Are MAGA Republicans 'conservatives'?
Defining the true nature of the GOP amid Trump's authoritarianism
Is “conservative” the right word to describe Trump’s Republican Party?
In response to recent posts, some FrameLab readers have rejected the use of the term to describe today’s GOP. Some say a stronger word, like “fascist,” better describes the MAGA cult. Others prefer “reactionary” or “regressive” or “authoritarian.”
These arguments make sense. Under Trump, the Republican Party has broken most political norms and clearly entered an extreme phase. Trump’s popularity with the party’s base, which only seems to rise in proportion to the number of indictments he faces, reveals that democracy is no longer considered essential to a large number of Republican voters. They would apparently be fine living in a nation where the loser of the presidential election was able to remain in power through lies and force. In fact, they would prefer it.
The term “conservative” has traditionally signified a political ideology that seeks “to preserve, to keep intact, to guard.” This meant retaining traditional hierarchies, systems and prejudices as the main order in society. In this way, the Republican interest in overthrowing American democracy could seem anti-conservative, since it aims to throw out our cherished system of democratic governance in favor of an unelected authoritarian.
Yet we must consider the underlying reasons why Republican voters are ready to destroy our democracy. They clearly see democracy as a hindrance to their ability to force their version of morality on the nation. They see a future in which it will become impossible to maintain power because the majority of voters does not agree with them. They view truth as a negotiable concept that bends to suit their political goals. And so, in order to preserve their power and maintain traditional hierarchies, they are willing to become enemies of democracy and impose the tyranny of minority rule. A willingness to overthrow American democracy would seem the opposite of conservation to some. But they are attempting to conserve something – their power and their version of morality. They just aren’t trying to conserve American freedom as expressed through democracy.
“The word conservative is not necessarily about conserving anything. It is about strict father morality.” – “Don’t Think of An Elephant,” 2004.
In this sense, they remain do conservatives. Today’s MAGA Republican Party is the productive of conservatism, and it seems like it would be a mistake to let the conservative ideology off the hook for today’s situation. In some ways, this was always the logical endpoint for conservatism. The threat has been rising for decades, even if most people did not want to accept or admit it.
We will be writing more in-depth on this subject but wanted to give FrameLab readers a chance to weigh in. What do you think the MAGA Republican cult should be called, if not conservative? Does their evolution toward authoritarianism and autocracy require a new label altogether, or simply a modification? Please reply in the comments and let us know what you think.
George and Gil
MAGA Republicans are fascists, pure and simple. Their party as constituted today is a fascist political movement hiding inside the hollowed out shell of the Republican party.
Finding a term that allows some people on the right to be conservative and some people to be something else would be powerful.
Insult-words don't really work, imho. They cause centrists and low-information voters to look at us with a frame of "they're all mudslingers" and then we're not the best mudslingers and we lose elections. Even if fascist is an appropriate label, the way forward is for people to realize they are being fascist, not to name-call them that in front of people who haven't been convinced yet.
We're at a phase where we need to call out specific fascist behaviors until centrists say "that's fascist" — but if we say the word first, we're mud-slinging. Accurately throwing well-deserved mud is still a mud-slinging frame.
The best words would be words that everyone agreed on. So Romney is a conservative, and Trump supporters are maybe: hard-right, or Trump-loyalists. I think that fascist or authoritarian *actions* are great to call out.
At this moment, Pence's "constitution vs Trump" frame seems like something we should be making go viral. And using the non-framing communication technique of I think that pushing the frame that they are divided is really really helpful. We don't want to say they are evil, because that's not the path forward. Saying they are divided means that listeners, including listeners who are life-long actual-conservatives, might nod their heads in agreement with us. Might start to identify, like perhaps most conservatives did a generation ago, as Americans who include the liberals they disagree with, not identify as Republicans more than Americans.
We need labels that draw conservatives with integrity to see a non-MAGA-cult place for themselves. We need to reinforce a frame there are disagreements within the GOP, and that there are good people who are conservative, and that they need to make choices now. Aim our framing to get *them* to call Trump authoritarian. Share and echo and get hashtags to go viral on their inner-conflicts, but don't use words that sound like mud-slinging that comes from us.
So something like:
The GOP is now in contention between traditional conservatives who want to put the Constitution first, and new Trump loyalists who put Trump first.