White Protestant Nation: The Rise of the American Conservative Movement

Allan Lichtman renders forth a dense, sophisticated, non-judgmental treatment of the phenomenon that most makes American culture, American. It is the "cultural mime" lying at the core of the nation's meaning, the American Conservative Movement. This movement is a virtual Gestalt of ominous, self-serving, immoral, greed-based and ruthless, fragments, strewn across American history and across the American heartland. And although one of its key components is religion, due primarily to it, the American DNA still clearly reveals a missing morally legitimate dimension. But worse (and this is what is most scary about the American Conservative Movement), is the fact that Lichtman's book reveals that this unbridled existential beast roams about virtually unchallenged and lacks the ability for even a semblance of self-correction. It does this all the while it carries forth the mantle and the shield of everything that is supposed to be American. In short, the American Conservative Movement has commandeered and arrogated unto itself, calling its own, the entire symbolic machinery of the nation: To be patriotic, to be freedom loving, to be anti-Communist, to be capitalist Wasp, to be moral, indeed to be pro-American, is now taken for granted that one must be an American Conservative. Thus, in no small way Lichtman's book is the voice in our heads telling us what we already are "pretending not to know" about our own country: that American culture propelled mostly by the American Conservative Movement, has always been firmly rooted in Fascist soil, and that with its not so well-disguised veneer of pseudo-religious and capitalist rationalizations, its racial myths, justifications and cover stories, underneath is a much scarier picture of little more than a home-grown plutocracy covered with a collection of Fascist elements (racism, anti-pluralism, sexism, anti-evolutionism, anti-abortionism, etc.) hurling off course into an uncharted orbit towards full-fledged Fascism. Anyone who doubts that this is so, should do a Goggle search on the phrase "American Fascism." This book puts the phenomenon of Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Bill O'Rielly and the like, into frightening historical context. But it is the other implications that also run along in the subtext that are even more disturbing: that the "would be corrective mechanism," liberalism, is not just worse than conservatism, but much, much worse. Liberalism, the ad hoc reaction to conservatism, whose sole existence seems only to be to keep conservatism in check, has failed miserably. For unlike conservatives who are certain about their reasons for existing (no matter how immoral those reasons may be), liberals are confused about their own reason for being. Thus the meaning of liberalism remains shadowy empty and hollow. It is less a movement than an ad hoc assemblage of angst-ridden, hand-wringing, worry warts. Unless, ultra or radical conservatism raises its ugly head, liberals just sit on their

This history of the evangelical Christian movement in the twentieth century is an important contribution to understanding both the recent political arena and the culture wars. It approaches history with a decided present-tense interest in helping to explain current issues. Author Allan J. Lichtman, professor of history at American University in Washington, D.C., demonstrates how conservative religious traditions coalesced in the first half of the twentieth century around issues of morality and society ranging from marriage patterns to economic priorities. The author's assertion that this was born out of the split between the modernists and the traditionalists is not new, but his positioning of the movement in the context of a larger pro-business, mainly Protestant, coalition of interests is path breaking. Moreover, the rise of intellectuals and financiers such as J. Howard Pew, Frank Gannett, the Du Ponts, William F. Buckley, and William Kristol gave power to the movement beyond its insular borders as never before in the last half century. These various groups and individuals disagreed with each other on many issues but were united in their hatred of the modern welfare state put into place in successive Democratic administrations between the 1930s and the 1960s and built a network of organizations to resist what they considered the evils both of social engineering and federal power. They used oftentimes misplaced fears of immigration, race relations, and sexual politics as triggers to create powerful political organizations. "White Protestant Nation" offers a well-reasoned, excellently and entertainingly written history of the rise of conservative political power.

