not polarize on the issue until the 1990s. Members of Congress polarized in the 1980s (Adams 1997).
Activist groups take up stands – after Roe v. Wade in 1973. But ideological elites had already chosen
sides in 1970. They soon made their influence felt in the Republican Party. The religious character of the
Republican Party has been shaped over the course of the last few decades (Cohen n.d.). But the religious
character of modern conservatism dates at least back to William F. Buckley’s God and Man at Yale.
Section VI: CONCLUSION
Ideology is a central component of modern politics — so central that we use ideological labels
with ease. But the meaning of those labels is constantly being re-defined by the political intellectuals who
discuss ideological opinions.
These intellectuals mean to influence politics, and I think they do. But the traditional way of
thinking about how an actor might influence politics is to ask whether the policy positions advocated by
that actor are later enacted by policymakers. This is an important question, but it is perhaps not the most
important question. When policy change happens, some favor it while others oppose it. It is notable how
often the coalitions defined by one issue are the same as those defined by another. Political parties are one
reason this happens. But ideology is another. The greatest way that ideology influences politics is not
issue-by-issue, but through binding issues together into a coalition.
A perfect partisan would not much care who his logroll partners are. So long as they are loyal and
they help him get elected and re-elected, they qualify. But ideological thinkers do care. For this reason, I
suspect that the coalitions that are defined by ideology will work their way into party coalitions. Partisans
need to worry about other things, including loyalty to their past collaborators and the electoral incentive
from their constituents. And so sometimes ideology will be a nuisance -- often a very insistent nuisance.
It was especially insistent in the antebellum period. Slavery was an issue that threatened party
coalitions. It was a threat largely because it was so intractable. It could not be resolved without forcing
one side to accept the other side’s position. Politicians hoping to deal with the nation’s business thus tried
to look the other way. But ideological thinkers did not. Since they care about what they think is right,
38
Convention