Why have the years since the 18th century been a slow, steady retreat for conservatives?
One answer is that liberalism is eternally popular. Indeed, among the lower half of people by ability, it is the sole political viewpoint. Others have succeeded; why don’t they hand to us the products of that success? But among these groups, political apathy reigns unless a freebie or bennie (same difference) is offered.
A more practical answer is that, as usual, liberal dominance is the result of many factors. The first is that liberalism itself is demagoguery, or pandering to the weakness and self-important pretense of the herd. The second is that conservatives as a public organization are inevitably corrupted by their own desire to be popular like liberals, and the belief that we can work within the system, or that if each of us just “does what is right” things will magically work out OK even though the people who want to do right are a minority.
Few dare attack liberalism at its core: the idea that all people are equal in approximate ability and moral character, and that we can have a government created by popular vote when we all know that most people do not possess the intellectual or moral capacity for making such decisions.
In fact, most conservatives double down on liberalism by insisting on “meritocracy,” apparently not realizing that meritocracy in a democracy means more time-wasting propagandistic education, certifications and regulatory creation job roles.
Your average conservative knows what he hates, not what he loves. He will pound tables and throw french fries at the Fox News screen about the latest liberal outrages, but his plan is something like this: “Everyone should work hard and go to church, then we can get back to the good old days.”
That response is dysfunctional. The people who can do the right thing thus marginalize themselves and stop participating in the actual task, which is changing how our society is run. Ideas lead to policy and those shape who is in charge. Dropping out doesn’t help.
Conservatives do not need a new vision, nor do we need more examples of what we hate. We need unity of voice and action toward what we want. This will not be an ideological solution, or one big Idea to solve all problems. It will be a commonsense series of steps toward a saner society.
Then again, if you look above, you’ll see the statement that most people cannot make policy decisions, and this applies to conservatives as well. They cannot articulate what they want, have not diagnosed what is wrong, and consequently have no plan.
I suggest instead that we summon up a vision of the society we want. This requires admitting self-interest: this is a society designed to benefit Us, and everyone else needs to go find or create their own society. In fact, all of the problems of the third world would be solved that way, where immigration and welfare solve zero problems.
That self-interest boggles the minds of those who have grown up in democracies. When our purpose is equality, there is no greater sin than acting for yourself and not the great altruistic, compassionate “collective.” And yet, this is what we need to do: act for ourselves, and let others equalize themselves as they can.
To that end, there are several things we could demand:
These things will not be popular because they cut out the great bennies/freebies chain that tyrants traditionally use to make an audience for themselves. However, they are an achievable plan that can be enacted in one administration if it has a helpful Congress. Instead of mountains of outrage culture, we need a molehill of common sense and directed, unified action.