One thought I have on the various posts on the paleo dilemma is that it is not at all obvious to me that the greater chances for paleo influence (on the culture, and on national politics) are with the Republicans. There has been a natural Republican gravitational pull because Pat Buchanan, the most prominent national figure with paleo leanings in the past generation, was a top Nixon and Reagan aide, ran quite well in the Republican primaries, and despite Sam Francis’s frequent entreaties, never really broke with the party. But apart from that, it seems the major political figures with some paleo tendencies, at least in my lifetime, have been Democrats. Off the top of my head, I’d nominate Bill Fulbright, Gene McCarthy, and (perhaps) Jim Webb as the most paleo-ish in sensibility of major political figures in the past two generations. George Kennan, whose paleo tendencies are pretty clear to his readers, was a Democrat.
This isn’t an argument for any attempt at “entryism” modeled on what the “Scoop Jackson Democrats” did in the 1980’s. (And the irony of paleoconservatives trying to emulate that strategy would be pretty rich.) There were many historical circumstances which made the Right receptive to neoconservative influences that do not nearly obtain, in any mirror image sense, today. But I do think there is at least an equal chance that the ideas in TAC and other such institutions will resonate in some parts of the left as in some parts of the right. I also believe there are more Democrats sick of the standard liberal loyalty oaths on a variety of issues than we are inclined to think.