Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Claremont Institute

Please note: IPS Right Web neither represents nor endorses any of the individuals or groups profiled on this site.

 

The Claremont Institute, based in Claremont, California, is a conservative non-profit institution that has a track record supporting militarist foreign policy advocacy agendas. According to its website, “The mission of the Claremont Institute is to restore the principles of the American Founding to their rightful, preeminent authority in our national life.”[1]

The Claremont Institute previously had a number of associated projects. These included the William Bennett-founded group Americans for Victory Over Terrorism, which was launched shortly after the 9/11 attacks to promote a interventionist U.S. “war on terror”; the Ballistic Missile Defense Project, which advocated lavish missile defense programs because “to insure domestic tranquility and provide for the common defense”; the Salvatori Center for the American Constitution, which promoted “honest and patriotic scholarship about America”; and Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership, “a group of health professionals familiar with guns and medical research [that serves as] the antidote to those who twist science to serve a misguided anti-gun ideology.”[2]

The institute publishes the Claremont Review of Books, which seeks “to reinvigorate the public mind by returning to the first principles of a distinctively American conservatism.”[3]

Past Claremont fellows and leaders  included William Bennett, secretary of education in the Ronald Reagan administration; J.D. Crouch, deputy national security advisor in the George W. Bush administration; Leo Strauss scholar Harry Jaffa; Laurence Kadish, founding chairman of the Republican Jewish Coalition; Brian T. Kennedy, previous Claremont’s president; and Tom Karako and Seth Leibsohn, who served as advisers to Americans for Victory Over Terrorism.

During the 2010 mid-term elections, Claremont received attention in connection to the rise of the. Tea Party. Senate candidate Delaware Republican Christine O’Donnell participated in a Claremont fellowship program in 2002. And Tea Party favorite, Sharon Angle, received Claremont’s Ronald Reagan Freedom Medallion for Courageous Client in 2004.

In an article about the Tea party published in the Claremont Review of Books, William Voegeli wrote, “The Tea Party movement … has a natural affinity with, if you’ll permit a parochial observation, the Claremont Institute, which antedates the movement by 30 years, and was created to restore the principles of the American Founding to their rightful, preeminent authority in our national life. This orientation means the Tea Party movement has the potential to be a vessel for a conservatism committed to conserving political blessings that are unqualifiedly American. What’s more, implicit in the project of the political restoration of a rightful authority is the identification and defeat of the ideas and practices that have wrongfully usurped those founding principles. To this end, scholars such as Ronald J. Pestritto and Matthew Spalding, both Claremont Institute fellows, have painstakingly shown how 19th-century progressivism made 20th- and 21st-century liberalism both possible and dangerous.”[4]

Missilethreat.com previously was the website for Claremont’s Ballistic Missile Defense Project. It offered a number of pages aimed at hyping purported missile threats facing the United States. One page, titled “Scenarios,” features brief video clips showing “textual descriptions and animations” of how an enemy could attack America and how U.S. missile interceptors might defend against them. One scenario, titled “Ship-Based Attack on Hollywood,” opens with a quote from the so-called Rumsfeld Missile Commission, a congressionally mandated 1998 investigation led by Donald Rumsfeld that was heavily criticized by many arms control experts for exaggerating the ballistic missile threat to the United States. Advisers to the missile defense project included Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy, Hank Cooper of High Frontier, and William Van Cleave of Missouri State University’s Department of Defense and Strategic Studies.

Claremont served as a sponsoring institution of the 2006 “Independent Working Group on Missile Defense, the Space Relationship, and the 21st Century,” a task force of militarist foreign policy ideologues whose final report claimed that the 21st century maintenance of the “U.S. lead in space may indeed be pivotal to the basic geopolitical, military, and economic status of the United States. Consolidation of the preeminent U.S. position in space is akin to Britain’s dominance of the oceans in the 19th century.” Other sponsors of the task force included the American Foreign Policy Council, Missouri State University’s Department of Defense and Strategic Studies, the George C. Marshall Institute, Heritage, High Frontier, and the Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis. As missile defense expert Theresa Hitchens wryly commented: “‘Independent Working Group’ is, therefore, a bit of a misnomer.”[5]

According to one writer, task force members and sponsors included “many key figures and institutions that advocate a more aggressive nuclear weapons and space weapons policy, including the four sectors of the space weapons lobby: defense contractors (including Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Assured Space Access Technologies), think tanks and policy institutes (including the Hoover Institution), former military (including the Air Force Space Command), and university research institutes (including Tufts and MIT).”[6]

