Talk:Old Right (United States)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Hoover

Hoover was a conservative, not a liberal. RJII 07:44, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Hoover called himself a [classical] liberal. He and Robert A. Taft were not finally reconciled to the conservative label

until 1948. Green, Shaping Political Consciousness, 113, 224. Rjensen 07:47, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

He might have called himself a liberal, but he wasn't one. Hoover was very much an interventionist. The Republican Party were the interventionists/conservatives. The Democratic Party were the liberals --until Roosevelt changed that. RJII 07:51, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Regardless, do you even have a source that he was one of the "Old Right"? RJII 07:52, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
HH in 1920: "If the Republican party . . . adopts a forward-looking, liberal, constructive platform on the treaty and on our economic issues and if the party proposes measures for sound business administration of the country; and is neither reactionary or radical in its approach to our great domestic questions . . . I will give it my entire support. " in The Politics of American Individualism: Herbert Hoover in Transition, 1918-1921 by Gary Dean Best 1975. Page 78. Rjensen 07:55, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
HH was probably the most articulate opponent of the New Deal 1933 onward. Isn't that Old Right enough? Rjensen 07:59, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Sure, he was an opponent of the new deal, but he certainly wasn't an opponent of economic interventionism and protectioniosm. He definitely wasn't a classical liberal. RJII 08:01, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Rothbard counts Hoover as Old Right. [Rothbard counts him see

[1]] --note that Robert Taft was a disciple of Hoover....how can you split them? Rjensen 08:06, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Rothbard says that Hoover is included in the "former statists and progressives." RJII 08:09, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Keep in mind that people changed positions. I'm sure you'd have supported Hoover 98% in 1933-40.  :) Is your list comprised of people who never in their lifetimes changed? it would be very short indeed. Rjensen 08:10, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Sure he changed, but he didn't change into a classical liberal. RJII 08:11, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Note that Roosevelt also portrayed himself as a liberal in his campaign, but it turned out he was a big government conservative. No one today considers him a classical liberal. Maybe you can find someone calling Hoover a classical liberal, but if so, they're very misguided. RJII 08:16, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
were there ANY politicians you consider members of the Old Right? Rjensen 08:33, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Hoover was not Old Right by any stretch of the imagination. [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] Josh 02:15, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] keep OLD LEFT out of this article

This fellow Richman is a journalist not a historian. Norman Thomas was the head of the Socialist party and LaFollette was a strong supporter of New Deal. Call them right???? In fact quite a few leftists were isolationists in 1940 (John L Lewis, Charles Beard). Rjensen 03:34, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Sheldon Richman is well qualified to comment. The "Old Right" is not just the right. That's the point. Classical liberals were the Left, but they are considered to be in the Old Right as well. RJII 03:39, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
LaFollette and Thomas were far left socialists. They were NOT classical liberals--no one has ever called them that. Thomas was head of the Socialist party for decades, for example. There were many people on the left who were isolationists--let's not sign them up for the right just yet.Rjensen 03:43, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
I know they weren't classical liberals. I was just giving the example that "Old Right" isn't just the right-wing. RJII 03:44, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Again, it doesn't matter whether you or I agree with him. His article is in a peer-reviewed journal. You shouldn't delete it. RJII 04:00, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
First of all mistakes are never acceptable in Wiki, even if they appear in peer reviewed journals. In this case Richman published the essay in the journal while he worked for the journal -- that is not peer review. But the point is that Old Rightism was strongly opposed to socialism and collectivism, as represented by LaFollette and Thomas. Richman does not say they belonged to the Old Right, only that they were fellow isolationists. (He does not spend more than a sentence on the two of them--so this can hardly be called a reliable source about LaFollette or Thomas. There are full books on each, that make the point they were far left. Rjensen 04:43, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Ok, I'll give it to you, since he just says they "felt at home in the Old Right." It's not clear that he's saying they were part of the Old Right. Norman Thomas was in the America First Committee with members of the Old Right --maybe this is what he's talking about. RJII 22:01, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Gop-plank.JPG

Image:Gop-plank.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] paleoconservative

Though paleoconservativism has incorporated much of old-right ideology, they are not exactly the same and represent two different cultural streams. It is best to say that paleocons perceive themselves as best representing the tradition of the old right, rather than to say that they are synonymous. Old Righters are not as focused on "Western Culture" as on America per se. They were less overtly religious in their self-identity (though recognized the debt they owed to their religious heritage) and did not preach about social morality nad personal habits. They were for small government and were unified by a laissez faire economic vision. Paleocons are not necessarily small-gvt people and are not necessarily unfied by an economic vision. Today Old-righters are probably best seen as some Libertarian-leaning conservatives or conservative leaning libertarians. 71.249.39.31 (talk) 04:18, 9 March 2008 (UTC)Shigaon