History on Improper Principles

For a decade now, the American Left has utterly failed to understand the forces behind the rise of right-wing populism. Its political leaders have doubled down on the extremist tendencies that made them unpopular in the first place. And among left-wing writers and activists, attempts to give conservatives a fair shake could lead to the terrible auto-da-fé of cancellation. For the most part, then, accounts of conservatism from the Left are profoundly unimaginative—and frankly boring.

The most recent entry in the genre is Allan Lichtman’s new book, Conservative at the Core, published by the University of Notre Dame Press. The American University history professor is perhaps most infamous for his “Keys to the White House”—a set of thirteen criteria he claims can accurately predict the outcome of every presidential election. In 2024, though, Lichtman’s formula failed him in spectacular fashion; he prophesied a victory for Kamala Harris. The “keys” he offered as serious analysis turned out to be no better than the perpetually unfulfilled millenarian forecasts of the Rapture. Facing public ridicule, Lichtman chose to accuse voters of behaving “irrationally” and giving into the “darkest impulses in American life.” 

Conservative at the Core is his attempt to explain those “dark impulses” he believes fueled Trump’s rise by assessing American conservatism. It is not a convincing effort. 

Throughout the book, Lichtman poses as an objective historian—even avowing that his “sole objective is to understand conservatism on its own terms by deconstructing conventional myths and revealing the true essence of what the U.S. conservative movement truly represents.” Rather than presenting a narrative rooted in honest historianship, though, Lichtman writes as an inveterate partisan. He understands conservatives as the Left understands them, never as they understand themselves.

Read more at Russell Kirk Center.