A Slightly Different Take on Conservatism

In my constant effort to more clearly define my center-rightness, sometimes this takes the form of attempting to reclaim a pejorative of the right (i.e. progressive) by using it as a modifier to a word that represents more of the current mainstream right (i.e. libertarian).  I, of course, am not the only person to do this.  Progressive Republicans, Hip-Hop Republicans, Bleeding Heart Libertarians (thought they may not be Republicans) and others all do this much better than I do.  One descriptor I sometimes use is “urban conservative,” or “UrbCon” for a nice substitute, to describe a sort of post-social conservative, conservatism.  For me, it typically means pro-market oriented education reforms (more school choice, magnet schools and merit pay), no opposition to gay marriage, a preference for energy efficiency (through walkable cities and mass transit) and a willingness to spend on infrastructure development to promote economic development.  Figures like Joe Scarborough are nominally in this group.

It turns out I was not the first person to come up with this label.  Apparently Akindele Akinyemi came up with it back in 2010 and described the policy stances of urban conservatives here.  There is some overlap with my concept, thought his ideas focus more on the urban poor than a broader definition of urban culture; mostly I thought it was an interesting policy outline that is worth sharing.

Good points by E.J. Dionne

I’m not always a Dionne fan but I found this to be worth sharing.

Romney is simply following the lead of Republicans in Congress who have abandoned American conservatism’s most attractive features: prudence, caution and a sense that change should be gradual. But most important of all, conservatism used to care passionately about fostering community, and it no longer does. This commitment now lies buried beneath slogans that lift up the heroic and disconnected individual — or the “job creator” — with little concern for the rest.