not any sort of manifesto

By Mark bennett "Mark"This book calls itself a conservative manifesto. A manifesto is usually a public declaration of political principles and intentions. But thats not whats in the book.

Mark Levin has a tough time even coming up with a definition of what a conservative is. He ends up calling it a system of analysis rooted in a handful of centuries old philosophers and in alignment with the views of the founding fathers. But when it comes time to define it, the real definition he provides is a negative one. Levin spends much of the book defining his political opponents (liberals, statists, whatever) and describing what they are for and defines conservatism as being in opposition to them. Its understandable why a talk radio show host would do that, but its an intellectually weak argument. It reduces conservatism from a political system and set of beliefs to a movement of perpetual opposition.

Beyond that basic flaw in the book, Levin spends far too much time complaining about the past. About things that happened 40 or 50 or 70 years ago. The DDT ban in the 1970s doesn't matter today. Fighting over the New Deal doesn't matter today. A Conservative Manifesto has to deal with the problems of *TODAY* rather than whining about things that are long past.

In my opinion, the problem Levin has in even defining conservatism is his loyalty to the politicians of the last decade. In that era, conservatism ceased to mean what it used to mean. It now meant foreign wars to "spread freedom". It meant programs like "no child left behind". It meant expanding medicare. It finally meant in 2008 passing a "tax cut" which was in reality welfare checks. Conservative has become so debased as a word that it means either nothing or anything from Great Society liberalism to libratarianism.

To create a modern conservative manifesto means making hard choices and declaring principals. Levin doesn't do either. The first core issue for anyone who wants to write a conservative manifesto is cleaning house on the conservative side of the asile rather than whining about the opposition as Levin does. The second core issue is coming up with an agenda for change.

This book in the end is a call to keep the status quo and change nothing. And because of that, its not worth much of anyone's time to read. Related Articles:


An Important Read, but Has a Little Flaw

Finally, The Truth Is Out

Bullying Style..