Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee onrnimmigration is Senator Spencer Abraham,rnwho refuses to countenance any effortrnto reduce immigration; and the greatrnfear within the Beltway right is that byrneven mentioning immigration, the Repubhcansrnwill alienate the Hispanicrnvote —a concern that tends to confirmrnMiddle American perceptions that politicalrnelites are allied with an underclassrnagainst the middle class. Hence, therntrend of thought within the RepublicanrnPartv and among its Beltway strategists isrnthat the Republicans should do nothingrnwhatsoever about immigration, exceptrnto restore welfare benefits to immigrantsrnas the Republican Congress did earlierrnthis year.rnIn addition to the immigration issue,rnthere is also the very salient MiddlernAmerican issue of trade policy. I understandrnthis is not just controversial but actuallyrnanathema to most conservatives,rnbut the fact is that last year Buchanan acquiredrnsome of his most impressive voterncounts in areas harmed by current tradernpolicies. Well after Dole had effectivelyrnsecured the nomination in the primaries,rnBuchanan won nearly 34 percent of thernvote in the Michigan and Wisconsin primaries,rnboth states where crossover votingrnis allowed and both manufacturingrnstates now facing economic decline becausernof foreign competition. On thernsame day, March 19, in the 17th congressionalrndistrict of Ohio (Ohio’s MahoningrnValley, also a center of MiddlernAmericans who hold or have held manufacturingrnjobs), Buchanan took 40 percentrnof the vote, again well after Dolernhad effectively won the nomination.rnTrade and economic nationalism, therefore,rnare key Middle American issuesrnthat can help regain for the Republicansrnthe Reagan Democrats forfeited by thern1992 Bush-Quayle and 1996 Dole-rnKemp tickets.rnOnce again. Republicans and mainstreamrnconservatives have blown thesernissues, just as they have immigration.rnClinton was able to enact NAFTA onlyrnwith Republican help, and today hernstands to win passage of fast-hack legislationrnand the extension of NAFTA, againrnwith Republican help. Although pollsrnindicate that 54 percent of the public opposesrnfast track, as do 67 percent of selfidentifiedrnRepublicans, fast track hasrnbeen editorially endorsed by virtually allrnleading conservative newspapers andrnmagazines and by the Republican leadershiprnin Congress, and free trade ideologyrnremains dominant among most conser’rnatives everywhere.rnI could go on with a variet}’ of issuesrnthat are of vital importance to MiddlernAmericans on which Republicans haverneither refused to act or actually come outrnon the other side of—afiFirmahve action;rnSecond Amendment rights; perceivedrnerosion of national sovereignty not onlyrnthrough NAFTA and the World TradernOrganization but also in the enhancementrnof United Nations peacekeepingrnoperations and the continuous, needlessrninvolvement of the United States in foreignrnconflicts irrelevant to our nationalrninterests; and the whole range of culturalrnissues from the failure of the Republicansrnto abolish the National Endowmentrnfor the Arts to the actions against thernConfederate flag by South Carolina RepublicanrnGovernor David Beasley. Onrnissue after issue, the Republicans havernfailed to support Middle Americans. Insteadrnof taking these issues seriously andrntrying to address them, what we hearrnfrom the Republicans is the Beltway policy-rnwonkism of the Contract with America,rnand we are now advised by GOPrnpollster Frank Luntz to avoid all issues,rnto mouth merely sound bites that makernvoters think their concerns are being addressedrnand make them feel good.rnMeanwhile Bill Kristol tells us, in a sentencernworthy of Leonid Brezhnev, thatrnyou cannot love your nation if vou haternits government and, as Mr, Kristol toldrnE.J. Dionne a couple of weeks ago, thatrnconservatives should have no problemrnwith Franklin Roosevelt, John F.rnKennedy, or Lyndon Johnson. With advicernlike that, no wonder there is a conservativerncrack-up, and it would be interestingrnto know why there should be anyrnconservatism at all or why it should everrnhave existed.rnIt is therefore no wonder that GOPrnpresidential candidates lose MiddlernAmerican allegiances and with them alsornlose elections; that we see the emergencernof third party rivals; and that arnfringe is turning to groups like the militias,rntalking seriously about secession,rnand endorsing the most bizarre conspiracyrntheories about the government and itsrnleadership.rnWhat we are seeing in this alienationrnof Middle Americans from mainstreamrnconservatism and the RepublicanrnParty is, in my view, essentially the emergencernof a new paradigm in Americanrnpolitics —not James Pinkerton’s newrnparadigm and not the Third Wave of Mr.rnGingrich, but a paradigm that is essentiallyrnnationalist rather than “right” orrn”left” as we have historically known thosernlabels. Immigration, hade, sovereignty,rnand cultural issues all revolve around nationalrnidentity, and the new shape of politicsrnin the future will see the emergencernof a new nationalism: not Bill Kristol’srnnationalism, which is denuded of allrncontent, but one that will demand thatrnthese issues be addressed. It may not bernPat Buchanan who carries the newrnparadigm to political and cultural power,rnbut someone will. Mainstream conservativesrnand Republicans can either takernup the issues that the Buchanan campaignsrnhave identified or they can ignorernthem, as they have done and are doing,rnand eventually expect to vanish from thernnational political scene. crnLIBERAL ARTSrnFORSAKING ALL OTHERSrnSome Promise Keepers may not be. A recent issue of New Man reports that a surveyrnconducted by the National Center for Fathering in 1996 found that “33 percentrnof men responding at eight different [Promise Keepers] conferences agreedrnwith the statement that they ‘enjoy looking at sexually oriented material’ and 15rnpercent had ‘purchased pornographic material in the past year.”‘rnJANUARY 1998/31rnrnrn