The New Intellectuals of the Right: A Shift in Priorities?

The report from Baron Public Affairs LLC has shed light on a trend within the right-wing policy world, identifying “super influencers” who shape the thinking of national-populist conservatives. Atop this list is Aaron Renn, a former Accenture partner turned urban policy expert. What’s striking about these thinkers is not their familiarity with Trump-era rhetoric but rather their focus on issues that go beyond traditional conservative concerns.

Renn’s concept of the “negative world” – the idea that mainstream culture is hostile to evangelical principles – has gained traction in liberal circles, yet it’s part of a broader narrative among these intellectuals who prioritize social health over economic growth and foreign policy projection. They’re concerned with reversing declining fertility rates, addressing trade competition with China, and exploring ways to improve American cities and families.

This shift in priorities is significant, marking a departure from previous generations of conservatives dominated by economists like Milton Friedman. These new thinkers – including Renn, Brad Wilcox, and Michael Lind – draw on their backgrounds in quantitative social science to tackle issues once taboo within conservative circles.

Wilcox’s empirical approach to social conservatism has been influential, while Lind’s transition from liberal to conservative commentator reflects the evolving intellectual landscape. Lind’s critiques of cultural elitism among liberals resonate with many on the right, but his presence also highlights the increasingly blurred lines between left and right.

These thinkers’ preoccupations are not necessarily tied to Trumpian rhetoric; they seek answers beyond MAGA demagoguery. This is a telling development, suggesting that even within conservative circles, there’s growing recognition of the limitations of populist rhetoric. The “social health of the nation” has become a key concern, encompassing issues like happiness, meaningful lives, and community stability.

The implications of this shift in priorities are far-reaching. Will these thinkers help shape a more inclusive and nuanced right-wing agenda that addresses social and economic challenges facing the country? Or will they remain relegated to the fringes, unable to influence policy beyond their narrow areas of expertise?

Baron’s report highlights the importance of quantitative research in informing conservative thought but also underscores the challenges of translating this research into practical policies. The rise of these “super influencers” raises questions about the role of think tanks in shaping policy debates.

As we watch this trend unfold, one thing is clear: the intellectual landscape of the right has changed forever. These thinkers are pushing conservatives to confront issues once considered off-limits. But will their focus on social health and community stability be enough to address the deep-seated problems facing American society? Only time will tell.

The “super influencers” powering the post-Trump right may not be household names, but they’re shaping the intellectual debate within conservative circles. As we navigate this new landscape, it’s essential to understand their priorities and concerns – and to engage with them in a meaningful way. The future of American conservatism depends on it.