WHITE PROTESTANT NATION: THE RISE OF THE AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT is a full history of the modern conservative movement from its beginnings in the 1920s to current issues affecting its status and well-being. A political analysis blends with a social history and even analysis of the economic forces shaping the movement, making for a key acquisition for any library strong in either American history or social issues. Diane C. Donovan California Bookwatch

I've been curious for many years. We can talk about various economic or political systems as if they're acceptable. But one about which we cannot speak without being treated like we've used inappropriate language is "Communism." It struck me that the "conservatives" must have a pretty powerful platform since we can't even talk about that concept except negatively. This volume I read not long after completing Alan Dawley's "Struggles for Justice," while listening to David Halberstram's "The Coldest Winter: American and the Korean War," and while reading a fine article by Thomas Frank in "Harper's" magazine about the neo-cons in today's government. Combined, they paint a fairly clear picture of the "evolution" of American conservatism. The book is set up both chronologically and thematically; one can see the "evolution" (thought some might think of is as devolution) of America's right wing throughout the years. And that mix made the book compelling. The book's first chapter is entitled "The Birth of the Modern Right: 1920 - 1928." Conventional wisdom seems to attribute the beginning of the "modern right" to the era of Goldwater, but Lichtman thinks it took place quite a bit earlier. This was the post-WWI era. During that war, Americans had to be stimulated by the Creel Commission, or Committee on Public Information to despise the heathen Huns (Germans). After the war, that zeal went against the bomb-throwing Bolsheviks. And this was the era of Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge. What the "right" feared later took place when Franklin Roosevelt was elected. Lichtman seems to make clear--as have other authors--that Roosevelt wasn't some red-flag waving socialist. (Indeed, years ago I researched an article on Social Security in which I learned that Roosevelt used that and other economic benefits to sustain the system, not destroy it!) But by the time of Roosevelt's election, the anti-Communist fervor had been thoroughly institutionalized. So it was, indeed, used by many on the "right" to discredit the New Deal. Subsequent to that experiment were born institutions like the John Birch Society and other far-right organizations which had credibility for a while. Interestingly, by the way, when the book covers the Goldwater era, the author suggests that after Goldwater's defeat was when the right decided to regroup and rethink its strategy. A name that came up many, many times in the book was J. Howard Pew. His foundation helped to fund many a right wing cause throughout much of the 20th century. (Indeed, without that foundation, many of such causes wouldn't have been able to survive). And the theme structure of the book led into later in the century, I think it was during the 70s, that many more foundations became the backbone of the right. Two that come to mind are Scaife and Bradley. Another "theme" that evolved was the right's use of "think tanks." The American Enterprise Institute had been somewhat of a think tank earlier in the century. But,

Because of the provocative title, I at first thought that this was one of those in-your-face political harangues that populate the front tables of bookstores. However I quickly found that this was a serious, scholarly study of American conservative thought (and action) in the 20th century. I think Lichtman is on to something. I had read Sean Wilentz'z "The Rise of American Democracy" a few months ago and this book seems that it could have been a good companion. I guess the central thesis that could be argued is that America was founded as a democracy, albeit a democracy only for white, anglo, Protestant, property-owning heterosexual males. Much of the dynamics of American culture and politics in both the 19th and 20th centuries has been both the attempt to expand this definition of democratic government and the resulting response to defend and/or restore the status quo. This really highlights how much the "idea" of America is a highly politically contested concept. The strength of Lichtman's book is how he shows the continued line of conservative thinking from the 1920 (which was sort of a reset point for American conservatives after the upheavals of the Progressive Era and internationalism of Wilson) to the present. His discussion of the role of the woman's vote was very enlightening, showing how that otherwise conservative men supported woman's vote as a counterweight to the growing immigrant voting population. For me the whole discussion of the pre- 1970s conservative movement is the major strength of the book. Now for the book's drawbacks. Lichtman seems to have fallen to the dreaded graduate student vice of "pump and dump," that is "pumping" as much data and historical information as possible from the archives and other historical sources and then "dumping" it all into the text. As a result. The read is hit with pages of detailed accounts of numerous characters, events and publications. This seems to be work ok when he is talking about the 1920s and the 1930s and the focus of his "White Protestant Nation" theme is clear, but the closer he gets to the present, the more the details seem to muddy the analysis. Because of his emphasis on the details, there is a certain loss of focus and context in his analysis. For example the McCarthy anti-red campaign is only given cursory treatment. As he gets closer to the present, it only gets worse and his treatment of the Reagan era is at best a chronology. Still, in spite of these drawbacks, the books is a valuable historical study that should become part of standard literature about American politics.