The Failure of Vermont Conservatism  
By Nathan West

The 2000 legislative election in Vermont has long been heralded by conservatives as a partial success that was ultimately squandered.  Whether this view is a truthful assessment of the facts can be debated, however I doubt any informed conservative would debate the fact that since that election the Right has failed to replicate its 2000 victory.

This begs the question of why that replication has not been a possibility.  To indict "moderate" or "liberal" Republicans or to cite the seemingly insurmountable success of progressive Vermont elements ignores the central fact that the failure of conservatism is, to put it plainly, the result of a lost opportunity  stemming from a lack of historical consciousness, a historical consciousness that other conservative activists, thinkers, and leaders have tapped into.  The reason for this is that the conservative movement in Vermont has ignored the historical model of the national conservative movement, an error that has caused cultural and political failures, something most glaringly apparent in the aftermath of the 2000 legislative election.

Before an assessment of the failures of the conservative movement in Vermont can be made an overview of the development of the national conservative movement is in order.  To begin with, after World War II the American Republic  was situated politically in a sphere of progressive democratic socialism, a sphere the larger populace was comfortable and content with.  Out of this progressive complacency emerged a series of voices highly critical of the post-New Deal consensus.  These voices were intellectual forefathers of the modern American conservative movement.  In works such as The Road to Serfdom (1944) by F. A. Hayek, Ideas Have Consequences (1948) by Richard Weaver, and The Conservative Mind (1953) by Russell Kirk the prevailing progressive ethos was challenged, laying the seeds in the 1940's and 1950's for future political successes.  This period of in the history of the national conservative movement can be referred to as the "intellectual development" phase.

Following this phase (a development that in truth has continued ever since), a new phase of the national conservative movement began.  William F. Buckley, Jr. sparked this new period, or what can be referred to as the "institutional development" phase, with the founding of National Review, a magazine that united disparate traditionalist, libertarian, and anti-communist elements.  In addition to National Review, other periodicals were founded, including Human Events (1944), Modern Age (1957), The Alternative (later The American Spectator) (1967) as well as conservative organizations such as the Mont Pelerin Society, the Foundation for Economic Education, the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, the Young Americans for Freedom, Regnery Publishing, the Philadelphia Society, and the American Conservative Union.  This phase was instrumental in cementing the foundation that men like Hayek, Weaver, and Kirk laid down.

The final period can be called the "electoral development" phase, where with the new conservative counter-establishment  firmly in place, candidates for president such as Sen. Barry Goldwater and Gov. Ronald Reagan carried the conservative banner.  In 1964 Goldwater was able to gain the GOP nomination because he had an active and vibrant movement behind him.  Four years later Ronald Reagan was able to tap into that same movement and did so again in 1976 and 1980, where ultimately his efforts led to presidential success.

It has been said that Ruth Dwyer was "Vermont's Goldwater," a catchy phrase but an incorrect assessment of her role in the conservative movement in Vermont.  Barry Goldwater had National Review and numerous conservative thinkers, activists, and organizations  behind his 1964 presidential bid.  Ruth Dwyer had the Take Back Vermont movement and a host of disgruntled Vermont voters.  The two are not comparable.  After all, prior  to Dwyer's run where was Vermont's version of The Road to Serfdom or The Conservative Mind?  Where was Vermont's National Review or the proliferation of united conservative public policy organizations that comprise a counter-establishment?

The truth of the matter is that Vermont conservatism has intellectuals but has not had an "intellectual development" phase.  It has institutions but has only had a tepid "institutional development" phase.  Skipping intellectual and institutional development, the movement (if it ever really was one) coalesced around a populist quasi-New Right that was issue-oriented and lacked a coherent grounding in conservative philosophy.  How many of the quasi-New Right leaders of the Take Back Vermont movement had ever ready anything by Hayek, Weaver, or Kirk? How many new the history of the national conservative movement and played a role in it?  How many were veterans of YAF and ISI and subscribed not only to the major weekly and monthlies, but read the more philosophical quarterlies?  How many even cared?

Furthermore, with no apparent historical and philosophical grounding, how did the Vermont New Right expect to translate anti-civil union animus and an ugly populist hysteria into a sustainable electoral strategy?  The truth is they couldn't and despite the anti-progressive, anti-establishment candidacies of Ruth Dwyer and a short-lived victory in the House in 2000, they wouldn't.  They underestimated the liberal wing of the GOP, the power of the progressive Left, and the attention span of the average Vermont voter.

Once the election was over the conservative coalition devolved into squabbling turf wars and soon the most recognizable element of the Vermont Right were the stirrings and twitches of a slow and painful political death.  Having no foundation, the disparate camps stewed in their juices and blamed betrayal from Walt Freed and the House Leadership instead of looking at their own selves.  To this day the failures of Vermont conservatism has not been grasped and until it is electoral success will be elusive and conservative ideas will continue to bear withered fruit.
 

N. P. West is a former congressional campaign staffer who in 1998 and 2000 worked as a volunteer for the Ruth Dwyer gubernatorial campaigns.  He is the moderator of the Lyceum Society of Vermont and resides in Rutland County.