Russel Jacoby's new article in the Nation ponders the growing pressure on universities to hire more conservative professors to balance the longstanding leftism of campuses. The argument is usually phrased in terms of "intellectual diversity." The piece is typical Nation rinse-and-recycle, with sentences that begin, "Conservatives claim that..." The ironic knife-twist promised in the title barely appears, and then not until the end of the third page. In the interim, Jacoby drools remarks like, "Angst besets the triumphant conservatives. Those who purge Darwin from America's schools must yell in order to drown out their own misgivings, the inchoate realization that they are barking at the moon." I thought this was sarcastic until I reread it a couple times.

The real punch at this academic trend comes from Stefan Beck, in the National Review no less. The "intellectual diversity" campaign probably started as a parody of the collegiate diversity movement, and its latter-day earnestness is a disgrace. I'm sure there are other conservatives out there who find these feckless campus whiners as absurd as Beck does. But the "intellectual diversity" movement is just one small symptom of a growing problem in American politics. We are all conservatives now.

It is now possible to believe just about anything on any issue and consider oneself a conservative. If you would ban gay marriage and racy movies, you're a social conservative; liberalize gun and drug laws, and you're a libertarian conservative. If you'd slash social spending and eliminate the deficit, you're a fiscal conservative; embrace huge government social spending without an obvious way to finance it, and you're a compassionate conservative. If you want to intervene abroad and use American power to spread liberty and democracy, you're a neoconservative; if you'd just as soon withdraw into our borders and let the Europeans deal with everything, you're a paleoconservative. You may also consider yourself a pro-business conservative, or an individualist, or a states-rights conservative, or a communitarian, or an anarchist, or a theocrat, or a "9/11 Republican," or a plain vanilla moderate. You can even call yourself a "classical liberal." Andrew Sullivan won't stop fretting about whether his party is religious or secular. But the answer is it's everything. The GOP big tent has become huge enough to build a three ring circus around the elephants.

(Sorry.)

I don't really know what the GOP stands for anymore. Or rather, I know what it stands for: everything and anything. Whereas the Democratic party stands for nothing. Their platforms are empty promises to mouth-frothing bases. When we elect a major party candidate, I have no idea what he or she will actually do in office. I can only be sure that the Republican will argue his position in idealistic language, while the Democrat will choose pragmatic language. Usually.

Which leads us back to the conservative protestors. Which conservative policies would they like to hear espoused more often in the classroom? Reduction of state social services, or rapid expansion of them? Privatization of industry, or huge subsidies to private companies that is public ownership in all but name? Invade, or stay home? But then, these campus conservatives would have to admit that that ideologies shuttle between "liberals" and "conservatives" like rival baseball teams swapping outfielders, and that they're cheering for whoever happens to be in their pet team's uniform. (And not just ideologies. Now playing at shortstop, Senator Jim Jeffords.)

But cheer up, liberals. You'll always have gay marriage. Unless you choose to play that down while running for president, of course. Then it's the old Vietnam card.