Review: Charting the 3 Factions of the MAGA Movement
Furious Minds identifies national conservatives, postliberals, and Claremonters as the coalition driving the New Right.
Books had little to do with the populist uprising that swept Donald Trump into power in 2016 and 2024. But a cadre of right-wing writers and influencers have been constructing intellectual scaffolding around the MAGA phenomenon ever since. In Furious Minds, Laura K. Field explains and taxonomizes the effort to replace old-school Reagan-style conservatism with something more ruthless and muscular—but still grounded in ideas.
Field divides the New Right into three rough factions: Claremonters (such as Michael Anton, the man behind the infamous "Flight 93 Election"essay published in the Claremont Review of Books), postliberals (such as Patrick Deneen, author of Why Liberalism Failed, which made it onto former President Barack Obama's reading list), and national conservatives (such as Yoram Hazony, an Israeli-American philosopher trying to make nationalism great again).
Field has especially rich insights into the first camp, having studied political theory in the Straussian tradition. She earned a Ph.D. from the University of Texas at Austin under the supervision of Thomas Pangle, a student of both Closing of the American Mind author Allan Bloom and Leo Strauss himself. This lineage makes her treatment of figures associated with the Claremont Institute, headquarters of "West Coast Straussianism," particularly valuable.
The New Right factions are united, Field writes, by "a staunch social traditionalism and rejection of liberal pluralism." They want to fight and definitively win the culture war. Field's center-left critiques are not always the ones a libertarian would make. But her work mapping this intellectual space provides an indispensable starting point for anyone who hopes to go beyond a superficial understanding of the anti-liberal American right.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
*fart* Sniff sniff.
Fart! Man, am I a funny guy!!! The FUNNIEST of the Fungi!
Reason really has a problem with conservatives not assuming their traditional role in American politics as controlled opposition to their pals in Team Blue.
But don’t worry guys, it’ll all be over soon, starting the moment Trump leaves office.
Hang in there. It’ll get better, I promise!
Here I thought the MAGA coalition was all the sane people who could no longer abide the insanity of the Left
It is. Many slightly center left people whom the democrat party shifted greatly away from to the extreme are included...
That's the real definition, but these Charles Koch shills will happily tell lies to satisfy their employers and peer group.
"Rejection of liberal pluralism"... yep. MAGAs are more closed-minded than any lefty. Just look a the angry denunciations of "RINO"s and "GOPe"s... they want conservatism to be a tiny little tent with no room for independent thought.
Red woke.
I can remember the days of the GOP "Big Tent". You were welcomed into the "Big Tent" (you were welcome to vote for them and send them all or most of your money). This was true even if you were one of those people who wanted to get an abortion, and they wanted to severely PUNISH people like you, for getting an abortion!
Keep convincing yourself with lies. Lord knows if you stop you will realize what an idiot you've been.
Do you recall the awesome enchanter named “Tim”, in “Monty Python and the Search for the Holy Grail”? The one who could “summon fire without flint or tinder”? Well, you remind me of Tim… You are an enchanter who can summon persuasion without facts or logic!
So I discussed your awesome talents with some dear personal friends on the Reason staff… Accordingly…
Reason staff has asked me to convey the following message to you:
Hi Fantastically Talented Author:
Obviously, you are a silver-tongued orator, and you also know how to translate your spectacular talents to the written word! We at Reason have need for writers like you, who have near-magical persuasive powers, without having to write at great, tedious length, or resorting to boring facts and citations.
At Reason, we pay above-market-band salaries to permanent staff, or above-market-band per-word-based fees to freelancers, at your choice. To both permanent staff, and to free-lancers, we provide excellent health, dental, and vision benefits. We also provide FREE unlimited access to nubile young groupies, although we do firmly stipulate that persuasion, not coercion, MUST be applied when taking advantage of said nubile young groupies.
Please send your resume, and another sample of your writings, along with your salary or fee demands, to ReasonNeedsBrilliantlyPersuasiveWriters@Reason.com .
Thank PervFected You! -Reason Staff
Stop proving Neutral-not-Neutered's point, Shillsy.
It may seem like that, but we've all seen what unfettered compromise looks like. Compromise is the wrong word, because the right has only surrendered, whereas the left almost never does. Gun control is a glaring example. What the left calls compromise, is just surrender. A faction of MAGA understands this and has decided fuck that.
What the left calls compromise, is just surrender.
Not even Left, not even surrender. Take the gun, beat the owner with it, throw it down, and turn around with hands out, palms up asking, "Where'd all the 2A advocates go?"
I mean, literal days before Sullum was trying to parse how shots number 2 and 3 were illegitimate because the vehicle was no longer in contact with the shooter, like the 2A was written to only allow black powder firearms, the magazine asks them to pick the cause back up on their behalf.
+1
Yes, right, fellow citizen. [nods] Absolutely correct. [continues nodding] We're all in this together. [still nodding] Your liberal pluralism protects me, my liberal pluralism protects you. [*still* nodding] The immigrants who support deportation, oppose gun control, and embrace fundamentally objective laws of nature and Western economics have all been brainwashed and/or ideologically captured. [**still** nodding] They couldn't possibly have arrived at their own conclusions based on their own backgrounds, cultural heritage, or lived experiences. [***still*** nodding] They are clearly not thinking about things on a level as clearly expansive, diverse, and generally superior as you... I mean we... are. [stops nodding, glances sideways]
One of the things that comfort me as I watch the West slide into establishment totalitarianism, is that JeffSarc and Shrike will be sitting in the gulag too, thinking it must be a mistake because they were always loyal.
LMFAO keep lying to yourself if it makes you feel better. Because the left is all about feelings and not sensibility...
Books had little to do with the populist uprising that swept Donald Trump into power in 2016 and 2024.
Awful rich coming from someone who doesn't read their own magazine (or adjacent):
So here's my cri de couer to fellow conservatives: Banish this book from your library. Purge it from your consciousness. This book should never have been admitted into civilized company, but especially not now ,when America is a polyglot, multi-ethnic — and, yes — multicultural country where Indian folks like us are likely to be your friends and family.
For books having nothing to do with anything, Shikha Dalmia's leaning awful hard into a literal book burning, literal purge, for a book that didn't exactly cause someone to take a shot at a President or burn down a police station or an ICE detention center anything. Especially in a screed against an administration that, now, has an interfaith Hindu second family.
Have you ever read *a* book, the dead tree kind, Stephanie or did you lose interest when the evil
ChristofascistsChristian Nationalists got the BJ books banned from your grade school?A few Abbevillers as well, I think.
The Left, once again trying to find and cut the head off populism because they can't comprehend a bottom-up movement.
Neither can Reason.
I guess that's what happens when you keep yourself in close proximity to power for so long.
Time and time again it is shown that leftists have zero comprehension of how people on the right think.
This book is a shining example of such.
Aside from your being an obvious fuckwit, research does show that in general conservatives have a better understanding of liberal thinking than liberals have of conservative thinking.
That list leaves out the racist, xenophobic, bigot, morons who like to inflict pain on others. That makes up the bulk of MAGAs.
Which party makes all the "skin-color" specific legislation again?
Which party makes all the "sex" specific legislation again?
Which party wants to 'inflict pain' on who they identify-as 'rich'?
MORE Leftard Self-Projection.
You misspelled "Democrats ", again.
LMAO.
MORE leftard self-projection.
[WE] lobby for [Na]tional So[zi]al[ism] ... but it's all [R]s fault! /s