Claremont and the Ashbrook Center co-sponsored the now defunct website, VindicatingTheFathers.com. The site was designed to accompany the book by the same title, authored by Thomas G. West and published by Rowman & Littlefield in 1997. According to the website, the book provided a “defense of the Founders’ views and actions on slavery, women’s rights, property rights, voting rights, and other controversial issues.” The website was created “to make available to the public an extensive collection of original historical documents on the themes of this book. These documents provide evidence from original sources in support of the book’s arguments.” A Library Journal review said the book aimed “to defend the U.S. Constitution and the men who drafted it in 1787 from the accusations of sexism, racism, and prejudice against the poor. West writes from a conservative perspective, and, as he frequently pauses to remind the reader, his arguments are learned and logical. However, this is a deeply flawed book. West writes in a supercilious and dismissive tone. Worse, he digresses far afield to introduce his ideas on contemporary issues, which have almost nothing to do with the founders; his chapter on the family is simply a compendium of current conservative views and he rarely mentions the founders, who said and wrote little on the subject.”[7]

Claremont has received considerable support from core conservative funders. According to MediaTransparency.com, between 1985 and 2005, Claremont received nearly $10 million in donations from Scaife, Bradley, Olin, and Earhart foundations.

Share RightWeb

Please note: IPS Right Web neither represents nor endorses any of the individuals or groups profiled on this site.

Sources

[1]Claremont, “About,” http://www.claremont.org/about-us/.

[2]Claremont, “Projects,” DEFUNCT WEBSUTE

[3]Claremont, “Claremont Review of Books,” http://www.claremont.org/crb/.

[4]William Voegeli, “The Meaning of the Tea Party,” Claremont Review of Books, Spring 2010, http://www.claremont.org/publications/crb/id.1704/article_detail.asp.

[5]Theresa Hitchens, “Return of the Star Warriors,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, January/February 2007, pp. 76-78, http://bos.sagepub.com/content/63/1/76.abstract.

[6]Tom Barry, “Space: The Phantom Menace,” Right Web Analysis, November 8, 2006, http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/articles/display/Space_The_Phantom_Menace.

[7]Review of Thomas West’s Vindicating the Founders, Library Journal, October 1, 1997.

Share RightWeb

Claremont Institute Résumé

CONTACT INFORMATION

The Claremont Institute
1317 W. Foothill Blvd, Suite 120
Upland, CA 91786
Phone: 909.981.2200
E-mail: info@claremont.org
Website: http://www.claremont.org/

FOUNDED

1979

ABOUT

“The mission of the Claremont Institute is to restore the principles of the American Founding to their rightful, preeminent authority in our national life.”

BOARD OF DIRECTORS (as of 2017)

Thomas D. Klingenstein, Chairman
Michael Pack, President
Larry P. Arnn, Vice-Chairman
Bruce C. Sanborn, Chairman Emeritus

Directors

Roy Crummer
Robert Curry
John C. Eastman
Edward J. Erler
Joel H. Farkas
Christopher Flannery
James E. Higgins
Kurt Keilhacker
Brian T. Kennedy
Charles R. Kesler
John Marini
Larry Mattson
Robert Nelson
Thomas G. West

Related:

Claremont Institute News Feed


Right Web is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.

The Right Web Mission

Right Web tracks militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy.

For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Soon after a Saudi-led coalition strike on a bus killed 40 children on August 9, a CENTCOM spokesperson stated to Vox, “We may never know if the munition [used] was one that the U.S. sold to them.”


The West has dominated the post-war narrative with its doctrine of liberal values, arguing that not only were they right in themselves but that economic success itself depended on their application. Two developments have challenged those claims. The first was the West’s own betrayal of its principles: on too many occasions the self interest of the powerful, and disdain for the victims of collateral damage, has showed through. The second dates from more recently: the growth of Chinese capitalism owes nothing to a democratic system of government, let alone liberal values.


Falsely demonizing all Muslims, their beliefs, and their institutions is exactly the wrong way to make Americans safer, because the more we scare ourselves with imaginary enemies, the harder it will be to find and protect ourselves from real ones.


Division in the ranks of the conservative movement is a critical sign that a war with Iran isn’t inevitable.


Donald Trump stole the headlines, but the declaration from the recent NATO summit suggests the odds of an unnecessary conflict are rising. Instead of inviting a dialogue, the document boasts that the Alliance has “suspended all practical civilian and military cooperation between NATO and Russia.” The fact is, NATO was a child of the Cold War, when the West believed that the Soviets were a threat. But Russia today is not the Soviet Union, and there’s no way Moscow would be stupid enough to attack a superior military force.


War with Iran may not be imminent, but neither was war with Iraq in late 2001.


Donald Trump was one of the many bets the Russians routinely place, recognizing that while most such bets will never pay off a few will, often in unpredictable ways. Trump’s actions since taking office provide the strongest evidence that this one bet is paying off handsomely for the Russians. Putin could hardly have made the script for Trump’s conduct at the recent NATO meeting any more to his liking—and any better designed to foment division and distrust within the Western alliance—than the way Trump actually behaved.


RightWeb
share