Are the “Right” and “Left” Useful Distinctions?

Everyone from mainstream conservatives, died-in-the-wool paleocons, and anarcho-libertarians participate in the American Conservative’s symposium on whether conservatism and liberalism (right and left) are still meaningful and concrete distinctions? John Lukacs, John Derbyshire, Heather MacDonald, Taki, and many others make an appearance. It’s noticably more thoughtful and cerebral than some of the pablum coming from the once great National Review. I’ve yet to tackle all the articles, but I like this point by Heather MacDonald; it reminds me of my own alienation from the “Religious RIght” even though I consider myself both religious and a man of the right:

Upon leaving office in November 2004, Attorney General John Ashcroft thanked his staff for keeping the country safe since 9/11. But the real credit, he added, belonged to God. Ultimately, it was God’s solicitude for America that had prevented another attack on the homeland.

Many conservatives hear such statements with a soothing sense of approbation. But others—count me among them—feel bewilderment, among much else. If God deserves thanks for fending off assaults on the United States after 9/11, why is he not also responsible for allowing the 2001 hijackings to happen in the first place?

Skeptical conservatives—one of the Right’s less celebrated subcultures—are conservatives because of their skepticism, not in spite of it. They ground their ideas in rational thinking and (nonreligious) moral argument. And the conservative movement is crippling itself by leaning too heavily on religion to the exclusion of these temperamentally compatible allies.

To this, I can only say, Amen.