A Reactionary Party

Nate Silver notices that, of the various oppositional poses that Republicans had to choose from, they have seemed exclusively to pursue the libertarian one. They embraced the tea-party movement, which originated in libertarian circles; they proposed an alternative budget notable for its fantastical belief that you can cut taxes and balance the budget at the same time; they seem generally to be backing off the social-issue catfights that were sprinkled liberally throughout the Bush presidency; they tout the notion of “going Galt” and devour a revisionist anti-New Deal screed.
But my sense of the matter is that, first, there’s little new here (Republicans have proposed simultaneous tax-cutting and budget-balancing for decades). And second, the Republicans are reactionary, by which I mean not only that they pine for the Roaring Twenties, but that they react to the agenda set by Democrats, and the content of their opposition is determined by the content of the Democratic agenda. If Obama were a liberal social warrior, the Republicans would be embracing Huckabee-ism rather than radical libertarianism. But since Obama’s overwhelming priorities and most ambitious proposals have been in the area of economic policy, it should be no surprise that the Republicans have only found their oppositional voice when talking about economic matters.