David Brooks describes his philosophy as progressive conservatism
It starts with the wisdom of Edmund Burke — the belief that the world is more complex than we can know and we should be skeptical of handing too much power to government planners. It layers in a dose of Hamiltonian optimism — the belief that limited but energetic government can nonetheless successfully enhance opportunity and social mobility.
To the chagrin of such a centrist, politics has become more polarized than ever:
The administration came into power at a time of economic crisis. This led it, in the first bloom of self-confidence, to attempt many big projects all at once. Each of these projects may have been defensible in isolation, but in combination they created the impression of a federal onslaught.
One of the odd features of the Democratic Party is its inability to learn what politics is about. It’s not about winning arguments. It’s about deciding which arguments you are going to have. In the first year of the Obama administration, the Democrats, either wittingly or unwittingly, decided to put the big government-versus-small government debate at the center of American life.
Just as America was leaving the culture war and the war war, the Democrats thrust it back into the government war, only this time nastier and with higher stakes.
This war is like a social script. Once it was activated, everybody fell into their preassigned roles.
Addendum: Matt Welch of Reason re-phrases Brooks’ point:
David Brooks: It’s a Pity We Didn’t Drive a Stake Through Barry Goldwater’s Dead Heart When We Had the Chance