A few nights ago I was at a cocktail party (a not uncommon occurrence) when a guest remarked that they had visited this blog, having seen my name on the invitation list. After a bit of banter, he commented that I obviously didn’t like Glenn Beck. Fair enough, in a general sense. However, not having written anything about Beck, I decided it was a good time. So I’d like to spend a few paragraphs explaining why – although he might be adept at capturing audience – Beck is anything but what he claims to be: a conservative or libertarian political thinker.
I’m going to focus on the idea of populism, because I think that Beck uses it as a way to relate to his audience. Adopting the mantra of populism helps Beck break down actual obstacles to a relationship (e.g., wealth disparity, religious views, psychographics) that exist with any group of followers. It’s also a great tool for creating and maintaining the emotional passion that breeds loyalty. By playing the “populist card”, Beck and his producers succeed in creating a platform lucrative to their advertising base.
Unfortunately, it creates a sticky intellectual problem for him. Populism is characterized by traits that are antithetical to conservative thought. We need only turn to current events for an illustration: during the recent healthcare debates, many “tea baggers” (their term, not mine) were calling for revolution and invoking Jefferson’s “tree of liberty” quote. 
While populism relishes disorder, conservatism embraces prejudice in action. You can’t restore conservative thought through revolution. A second fundamental of conservatism is deference to tradition. This is a common talking point amongst conservatives, and often drives talk about the Founding Fathers. Why do we care so much about what the Founding Fathers think if not for tradition? In contrast, populist movements seek a new way of business, the passions of the movement driven by the desire for a new paradigm. Populism and conservatism can’t share guiding principles.
More importantly, populism is founded on a belief in the fundamental rights of man, and equality in society. While that sounds like a laudable goal and even distinctly American, it is not a conservative value. Edmund Burke, the father of modern conservatism, believed in the equality of man only before God, that it was the natural order for some men to be more successful than others. Poverty is a part of this life, and as such it is part of Providential law. It is arrogant and prideful to attempt to change that. Populism, in the tradition of Paine or Rousseau, is an affront to God that can only end in failure.
As Beck attempts to usurp historical figures like Thomas Paine for the purpose of burnishing his populist bona fides, he is committing an intellectual heresy that can only be explained in one of two ways: Beck is actually ignorant of history and political philosophy, and blathers on despite the most obvious errors and inconsistencies, or; he is a smart operator who knows how to craft his message to gain audience, unmoved by the deception he peddles. Given his success in broadcasting, I’m inclined to believe the latter.
