Review: Conservatives without conscience by John W. Dean
Originally Posted in the WENDELL2006 campaign blog on Monday 31 July 2006 as Dean’s Bias Pollutes an Intriguing Premise
I’ve always considered myself to be a Barry Goldwater conservative and when I learned that former Nixon White House aide and Watergate participant, John Dean was publishing a book that was originally conceived as a joint effort between himself and Goldwater I quickly put it on my list of “must-reads”. According to Dean, he and Goldwater had agreed to collaborate on a book in the early 1990’s that would discuss the wayward direction of the conservative movement from which Goldwater (and his failed 1964 campaign for president) laid the foundation for future victories. Dean’s motivation for the book at the time (he indicates this in the book’s lengthy Preface) had as much to do with exposing (for lack of a better term) a vast right wing conspiracy as it did with setting the record straight about conservativism. Unfortunately due to the former Arizona Senator’s failing health, the project was never fully realized and Dean put it on the back burner as he concentrated on other aspects of his professional life. Dean’s research and interest in the subject was re-invigorated during the impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton and then as he watched the Bush presidency become increasingly autocratic and secretive. While he claims in the Preface that the book is not about President Bush (and to a lesser extent, Vice President Dick Cheney), it’s impossible as a reader to come away from the book without thinking that the Bush White House and more significantly the Vice President’s activities in shaping the culture of the administration were not central to Dean’s consideration.
John Dean speaks as Senator Barry Goldwater looks onThe premise of Conservatives Without Conscience is incredibly intriguing. Dean preposes that the conservative movement in the United States is a victim of unchecked authoritarianism and unscrupulous leadership. Utilizing a phalanx of little-known (but well-documented) studies, Dean establishes that there is a preponderence in the behavior of most conservative-oriented individuals to submit to authoritarian leadership. Additionally, Dean extends this preposition by indicating that particular “double-highs” (those with conservative/authoritarian tendencies combined with win at all cost leadership behaviors) have betrayed the conservativism of his youth and replaced it with a movement that is more interested in power and control than improving the quality of our society.
The opening chapters of the book read like the work of an attorney (which Dean is) giving an opening argument at trial. Dean relies on the heavy use of footnotes and endnoted references to support his position. While the book’s reliance on data and Dean’s lawyerly argument make for EXTREMELY dry reading, the value of his premise gains credibility. His argument seems so substantial that this reader found himself willing to soldier through the erudite nature of the book and accepting of the poor state of the publication’s editing (the book has numerous typos and grammatical errors). Fortunately though, the meat of the book (without its lengthy Preface and accompanying Acknowledgements, Appendices, Notes and Index) is only 186 pages and so was easily read in a weekend.
Something strange happens though in the midst of Dean convincing the reader of the legitimacy of his position; his argument loses focus and he attempts to extrapolate more conjecture as to the behaviors of well-known conservative leaders and their motivations. The axe-grinding that Dean alluded to in the book’s Preface rears its ugly head and derails what was becoming an argument worthy of further study and consideration. As Dean switches gears, the book becomes a witchhunt that reviews the less than positive points of the backgrounds of various conservative leaders and attempts to frame their actions in a way that satisfies the data he presented earlier. By the book’s end, it is obvious that Dean is less interested in a philosphical argument about the misguided direction of the conservative movement as he is with using scientific study to smear Dick Cheney (without the benefit of further study, it seems that Dean has a personal dislike for the Vice President) and other conservatives who have gained positions of leadership in the movement.
Conservatives Without Conscience is a book that offered so much promise, but fails due to its author’s apparent need to settle a score. Having said that, this book should be read for its premise and empirical data - the rest should be discarded as the jaded complaints of a wounded and permanently scarred former player in our democracy’s biggest arena.
[…] Subtitled “How the Holy-Rollers and the Neo-Cons Destroyed the GOP“, Invasion of the Party Snatchers takes no prisoners in listing what has gone wrong in the Republican party. It is the author’s contention that Goldwater’s party has been hijacked by self-serving interests who magnify the importance of their singular issues of exclusivity rather than promote the big tent philosophy that for so long symbolized the party. To some extent, Invasion of the Party Snatchers echoes many of the same themes that can be found in John Dean’s recent book Conservatives without Conscience. Where Gold succeeds and Dean failed can be seen in Gold’s continuing commitment to the principles that brought him to conservativism in the first place, whereas Dean fell off the wagon long ago. An argument can be made though that Gold (like Dean) is simply a grumpy old man who finds it necessary to make noise. […]
June 2nd, 2007 at 2:41 pm