Julian Sanchez header image 2

photos by Lara Shipley

Frum, Cocktail Parties, and the Threat of Doubt

March 26th, 2010 · 230 Comments

Amid the buzz over David Frum’s recent ouster from the American Enterprise Institute, some folks have linked back to this old post on the now-hoary trope that heterodox conservatives are simply angling for invitations to the fabled Georgetown Cocktail Parties. There’s a certain irony here in that Frum himself is no stranger to attacking the motives of deviationist conservatives. Just a few years back he was suggesting that paleoconservative opponents of the war in Iraq had progressed from”hating their party and their president” to “hating their country.” And I’m not sure this quite counts as a pattern, but it’s interesting to me to note that Andrew Sullivan, similarly derided as an apostate for his increasingly harsh criticism of the current state of the conservative movement, was back then in very much the same business, denouncing those he regarded as insufficiently fervent about the war on terror as a “fifth column”. I doubt this is accidental. Both men, I’m inclined to suspect, may in part be directing their fiercest critiques at some echo of their own past selves. (Aren’t we always most irritated by the people who remind us of our own least favorite traits?)

In the original post I suggested that the cocktail party attack itself might be a form of projection on the part of folks who are, at some level, acutely aware that their own careers depend on hewing pretty close to a party line. But I think there’s something else going on here too. One of the more striking features of the contemporary conservative movement is the extent to which it has been moving toward epistemic closure. Reality is defined by a multimedia array of interconnected and cross promoting conservative blogs, radio programs, magazines, and of course, Fox News. Whatever conflicts with that reality can be dismissed out of hand because it comes from the liberal media, and is therefore ipso facto not to be trusted. (How do you know they’re liberal? Well, they disagree with the conservative media!)  This epistemic closure can be a source of solidarity and energy, but it also renders the conservative media ecosystem fragile. Think of the complete panic China’s rulers feel about any breaks in their Internet firewall: The more successfully external sources of information have been excluded to date, the more unpredictable the effects of a breach become. Internal criticism is then especially problematic, because it threatens the hermetic seal. It’s not just that any particular criticism might have to be taken seriously coming from a fellow conservative. Rather, it’s that anything that breaks down the tacit equivalence between “critic of conservatives and “wicked liberal smear artist” undermines the effectiveness of the entire information filter.  If disagreement is not in itself evidence of malign intent or moral degeneracy, people start feeling an obligation to engage it sincerely—maybe even when it comes from the New York Times. And there is nothing more potentially fatal to the momentum of an insurgency fueled by anger than a conversation. A more intellectually secure conservatism would welcome this, because it wouldn’t need to define itself primarily in terms of its rejection of an alien enemy.

To prevent breach, the internal dissident needs to be resituated in the enemy camp. The Cocktail Party move serves this function particularly well because it simultaneously plays on the specific kind of cultural ressentiment that so much conservative rhetoric now seems designed to stoke. Because it’s usually not just a tedious charge of simple venality—of literally “selling out” to fetch better-paying speaking gigs or book deals.  You can clearly make a damn good living as a staunch conservative, after all, and Bruce Bartlett doesn’t exactly talk as though he’s gotten a big income boost out of his apostasy. No, the insinuation is always that they’re angling for respectability, because even “one of us” might be tempted by the cultural power of the enemy elites, might ultimately value their approval more than that of the conservative base. It’s a much deeper sort of purported betrayal, because it’s a choice that would implicitly validate the status claims of the despised elite. You’re supposed to feel as though you’ve been snubbed socially—discarded for “better” company—which evokes both more indignant rejection of the quisling and  further resentment of the liberal snobs who are visiting this indignity on you.  In a way it’s quite elegant, and you can see why it’s become as popular as it has.  But it’s fundamentally a symptom of insecurity—and a self-defeating one, because it corrodes the kind of serious discussion and reexamination of conservative principles and policies that might help produce a more self-assured movement.

