New Paradigm or Old Paradox?

ARAM BAKSHIAN JR.

HISTORY, according to an old Austrian friend of mine who saw more than one New World Order come and go, is mainly a matter of people rediscovering the obvious by tripping over it. This is certainly true of the current conservative debate over the post-Reagan future. The five points of the “New Paradigm” defined by White House aide James Pinkerton [NR, Jan. 28] are a case in point. For those whose memories go back to the Nixon years and before, the points are as much a case of déjà vu as a glimpse into the future, a reprise of some of the oldest—and worthiest—conservative and Republican principles: “market forces,” “individual choice,” “empowerment” (a trendy new word for more individual opportunities for self-betterment), “decentralization,” and “what works” (statism has failed; conservatism works; ergo, it should be applied).

Featured Tags

ARAM BAKSHIAN JR.

HISTORY, according to an old Austrian friend of mine who saw more than one New World Order come and go, is mainly a matter of people rediscovering the obvious by tripping over it. This is certainly true of the current conservative debate over the post-Reagan future. The five points of the “New Paradigm” defined by White House aide James Pinkerton [NR, Jan. 28] are a case in point. For those whose memories go back to the Nixon years and before, the points are as much a case of déjà vu as a glimpse into the future, a reprise of some of the oldest—and worthiest—conservative and Republican principles: “market forces,” “individual choice,” “empowerment” (a trendy new word for more individual opportunities for self-betterment), “decentralization,” and “what works” (statism has failed; conservatism works; ergo, it should be applied).