global democracy, Big Governmentnconservatism, unlimited free trade andnimmigration, and perpetual war fornperpetual nonpeace are what’s on thenmenu of the soft right, but no one’sngoing to order it, much less swallow it.nThe issues Mr. Buchanan shouldnand probably will address have to donnot with the cerebrations of think tanksnand the preferences of institutionalncash cows, but with the real concerns,ninterests, and beliefs of real Americans:nthe economic destruction of the Americannmiddle class by the leakage of jobs,nplants, and technologies abroad; thencultural deracination of American civilizationnand education by literally millionsnof illegal and undocumentednaliens and their allies in powerfulnpolitical lobbies, bureaucracies, andnuniversities; the grotesque injustice ofnaffirmative action, quotas, set-asidesnand all the other phony therapies bynwhich a ravenous and irresponsiblenunderclass clamors for power and privilege;nthe corruption of our public lifenby the entrenched congressional oligarchynand its incestuous sibling in thenexecutive branch bureaucracy; the frivolousnfrittering away of national sovereigntynand national power in foreignnaid and American troops for thanklessn”allies” and dubious neutrals.nConservatives in the post-Reagannera don’t even recognize most of thesencrises and threats as real problems, letnalone the mortal wounds to our nationalnidentity and interests that they are,nand when someone emerges who doesnsee them and wants to heal them, hisnadrnonitions are denounced as “ravings”nby the very claque that purportsnto want to “conserve” America and itsnheritage.nLabels like “conservatism” and “liberalism,”n”left” and “right,” have nonmeaning anymore because they havenbeen hijacked by frauds who use themnonly to deceive and dissimulate insteadnof to communicate and lead. Awaynwith these baubles and those who playnwith them. Let real Americans lead thenreal America.n— Samuel FrancisnCONGRESS, said H.L. Mencken,nor perhaps it was Will Rogers, cost himnabout twelve dollars a year in taxes tonsupport the institution, which was annunmatched bargain for entertainment.n6/CHRONICLESnThe statement was made during thenraucous 20’s, when things seemed tonbe going along pretty well, and thenantics of our leaders did not usuallynresult in inescapable and intolerablenburdens. Congress, of course, costs anlot more today. Will Rogers was lost inn1935 and Mencken about the samentime gave up political reporting fornother interests. The whole thing hasnbecome a lot less funny, but we mightnas well get what enjoyment we can outnof it—that’s all the benefit we will get.nThey are all funny, politicians, butnperhaps the funniest are the establishmentnconservatives, who will providenus with many occasions for hilaritynduring the coming presidential campaign.nThe last time, during the RepublicannNational Convention, theynstridently demanded attention and representation.nThey got Dan Quayle,nwhom Bush and the media immediatelynidentified as theirs, though most ofnthem had never heard of him. Theirnone big payoff turned out to be anliability.nProbably the most amusing part ofnthe whole campaign will be watchingnBush, whose affirmative action quotanbill was barely distinguishable from thenDemocrats’ affirmative action quotanbill, pose as the antiquota hero.nThe knee-jerk conservatives ralliednto the defense of Judge ClarencenThomas in the same fashion, becausenhe was denominated the conservativencandidate, though no one has evernexplained whether or why this is actuallynso. They declared their determinationnnot to allow Judge Thomas to ben”borked.” But this is silly. Bork was anserious scholar who would have intellectuallynremolded federal jurisprudence.nThat is why he had to bendefeated. There is no evidence thatnThomas will provide anything to thenCourt except a correct vote now andnthen, if even that is certain. Somethingnthousands of potential nominees couldndo, and many of them better. Liberalsnput up a token opposition to Thomas,nbut they know they really have little tonfear.nFurther, if we are to take Thomasnseriously in his intellectual positions,nhe is a “higher law” philosopher,nsomething which is more alien andnpotentially more dangerous to what isnleft of our constitutional patrimonynthan even the fulminations of JusticennnBrennan. Let us hope we don’t have tontake it seriously. It is reported thatnThomas’s “higher law” writings werenghosted by a disciple of Professor HarrynJaffa, allegedly the author of thenfamous speech in praise of extremismnthat cost Barry Goldwater ten millionnvotes.nBut perhaps the establishment conservativesnare not as dumb as I think.nMaybe it is a fact that few of them havenenough base to get reelected withoutnthe assistance of presidential glamour,nsince we now have an imperial rathernthan a representative government.nThat would explain why, except fornJesse Helms, none of them ever opposentheir President, though the liberalnRepublicans do so whenever theynwant.nAs one who spent an embattlednyouth as a “conservative” inside thenacademy, I feel I have earned the rightnto laugh at what “conservatism” hasnbecome. One must either laugh or cry.nAnd, of course, we can always fallnback on the dubious consolation thatnthe Democrats are worse. The Republicansnhave betrayed their middle-classnconstituency at every turn, whichnmakes them ripe for revolt. But thenDemocrats are incapable of disengagingnthemselves from weirdness longnenough to make any political capitalnout of it. Or perhaps they don’t wantnto. Actually, the division of powernbetween the Republican President andnthe Democratic congressional leadership,nwho disagree about nothing significant,nmakes the perfect arrangementnfor the imperial state. The mostnnormal and logical thing for the Democratsnto do is to nominate Bush for thenpresidency, in which case they wouldnwin the election — and get rid of DannQuayle in the bargain.nIt is impossible to find intellectualnand ethical bankruptcy any greaternthan the turn the Democrats haventaken on the Bush-Solarz war in thenPersian Gulf. A great many , votednagainst it, but now that it is over andnpopular, all we hear is the plaintive crynthat they were not unpatriotic, they justnwanted more time for the sanctions tonwork. I would submit that there isnpolitical capital to be made even yet outnof honest criticism of the war — thencost in blood and treasure, the confusednand dubious goals, the exposurenof military technology that would haven