Addendum: My friend Andrew Grossman writes to object:

Interesting, but you are much too dismissive of those who constitute “the contemporary conservative movement.” Do you really believe that Washington’s movementarian conservatives cloister themselves in conservative castles? Perhaps that’s true in the hinterlands—though I have seen it only rarely during my stint in Texas—but it is not in Washington. If nothing else, pretty much everyone goes to the same bars and trivia nights or, for the older set, charity fundraisers and (yes, generally) cocktail parties. I like the idea of “epistemic closure” for its explanatory power, but it is not an accusation I’d throw around lightly.
Andrew is absolutely right about conservative elites, and it’s part of what makes this line of attack so silly. The New York– and D.C.-based conservatives who staff the movement’s think tanks, magazines, and advocacy shops don’t in fact inhabit a different universe from their liberal counterparts.  They all read the New York Times and drink lattes and go to parties together. There’s some clustering, to be sure, but nobody acts like they really believe the folks on the other side are insidious hellspawn. The pose is for the benefit of the base, who—not because they’re conservative, but because they aren’t urban media professionals—are likely to draw on a narrower range of trusted news and opinion sources.

Tags: Art & Culture · Horse Race Politics · Journalism & the Media



230 responses so far ↓

  • 1 早漏 // Aug 5, 2014 at 3:13 am


  • 2 Cheap Stone Island // Sep 27, 2014 at 4:31 am

    Good day! This is kind of off topic but I need some help from an established blog. Is it hard to set up your own blog? I’m not very techincal but I can figure things out pretty fast. I’m thinking about making my own but I’m not sure where to start. Do you have any points or suggestions? Thank you

  • 3 stone island jackets sale // Sep 27, 2014 at 4:32 am

    Searching reddit.com I noticed your site book-marked as: %BLOGTITLE%. Now I am assuming you bookmarked it yourself and wanted to ask if social book-marking gets you a bunch of traffic? I’ve been thinking about doing some social bookmarking for a few of my websites but wasn’t sure if it would generate any positive results. Many thanks.

  • 4 75% Off buy cheap stone island jackets // Sep 27, 2014 at 4:35 am

    Hey your web page url: %BLOGURL% appears to be redirecting to a completely different webpage when I click the home page link. You might want to have this looked at.

  • 5 The Closing of the Libertarian Mind | The Musings of a Burkean Libertarian // Sep 30, 2014 at 12:54 am

    […] a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute, writing in 2010, noted the problem with what he dubbed the epistemic closure of the conservative community: [conservative media has] “become worryingly untethered from reality as the impetus to satisfy the […]

  • 6 stone island jacket // Oct 6, 2014 at 5:17 am

    Hello there. I noticed your blog title, “%BLOGTITLE%” does not really reflect the content of your website. When writing your website title, do you believe it’s most beneficial to write it for Search engine marketing or for your audience? This is something I’ve been struggling with mainly because I want good rankings but at the same time I want the best quality for my site visitors.

  • 7 Krugman shows us why the Left loses, despite its advantages | Fabius Maximus // Nov 14, 2014 at 8:03 pm

    […] In this, as in the many other examples listed below, we see epistemic closure. The same illness which has infected the Right, as described by Julian Sanchez, 10 March 2010: […]

  • 8 The Wangst that Comes After | Vox Popoli // Dec 3, 2014 at 8:58 pm

    […] about “epistemic arrogance” is simply a variation on the left-wing meme du saison, epistemic closure. I would venture to bet, as Nate has already noted, that I have publicly changed my mind about more […]

  • 9 漢土漢方 // Jan 4, 2015 at 11:23 pm

    新一粒神 (持続性勃起)

  • 10 Postmodern Conservatism | Excessive Farce // Jan 7, 2015 at 1:04 pm

    […] I am reminded of Julian Sanchez’s 2010 post coining the phrase epistemic closure with regards to the conservative movement. The epistemic closure he identifies is a symptom of […]

  • 11 scarpe jordan // Jan 26, 2015 at 11:03 pm

    dato il nostro budget. ‘Con un scarpe jordan un buon inarrestabile secondo tempo arrêt che fatto a esercizio successiva , molto Cardinali (17-4) scoperto opportunità poiché soddisfatto li . Saranno Musei Un parere (14-6) con un multi-dimensionale attacco l’esatto Falcons non ha fatto vedere se cruciale

  • 12 Chait Speech // Jan 27, 2015 at 6:35 pm

    […] of self-censorship Chait describes bears some resemblance to one I wrote about a few years back in a post on the conservative movement—a post which, quite accidentally, ended up introducing the phrase “epistemic closure” to the […]

  • 13 Gov. Pence Feels the Effects of Epistemic Closure | The Penn Ave Post // Mar 29, 2015 at 11:19 am

    […] LeTourneau Back in 2010, Julian Sanchez did us all a favor by defining something he called “epistemic closure.” One of the more striking features of the contemporary conservative movement is the extent […]

