Two Replies to DeMuth’s Version of National Conservatism

Commercial competition regulates firm behavior far better than do government bureaucracies.

Letters to The WSJ.

"Usually sure-footed, Christopher DeMuth slips into error when he writes that “American conservatism became unduly attached to libertarian individualism, unfettered markets and free trade as ends in themselves—which helped set the stage for anything-goes cultural corruption.” (“America’s Right Confronts the 21st Century,” op-ed, Nov. 19).

First, far from being unfettered, free markets teem with the time-tested and honest fetters of commercial competition. This competition regulates firm behavior far better than do government bureaucracies, which, when they aren’t restricting firms from serving consumers better, are protecting firms from the competition that alone keeps them efficient and responsive, not to government, but to consumers and suppliers.

Second, corruption is fueled not by free trade but protectionism. Under free trade, government has no favors to sell to firms that crave relief from having to satisfy consumers. Firms thus compete for profits honestly rather than lobby for rents mendaciously. Because protectionist interventions must be sold to the public as patriotic and well-intentioned rather than what they really are—privileges for the few at the larger expense of the many—protectionism contributes to cultural rot as well.

Prof. Donald J. Boudreaux

Mercatus Center, George Mason U.

Fairfax, Va.

Mr. DeMuth’s latest tome defending and defining national conservatism remains less than compelling. Politics concerns man’s relation to the state. The Founders and later the framers sought to minimize that relationship, believing that the primary purpose of the state is to protect our liberty, freeing us to pursue happiness. Mr. DeMuth suggests that such liberty “set the stage for anything-goes cultural corruption.” It turns out that the complexities of an evolving society may be less “pristine than the one we imagine the Founders bequeathed to us.” You think? Mr. DeMuth views our contemporary society from 35,000 feet, offering sweeping national-conservative critiques but precious little in the way of national-conservative solutions.

Mr. DeMuth has two approaches in his program. First, after a convoluted discussion of equality, he suggests we “accept some contemporary claims and reject others.” Thanks so much. Second, he offers a few policy pointers: protect our borders, drop race from policy discussions, balance the budget and redirect welfare spending to infrastructure projects. Hardly a rallying call for a new approach to the 21st century. At least he left out the national conservatives’ infatuation with Europe’s budding authoritarian leaders.

Edward H. Crane

President emeritus, Cato Institute

Falls Church, Va."