heroes,” than the essays in the volume can Conservatism. In his career as an indepen‐ produced by the more “scholarly Nash.” dent scholar Nash has been supported by a now It is with this “frst Nash” that I will begin. If frmly entrenched conservative institutional net‐ there is a unifying thesis to Nash’s historical work--what Nash himself calls in many essays in scholarship it is that postwar American conser‐ this book an institutional “conservative counter‐ vatism is best seen as a coalition of fve distinct culture.” This book itself is published by ISI, a impulses. From the mid-1940s to the 1960s, liber‐ longstanding conservative institution and pub‐ tarians, traditionalists, and anticommunists made lisher. Many of the essays contained in the book up this coalition. In the 1970s, two more impulses were originally published by conservative think were added with the addition of neoconservatives tanks, magazines, journals, and publishing hous‐ and the interfaith Religious Right. Thus, Nash’s es. In a strange way, Nash’s career has nearly par‐ historical scholarship often returns to the devel‐ alleled the rise of this institutional counterculture opment of these varying strands; their arguments and it has provided him the resources to sustain a with one another; and fnally, how they were able career as an intellectual outside of academia. to overcome divisions and create a cohesive con‐ Thus, in such a position, Nash has functioned as servative movement. the preeminent conservative historian of conser‐ Of the fve parts of this book, part 3 is the vatism--one who helps conservatives in the clear stand out as an efort of historical scholar‐ present form their identities for the future by pre‐ ship. Entitled “Conservatism and the American senting them with an accessible past. This Nash, Jewish Community,” part 3 contains three essays the conservative political activist, is equally on that shine light on less well-known aspects of the display in this volume in shorter essays almost conservative coalition while at the same time pro‐ solely directed at other conservative activists. viding new interpretations on more familiar ones. Even though, for the purposes of this review, I As to the former, the essay “Jews for Joe Mc‐ am separating these “two Nashes,” it is important Carthy: The Rise and Fall of the American Jewish to qualify my separation. My division is in some League Against Communism,” one of the few pre‐ ways false given that all of Nash’s writing, and the viously unpublished works in the volume, shows writing of any historian, can be seen as both a the ideological power of militant anticommunism scholarly project and a political project--a fact for conservatives in the late 1940s and the 1950s. that we should accept rather than pretend other‐ This was so much the case that it even attracted wise. Additionally, I do not mean to situate the adherents from one of the most reliably liberal second category of conservative political activist constituencies in the United States--American as a disparaging one. Every movement needs a Jews. Through his examination of the American movement historian and Nash performs this role Jewish League Against Communism, Nash shows dutifully. He is clearly a proud conservative who how and why infuential Jews came to be enlisted

