| About Us | Contact | Donate | User Blogs | Login |
Branding via The Next Right
Ed Cone interviewed TNR founder Jon Henke on rebranding the Right through the internet:
CIOI: What happened to the Right that makes a site like yours necessary?
Henke: People on the Left would like to believe that the philosophy has failed. People on the Right would like to believe the people have failed, if we just elect better people we'll be fine. I think both of those are off the mark. Fundamentally what failed was the movement itself. We erected a movement based on two ideas: elect Republicans, to limit government. They elected Republicans, and then they didn't have a politically viable way to actually limit government, and so they settled for the first -- and so instead of a vast right wing conspiracy we had a half-vast right wing conspiracy.
What needs to be fixed is the movement needs to organize itself to actually accomplish the second part of the goal. Just electing Republicans is not enough, what you get is a corrupt Republican Party that is not an effective vehicle for the actual goals of the movement.
CIOI: How can a blog help rebrand conservatism?
Henke: The real value of the Internet is that it allows you to target an audience. The people who read the Next Right are the influential activists, the people inside the Beltway, the coalition members, the political officers, the people at think tanks and advocacy organizations, the people who are most active within campaigns. We're aimed at online and offline influentials.
CIOI: What are you telling them?
Henke: The world is happening first online. Your opposition is communicating online, they are rolling out their product online, and they are focus-grouping on the Internet to find out what they need to be doing. The things that are going to drop onto your press secretary's desk next week are bubbling upon the web this week, or last month.
Let me know where you agree and disagree with Jon.


Comments
I agree...the object is to limit government, kind of.
As Jon has pointed out, limiting government is just one of many litmus tests to determine if the democratic state is today even powerful enough to affect significant change in government spending over the interests of the state and of the taxing class.
Judging by the results of the last six elections, it doesn't really matter who is elected. The growth of the state has grown geometrically far beyond all reasonable means to pay for such growth and is even now growing completely out of control of the peoples' knowledge, authorization or ability to pay for such growth -- and yet it continues to grow.
The real question before the Republic is, does the democratic state even have the power to control government growth?
I think not.
When the people are no longer in control of government spending, they are no longer free sovereigns, consenting to be governed, but slaves to a fascist state.
Welcome.
ex animo
davidfarrar