CHICAGO, IL (September 22, 2006) – For several decades now, Tony Campolo, Ron Sider, and Jim Wallis – all of whom have appeared at Evangelical Covenant Church events – have fought the stereotypical image of evangelicals being insensitive to social issues beyond abortion and prayer, while at the same time attempting to convince the brethren to stop living down to the stereotype.
In his controversial new book, Crunchy Cons, Rod Dreher attempts to do the same with conservatives, most of whom he says have left the true faith.
He presents a challenge not only to conservatives, but to all who say they are seeking a way through the liberal versus conservative morass. Regardless of where a person may find themselves politically or ideologically, there will be times when they offer ecstatic praise and shout “Amen,” only to read several more sentences and begin to wonder.
Dreher criticizes what he calls the sexual libertarianism of Democrats, “the party of lust” as he phrases it, but aims most of his ammunition at the enablement of corporate irresponsibility by his fellow Republicans, which he describes as “the party of greed.” Despite political differences, however, both parties are built on the foundation that individual fulfillment is the ultimate good, an ideal that leads to a consumerist mentality and idolatry, Dreher maintains.
“We no longer seek to organize our lives according to what’s good, true and beautiful, but by a kind of shopping-mall utilitarianism that allows us to call ‘good’ whatever allows us to grow wealthier,” he writes.
Crunchy conservatives – a name he admits is silly – hold similar views as other conservatives in their fight against abortion rights, illegal immigration and secularization, he argues. Dreher distrusts public education and encourages home schooling, but he also breaks rank. He favors strong environmental protection laws, distrusts big business, is wary of unfettered capitalism, and opposes economics that fail to consider the human cost of decisions.
“The fundamental difference between crunchy conservatives and mainstream conservatives has to do with the place of the free market in society,” he writes. “ . . . When the market harms the good society, it should be reined in. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, whether it’s in the hands of big government or big business.”
Dreher uses a lot of pages to attack agribusiness, which he says represents much of what is evil in the world. Guided purely by greed, conservatives have supported a business he believes has destroyed small communities, sacrificed beauty for efficiency, degraded the quality of the food supply, and treats livestock cruelly. Such behavior violates God’s mandate – and true conservative ideals – for people to be conservers of humanity and of all creation, he says.
Dreher is inspired by Russell Kirk, Frederica Matthewes-Green, G.K. Chesterton, E.F. Schumacher, and Wendell Berry, who he refers to as a modern prophet. A Roman Catholic – now considering a move to Orthodoxy because of the former’s handling of the continuing sex abuse scandals – Dreher roots his ideals in a sacramental view of life and a belief in the family as the most important institution in society.
He has angered fellow conservatives with the choices he has made when trying to hold those values together. The religion editor at the Dallas Morning News, Dreher says he is one of the most conservative members of the editorial board, but that did not stop him in 2004 from pushing the paper to endorse a pro-choice liberal candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives. The solidly entrenched Republican incumbent was anti-abortion, but also was a strong supporter of local corporations that had been allowed to pour toxins into the environment. Fighting pollution also is a pro-family value, Dreher reasoned.
Dreher wrote Crunchy Cons due to the outpouring of responses he received to what was a “throwaway column” he wrote for the National Review website in 2004. He wrote the column after a conservative friend called him a liberal because he ate organic food. He says he was shocked at the number of people who wrote to say he had given them voice.
Although he lists possible political initiatives, Dreher says he puts little hope in political solutions, at least in the near future, reasoning that “crunchy conservatism is a cultural sensibility, not an ideology.” Without a cultural shift, exchanging the Congress or the occupant in the White House for a different model won’t matter much, he suggests.
The book is not without its weaknesses. Dreher sometimes paints with too broad a brush, and his tone occasionally turns snide, as does his blog at the popular religion website, beliefnet.
Still, this is a valuable book that should spark discussion. As with others who have sought reform, Dreher gives readers plenty of opportunity to question where the author stands and better judge their own footing.