2 H-Net Reviews in the fght against communism at home and its more vocal components were perceived to be abroad. Although Nash is careful not to overstate less supportive of Israel. This familiar story is ably the group’s power and infuence, he nevertheless told by Nash in his fnal essay of part 3, “Joining shows it as a small yet vibrant anticommunist the Ranks: Commentary and American Conser‐ thread of the conservative coalition--one that was vatism.” However, in many ways, the story Nash a thorn in the side of liberal American Jewish tells in this section is much more nuanced as he groups and one that helped expose Soviet perse‐ details how and why neoconservatives moved cution of Jews. Most interestingly, the essay ar‐ from critiquing the Left from outside movement gues that the group engendered an extensive de‐ conservatism (in the 1970s) to within movement bate over anti-Semitism in the postwar American conservatism in the 1980s. Nash perceptively ar‐ Right and in broader American culture with Nash gues that there were several barriers neoconser‐ persuasively concluding that the group helped to vatives had to cross in the seventies before they alleviate such sentiments in both areas. “crossed the Rubicon” into the Right (p. 232). Most The next essay in part 3, “Forgotten Godfa‐ important among these were the neoconserva‐ thers: Premature Jewish Conservatives and the tives’ cultural sensibility that the Right was with‐ Rise of National Review,” continues these same out intellectual heft, their enduring liberal policy unique argumentative threads as Nash details attachment to the welfare state, and their hope seven American Jews who were instrumental in that the Democratic Party could be remolded in the development of the central conservative insti‐ their image through such fgures as Daniel Patrick tution of the 1950s, The National Review, and in Moynihan or Henry Jackson. It was only after all helping that journal’s founder, William F. Buckley, three were crossed or dismissed that neoconser‐ purge organized anti-Semitism from the conserva‐ vatives became the ffth strand of the conserva‐ tive movement. In the 1940s and 1950s, all seven tive coalition. moved from various positions of left-wing radical‐ Other standout essays in this volume illumi‐ ism to right-wing radicalism as they became dis‐ nate other known and less well-known aspects of enchanted with both communism and liberalism. Nash’s conservative coalition. In part 1 of the As they began their journey rightward, all seven book, “Conservatism Reappraised: Traditions, In‐ were secular and downplayed their Jewish identi‐ stitutions, Books, People,” two stand out in this re‐ ty. Most interestingly, as they made their journey gard. First, “The Place of Willmore Kendall in from left to right, four of the seven became afli‐ American Conservatism” interprets the infuence ated with the Catholic Church. Nash argues per‐ of a less well-known conservative intellectual of suasively that this had to do with the continuity the ffties and sixties--Willmore Kendall. Kendall, and anticommunism of the Catholic Church as who was senior editor at National Review for well as the “distinctive cultural environment” of eight years, was somewhat ignored in his own The National Review (p. 222). However, none time and in the present because of his early death made the journey toward rediscovery of their Ju‐ (in 1967) and because he was a scholar who pro‐ daism--Orthodox or otherwise. duced essays and reviews as opposed to books. Such was obviously not the case for neocon‐ However, Nash convincingly argues that his icon‐ servatives in the 1970s for whom their personal oclastic conservatism, his role as the “Great Dis‐ Judaism, or rediscovery of it, was much more im‐ senter,” is ultimately what inhibited his signif‐ portant. Jewish neoconservatives were ardent cance in the overall movement (p. 64). Here was a Zionists who began a break with the liberal/Left man who did not ft neatly in any of Nash’s coali‐ in the late sixties as it radicalized and as some of tion strands. As a devotee of John Maynard Keynes, he rejected libertarianism outright and he

3 H-Net Reviews disliked the dourness and Eurocentric nature of Although the quotation is attributed to someone conservative traditionalists. He ft most comfort‐ else, one cannot escape the fact that Nash is in ably in the anticommunist wing of the coalition, agreement. but even there his advocacy of “preventive war” This is a small quibble, but the second con‐ against communist countries put him well outside cern is larger as Nash is somewhat incapable of the mainstream, even in the anticommunist wing forthrightly discussing the racial implications of of the movement. In the end, Nash convincingly Weaver’s ideas--and the racial component of the argues that his greatest legacies to the movement, conservative coalition more generally. Posthu‐ those still most evident today, were his distinctly mously, several of Weaver’s writings were used to American conservative populism and his idea of support southern segregation. While this is ac‐ the conservative movement as engaged in a politi‐ knowledged, Nash will only go so far as to say that cal and policy battle against liberalism. such a development was a precursor of the so- If Kendall was an early developer of conser‐ called paleoconservative movement of the 1980s. vative populism, Richard Weaver was its elitist. However, why not, as other scholars have shown, Weaver is the subject of the other standout essay place anti-civil rights and anti-integration orga‐ in part 1, “The Infuence of Richard Weaver’s nizing as another part of the conservative coali‐ Ideas Have Consequences on American Conser‐ tion in the forties, ffties, sixties, and even seven‐ vatism.” Nash persuasively shows that Weaver ties (for more on the relationship between post‐ was instrumental in the development of the intel‐ war conservatism, race, and anti-civil rights ac‐ lectual foundations of conservative traditional‐ tivism, see Dan T. Carter, The Politics of Rage: ism, particularly its Southern Agrarian variety, George Wallace, the Origins of the New Conser‐ through the publication of infuential books, espe‐ vatism, and the Transformation of American Poli‐ cially his Ideas Have Consequences (1948). In his tics [2000]; Joseph Crespino, In Search of Another almost wholesale personal and philosophical re‐ Country: Mississippi and the Conservative Coun‐ jection of modernity, Weaver comfortably called terrevolution [2009]; Kevin M. Kruse, White for a civilized aristocracy and a healthy distrust of Flight: Atlanta and the Making of Modern Conser‐ the middle class. In this way, he was often at intel‐ vatism [2007]; and Matthew Lassiter, The Silent lectual war with the libertarian wing of the con‐ Majority: Suburban Politics in the Sunbelt South servative coalition until his death in 1963. [2006])? Nash’s coalition quite conspicuously does In these more thought-provoking scholarly es‐ not do this and his essays rarely discuss the issue says of the volume, Nash is only occasionally of race in conservative postwar political organiz‐ overcome by his sympathy for his subjects of in‐ ing. A complete rendering of the conservative quiry. Nash’s own personal conservatism seems to movement in the postwar period would have to have been most afected by Weaver, so it is not contain a more forthright discussion of the role of surprising that his afnity for his subject comes race in conservative coalition building. through in this essay (for Nash’s personal feelings Beyond this major omission, however, Nash’s on Weaver, see chapter 32, “How Firm a Founda‐ articulation of the fve impulses of the conserva‐ tion? The Prospects for American Conservatism” tive movement rings true. He ably describes their [pp. 355-356]). This afnity twice overwhelms points of disagreement, but, more important, he Nash’s analysis, frst when he notes that one of also is able to delineate how and why the coali‐ the three reasons Weaver was signifcant in the tion was able to coalesce at diferent points in the formation of postwar American conservatism was postwar period. In many of the essays he agrees simply that he “was a ‘remarkable’ man” (p. 98). with the historiographic consensus that a shared

