Different conclusions
From Sebastian Calvo
Sir: Reading Christopher Caldwell’s analysis of the recent American elections (‘We have lost the war’, 11 November) makes me wonder what exactly remains of The Spectator’s old conservative voice. Is there no other conclusion from these elections than a wide repudiation of the war itself? Many more Democrats than Republicans voted on Tuesday, and yet constitutional amendments barring same-sex marriages passed in five of six states (Arizona already has a law making them illegal), and affirmative action was struck down in liberal Michigan. Republicans stayed home as a protest against President Bush’s proposed amnesty for illegal aliens and his exorbitant domestic spending. They will now get both. Conservatives (non-neocons) feel betrayed by an administration they argue has abandoned traditional values in favour of equivocation in the face of multiculturalist encroachments across civil society, an increasing abdication of sovereignty to organisations espousing extraterritorial jurisdiction, and yes, foreign adventure. But the vote was also about the war’s management, not only its genesis. Few outside Democratic leadership positions welcome appeasement through quick withdrawal.
A different, more nuanced take on these elections is that they confirm rather than repudiate a solid conservative majority across America on most social issues and an impatience with the war’s administration. Mr Caldwell’s conclusions seem superficial in the face of the deeper issues informing these results. Compared with historical results for second-term mid-term elections, Republicans did very well — and did so without any accusations of voter fraud or any insults directed at those displeased with their governance. Now that, surely, is something worth mentioning in your pages as a contrast to the Democrats’ defeat two and four years earlier.
Sebastian Calvo New York, NY, USA
Previous page