  • 14 It's so hard to be an Obamacare-hating Republican these days - LiberalVoiceLiberalVoice — Your source for everything about liberals and progressives! — News and tweets about everything liberals and progressives // Mar 29, 2015 at 12:51 pm

    […] – Julian Sanchez […]

  • 15 It’s so hard to be an Obamacare-hating Republican these days - Online Political Blog // Mar 29, 2015 at 6:15 pm

    […] – Julian Sanchez […]

  • 16 5 Hacks for Identifying Legit (or not) News Sources » De Civitate // Apr 20, 2015 at 2:02 pm

    […] card so hard that their audience becomes unbelievably closed-minded. (Nothing screams “epistemic closure” like a t-shirt for the Rally to Restore Sanity and/or […]

  • 17 Epistemic Closure Comes Back to Haunt the GOP | The Penn Ave Post // Aug 26, 2015 at 10:02 am

    […] at 10:02 on August 26, 2015 by Nancy LeTourneau Five years ago Julian Sanchez did us the favor of defining a pattern among conservatives that he called “epistemic […]

  • 18 “Wallowing In Ignorance”: Epistemic Closure Comes Back To Haunt The GOP « mykeystrokes.com // Aug 26, 2015 at 11:31 am

    […] years ago Julian Sanchez did us the favor of defining a pattern among conservatives that he called “epistemic […]

  • 19 Trump Cards: Why the Donald is Winning, and Why That’s a Good Thing (Part 4) | BE CLEAR // Sep 10, 2015 at 9:12 pm

    […] conservatism that has emerged and congealed in the past decade or so, a world ruled by what Julian Sanchez dubbed “epistemic closure,” a world midwifed by Fox News.  Fox wants to arrest the Spiral, to insulate America from […]

  • 20 2:00PM Water Cooler 11/3/2015 | naked capitalism // Nov 3, 2015 at 4:30 pm

    […]  “Republican defensiveness about debates reveals a fragile conservative bubble” (storify) [@billmon]. “3) The belief system of “movement conservatism” is now so a) whacky, b) self-contained, c) factually barren & c) intolerant of dissent… 4) …that even the purely notional challenge that a primary debate hosted by CNBC (!) presents is intolerable.” Also, the post that originally applied “epistemic closure” to movement conservatism. […]

  • 21 Rahul // Nov 19, 2015 at 4:02 pm

    (sarcasm)You’re simplifying the isesus that are on the plate of the nation at this point. We’re looking at a 1937 style double dip — everyone, Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman (TM) … Do you have a degree in economics?(/sarcasm)

  • 22 clash of clans gemmes gratuites android 2014 // Jan 6, 2016 at 10:19 pm

    Ce qui désire dire os quais vous choisissez d’avoir sobre l’or, sinon vous
    l’optimiser il devient illimité en allant sur votre cellular.

  • 23 What We Talk About When We Don’t Talk About Gun Control | News4Security // Feb 26, 2016 at 12:14 pm

    […] promoting conservative blogs, radio programs, magazines, and of course, Fox News,” Sanchez explained[29]. “Whatever conflicts with that reality can be dismissed out of hand because it comes from […]

  • 24 Sean Hannity called a columnist an asshole. What happened next explains Donald Trump. - Vox // Aug 16, 2016 at 2:58 pm

    […] and Sean Hannity. They can both only exist in a conservative informational environment where independent intellectual authorities are disregarded and a certain set of politically convenient but indefensible ideas are treated as catechisms. The […]

  • 25 永久漢方 // Aug 18, 2016 at 2:33 am

    we can only know that we know nothing

  • 26 精力剤 // Aug 18, 2016 at 2:34 am


  • 27 Liberal News, Conservative News, and Fake News | Washington News Cloud // Nov 2, 2016 at 12:16 pm

    […] our media could be split into “liberal news” and “conservative news.” As Julian Sanchez pointed out a […]

  • 28 Manuel Peugeot Partner // Jan 9, 2017 at 6:31 am

    Télécharger la notice Manuel Peugeot Partner

  • 29 髪に長 // Feb 6, 2017 at 2:28 am


  • 30 An Orwellian Threat in a Huxley World | Washington News Cloud // Feb 21, 2017 at 1:01 pm

    […] As regular readers here know, I’ve long thought that Julian Sanchez’s explanation about epistemic closure was a brilliant description of what is going on with conservatives these days. A month into our […]

Leave a Comment