4 H-Net Reviews anticommunism and antiliberalism provided the and Francis Graham Wilson--as well as the entire necessary “coalition glue” in the forties and ffties. second part on Buckley and the National Review-- In other essays, he relates the well-known devel‐ serve much the same “hero production” function. opment of conservative “fusionism” around Buck‐ All, in their own way, were rebels against liberal‐ ley and The National Review. Finally, he returns to ism/socialism/communism and you (“you” the Ronald Reagan’s presidency in multiple essays in present-day conservative) need to be a rebel as order to forward the argument that Reagan, as a well! There is a whole vibrant conservative coun‐ movement conservative himself, was able to “em‐ terculture for you to participate in (see the chap‐ body all [fve conservative] impulses simultane‐ ters on think tanks and Hillsdale College)! Again, ously” (p. 345). The most interesting of these es‐ it is not a problem that Nash has ably served this says occurs in part 5 of the book, “Wither Conser‐ role in the conservative movement. Movements vatism?” In the essay “Ronald Reagan’s Legacy need their heroes and their historians of these he‐ and American Conservatism,” Nash shows not roes. However, historians of the Right will fnd lit‐ only how Reagan was able to perform this “em‐ tle new historical ground broken in the essays blematic and ecumenical function,” but also how that are written in this vein. conservatives have worked to keep that connec‐ Nevertheless, Nash the conservative political tive function in place after Reagan left ofce (p. activist clearly has worries about the current state 345). and future of the conservative movement and it is In showing the importance of a deceased in the essays where he lets these worries surface president in the formation of modern conserva‐ that this “second Nash” can be quite interesting tive identities, Nash attempts to argue that this “is and perceptive. It is clear that Nash’s biggest fears little more than a right wing equivalent of the lib‐ revolve around the fve-part conservative coali‐ eral cult of John F. Kennedy’s Camelot” (p. 341). tion he has charted through his work. These fears However, I know of no present-day liberal who take on two main manifestations: “crack-up” and engages in constant “Kennedy nostalgia” in the “cocooning.” same way Reagan is regularly invoked by conser‐ These fears are best expressed in two chap‐ vative activists and politicians. No, there is some‐ ters in part 5 of the book, “Whither Conser‐ thing deeper going on here and it is directly relat‐ vatism.” In chapter 30, “The Uneasy Future of able to the “second Nash”--the conservative politi‐ American Conservatism,” presented at a confer‐ cal activist--that we see in this collection of essays. ence at a conservative university in February As I said at the beginning of this review, it is this 2006, Nash delineates his worries of a possible Nash who helps conservatives in the present form conservative “crack-up” of the fve-part coalition. their identities for the future by presenting them Here he argues perceptively that past “fusers” of with an accessible past. the coalition--Buckley’s National Review, Reagan, The main way Nash creates this accessible and the Cold War--were either no longer available past is through fat “hero narratives” for conser‐ for fusion or were not as authoritatively situated vatives to emulate in the present and future. Rea‐ as they once were. Additionally, but less persua‐ gan is the essential hero in this regard as he sively, Nash argues that the presidency of George forged the fve-part conservative coalition into a W. Bush presented an “internal challenge” to the genuine political juggernaut. However, the chap‐ cohesiveness of the conservative coalition (p. 332). ters on John Chamberlain, Whittaker Chambers, Nash argues that this occurred because some of John East, Friedrich Hayek, Russell Kirk, Forrest Bush’s policies angered certain elements of the McDonald, E. Victor Milone, Ernest van den Haag, coalition--particularly libertarians. However,

