It may be “the economy, stupid,” but this weekend, the first shots were fired in the looming civil war among members of the GOP.
The growing rift between “fiscal” and “social” conservatives was on full display during this year’s annual Conservative Political Action Conference.
Better known as CPAC, the event allows conservatives across the nation to come together to meet like-minded individuals and mingle with potential presidential candidates.
However, this year’s event was more noticeable for groups attending – and not attending – than for anything else put forth at the conference.
Due to the inclusion of and participation of GOProud, a group that openly advocates for the ideas of gay conservatives, several socially conservative groups and individuals boycotted the conference.
By doing so, they made known their opposition to GOProud’s laissez-faire positions on social issues, and, initially, they created a buzz in the media.
However, this coverage rarely went beyond stating these groups were not attending, and it seldom focused on the reasoning behind their decisions not to attend.
It is common knowledge that the best test of a political position is its ability to gain acceptance in the marketplace of ideas.
By boycotting the conference, socially conservative groups allowed GOProud and its allies to have unfettered access to this marketplace.
They gave them the ability to advocate their ideas with little opposition.
The marketplace of ideas functions effectively only if all ideas are equally represented.
For instance, some attendees and politicians at CPAC suggested social issues weren’t as important in the current tough economic times.
They hinted these issues should be minimized because they serve only as divisions within their otherwise unified conservative movement.
Whether one agrees or disagrees with this statement is unimportant.
The fact that the most vocal socially conservative groups were not present to rebuff this assertion deprived other attendees from hearing the other side of this message.
Their stance is that social issues are still important even in these tough economic times because they define who we are as a nation.
Because this side of the debate was not put forth at the conference, social conservatives run the risk that others would fail to grasp this important concept and would decide to accept the other side’s arguments as the truth.
While boycotting a few high-profile events might be an effective strategy to raise awareness for an issue in the short term, it is fraught with peril as a long-term strategy.
Social conservatives must put forth their ideas on an equal footing with others or risk losing their access to the marketplace of ideas altogether.
Zack Smith is a first-year law student. His column appears on Mondays.
