conservative principle; the export ofnglobal democracy as the primary goal ofnAmerican foreign policy; unqualifiednsupport for much of the civil rightsnagenda, unlimited immigration, and freentrade; the defense of one version or anothernof “one-worldism”; enthusiasticnworship of an abstract “opportunity”nand unrestricted economic growthnthrough acquisitive individualism; andnthe adulation of the purported patronnsaints of all these causes in the personsnof Abraham Lincoln and Martin LuthernKing, Jr.nNone of these idols has much to donwith the central task of an authenticnconservatism, which is the survival andnenhancement of a particular people andnits institutionalized cultural expressions.nAll of them are instead universalist bannersnthat can be fluttered by Pakistanisnand Patagonians as easily as by Americans,nand whatever their merits (whichnare very few) they contain nothing tondistinguish those who wave them as anparticular people, a particular nation, orna particular culture. Collectively theynconstitute what Professor Claes Ryn ofnCatholic University has recently callednthe “New Jacobinism,” and it is hardlynaccidental that their more literate exponentsn(such as Allan Bloom) explicitlynand properly root their creed in the Enlightenmentnof the 18th century, an eranthat historically has been repugnant tontraditional conservatism but is intimatelynembraced by the universalist cosmoconservatives.nNor is it surprising that the politicalnleft is enchanted by this redefinition ofnlor ImmediiiU’ Sen irenCHRONICLESnNFAV SLBSCRIBKRSnTOLL FRKK MIMBKRn12/CHRONICLESn1-800-877-5459nthe right in universalist terms, since thenredefinition promises a right that isnphilosophically indistinguishable fromnthe left itself, a right that can sooner ornlater (probably sooner) be pushed to thensame practical political conclusions thatnthe left has reached from the samenpremises, at which point there will benno serious ideological opposition to thenleft and its dominance at all.nHence, both the left and the cosmoconservativesnwere eager to join forcesnin trying to muzzle Mr. Buchanan’sn”New Nationalism” as soon as it begannto bark, for they correctly saw it as anthreat to the cultural uniformity andnhegemony that the left and the universalistnright demand for themselves, and ‘nit was the anti-universalist aspects of Mr.nBuchanan’s message that informed thenmost notorious denunciation of him bynMr. Bennett last winter. Mr. Bennett’snaccusation, in response to a questionnfrom George Will, was provoked by ancolumn by Mr. Krauthammer attackingnMr. Buchanan, and the whole trio ofncosmo-conservatives denounced Mr.nBuchanan’s “flirting with fascism”—thatnis, his assertions of economic nationalism,nhis criticisms of unrestricted immigration,nand his supposed “racism” inncriticizing Israel and defending a foreignnpolicy centered on American nationalninterests. To cosmo-conservatism, this isnprecisely what fascism is, the invocationnof the claims of the particular over thosenof the universal.nIn an earlier column, Mr. Will hadncriticized Mr. Buchanan for failing ton”understand what distinguishes Americannnationality.” “Ours,” Mr. Will intoned,n”is, as the first Republican Presidentnsaid, a nation dedicated to anproposition.” It is the characteristicnproposition of political universalism thatnthe heritage and meaning of historicallyndistinct nations, cultures, and peoplesncan be captured in and by propositionsnthat are universal in their application,nand the rejection of such propositions isnto the universalist mind at best tribalismnand at worst the brick from whichngas chambers are built. The inconvenientnhistorical truth is that genocidenand modern ideological tyranny have farnmore often been the product of universalismnitself, especially its egalitarian incarnations,nthan any assertion of particularistnloyalties and identity.nBut the main threat presented by Mr.nBuchanan and his own tribe was notnmerely their expression of an anti-uni­nnnversalist doctrine and agenda but thenwide appeal these expressions enjoyed.nThe irony of the New Nationalism isnthat its explicit particularist and nationalistnappeal to distinctively MiddlenAmerican values and interests lifts it outnof the ghettos and cloisters that havenbeen the natural habitat of the Americannright since World War II. Mr.nBuchanan suddenly found himselfnspeaking to sympathetic audiences ofnfactory workers, students, and middleincomenvoters whose interest in andncomprehension of the esoterica of conservativenmetaphysics has always been asnminimal as their commitment to thensonorities of the left. For the first timensince the Depression perhaps, therenloomed the prospect of a unified peoplentranscending the artificial and obsoletenframework of right and left and militantlynintent on dislodging the reigningnelites to take power back to their ownnbosoms for their own purposes. Todaynthis is known as “fascism”; it used to bencalled “democracy,” which is the realnreason the left-right establishment is sonfrightened by.it.nYet in the end, for all their lies, therenis not a great deal the incumbent elitesncan do about Buchananism, and theynmust be experiencing much the samenexhilarating emotions that French andnRussian aristocrats enjoyed when theynlistened to the somber sounds of tumbrelsnin the streets of Paris and St. Petersburg.nNo one imagined that theirncampaign of vilification had much politicalnconsequence, and it was mainlynthrough reliance on the natural advantagesnof presidential incumbency thatnthe Buchanan revolution was momentarilynfrustrated.nBut no one should imagine either thatnthe revolution is over. Indeed, Mr.nBuchanan’s presidential campaign wasnonly the opening shot, and whether henruns again or does or does not eventuallynwin the White House, he has unleashedna force in American politics thatncannot be bridled. Its main mission nownis to embark on a long march that willnpopularize and legitimize its claims tonbe the vehicle of a reborn national consciousness,nand that mission is only innpart political in the narrow sense. As angreat global democrat once said, a housendivided against itself cannot stand, andnthe main message of the Middle AmericannRevolution is that the real mastersnof the house are ready to repossess it andndrive out the usurpers.- <£>n