5 H-Net Reviews even Nash seems to eventually concede that this into a possible negative as conservatives can sus‐ internal challenge was basically small and not in‐ tain a movement but not build a wider one. As an fuential as “the seriousness of the terrorist threat, intellectual, this seems to trouble Nash the most. and the stridency and near hysteria of the anti‐ As a historian, one would guess, he also notices war Left, have done much to suppress any incli‐ the distinct similarity of this occurrence to the nation on the right to defect from the man in the sectarian Left of the seventies. His fnal admoni‐ White House” (p. 334). In other words, terrorism tion, that to achieve conservative goals “we must had replaced communism as a new “movement communicate in language that connects not only fuser” while antiliberalism/anti-leftism could still, with our own coterie but with the great majority as it always had, function as another form of fu‐ of the American people” as well could have just as sion. Nash seems on frmer ground in this inter‐ easily been spoken by a liberal Democrat to the pretation. Additionally, and perceptively, Nash Left in 1972 (p. 365). notes that by 2006 the movement had become In short, then, the two sides of Nash have “thoroughly institutionalized” and thus would not much to teach us about the past and future of be going anywhere anytime soon (p. 335). American conservatism. Nash the scholar, even in However, by the fnal essay in the book, “How his older work, continues to illuminate darkened Firm a Foundation? The Prospects for American corners of the postwar conservative coalition Conservatism,” Nash seems slightly less sure of while Nash the conservative political activist can the movement’s future. Written in October 2008 sometimes ofer trenchant critiques of conser‐ on the eve of Barack Obama’s election, he reiter‐ vatism from within the movement. Both have ates his fears of a conservative “crack-up.” Once their place and this volume showcases the best of again, he argues that the movement has strong each. enough roots and a powerful enough “enemy on Note the Left” to hold it together (p. 362). Additionally, [1]. The most conspicuous area where this is the movement can now put President Bush be‐ the case is in part 4 of the book, “Herbert Hoover: hind it--who, incidentally, Nash absurdly helps to A Neglected Conservative Sage?” While Nash has characterize as a “liberal Republican administra‐ written extensively on Hoover in the past, includ‐ tion” (p. 358). In this way, liberalism and Republi‐ ing his three-volume biography and his 1987 book canism are at fault but conservatism as a philoso‐ Herbert Hoover and Stanford University, the bulk phy is left unharmed. Additionally, a new Reagan‐ of this section is an essay regarding the political ite “fuser” of the movement had emerged in the relationship between Calvin Coolidge and person of Sarah Palin, who Nash argues aroused Hoover--an essay that has very little, if anything, “an intensity not felt on the American Right since to do with the past or future of American conser‐ the presidential campaign of Barry Goldwater” vatism. The other three essays in this section are (pp. 362-363). interesting and attempt to discuss Hoover’s con‐ But this same essay also adds a new fear for servatism, but ultimately they are too short to car‐ conservatives beyond the possibility of a “crack- ry the intellectual weight of the entire part of the up.” This fear is that conservatives, through their book. This reviewer would have liked to see this media and institutions, will “cocoon” themselves part, along with some of the book’s extremely of from wider American culture and society (p. short pieces--book reviews, book introductions, 365). In other words, the development of a conser‐ etc.--cut for brevity and cohesiveness. George H. vative counterculture--in think tanks, talk radio, Nash, The Life of Herbert Hoover, vols. 1-3 (New Fox News, and right-wing blogs--has been turned York: Norton, 1983, 1988, 1996); and George H.

6 H-Net Reviews

Nash, Herbert Hoover and Stanford University (Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, 1987).

If there is additional discussion of this review, you may access it through the network, at https://networks.h-net.org/h-1960s

Citation: Jason Stahl. Review of Nash, George H. Reappraising the Right: The Past & Future of American Conservatism. H-1960s, H-Net Reviews. March, 2011.

URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=31209

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.

7