WON'T TURN "CONSERVATIVE"
By: Selwyn Duke
Every so often the wonks of
wishful thinking give us an article about how blacks are becoming Republicans, how
Hispanics are supposedly a natural GOP constituency, or, as is the subject here today, how
the millennial generation is turning conservative. Perhaps pundits asserting
the last thing recall Winston Churchills observation, If you're not a liberal
at 20, you have no heart; if you're not a conservative at 40, you have no brain. And
perhaps they overlook that its possible to raise a brainless generation.
think, as one might, that this will be a typical analysis sneering at the proverbial
next generation using the perceived gold standard of ones own. After
all, I realize that my generation is the tree the millennial nut fell from. Placing
matters in further perspective, its true that older and younger generations ever
slam each other; its also true that they both are always partially right. Lastly,
Ill say that I dont at all consider the WWII FDR voters the greatest
generation, though it makes for a nice narrative. The greatest generation was the
one that founded our nation and wondered
if we could keep its republic, and there has been a consistent, but
accelerating, degeneration ever since.
discussing our latest movement toward idiocracy, my starting point will be a Sept. 4
American Thinker article
written by one Chriss Street. In making his case for millennial hope, Mr. Street points
out that while 61 percent of millennials voted for Barack Obama in 2012, his approval
among them has now sunk to 46 percent. But this is a deceptive statistic. For an approval
rating amounts to the judging of a candidate relative to peoples ideal personal
standard for the presidency, whereas in an election he is judged relative to another specific candidate for the presidency. And if
Obama were again running against Mitt Romney with all the usual media propaganda
does anyone really think hed lose millennials to the governor? No doubt more
would stay home, but I suspect the president would enjoy something close to his 2012
support among those who casted votes.
millennials may have soured on Obama somewhat, but this reflects cynicism more than
conservatism. Of course, that theyd be cynical is no surprise; theyve been
raised in an unraveling West in which feckless, morally confused adults in their homes,
schools, government, houses of worship and elsewhere have let them down. Nonetheless,
cynicism is not traditionalism; in fact, it
is a form of naiveté. Believing all people act out of selfish motives, the cynic
instinctively paints everyone with the same brush. And such a person can hardly
distinguish well among candidates.
Street also tells us that, in 2008, 37.4%
of incoming freshman women and 30.5% men identified themselves as liberals or
leftists, the most in 35 years. The reality, though, is even worse than this
indicates. First consider that self-reporting is more about perception than reality. For
starters, it always underestimates leftist numbers, as likely a majority of
moderates are liberals who usually because of self-delusion (a leftist
bailiwick) and a desire to sound reasonable dont brand themselves
what they really are; bear in mind when pondering this that liberals are generally
solipsistic and fancy that they define the center, and also realize that the label
liberal has been discredited enough so that many wont don it. Yet even
more significant here is that it isnt just peoples perceptions that shift
the definitions of liberal and conservative do, too.
Consider that while a
conservative in 1952 America was staunchly anti-communist, a conservative in the Soviet
Union at the time was a communist. And
conservatives in Western Europe are often our liberals ideological soul
mates. This isnt for lack of truth in political advertising. Rather, its
because the only consistent definition of conservative is a desire to
maintain the status quo while liberals only consistent definition
involves a desire to change it. This means conservatism is always changing:
tomorrows version will reflect todays liberalisms success in altering
the status quo. Conservatism is the caboose to liberalisms locomotive (I treat this
explains a few things. First, its often pointed out that a healthy plurality in
America describes itself as conservative. Is this surprising? All it really means is that
many, many people align themselves with the status quo and if this werent the
case, the status quo wouldnt be the status quo. Second, some insist that millennials
will move toward conservatism, and this is true in that most people become somewhat more
traditional with age. Yet its also true that conservatism will move toward them.
is to say, as conservatism drifts left, it follows that
millennials will become more conservative even if they stay in the same place, in that they
will be situated more on the post-shift political spectrums right side; this is just
as how a person can become poorer in a definitional sense if the poverty line standard is
That so few recognize this
reflects the relativism of our time, where we label ourselves with provisional terms and
measure ourselves against other people (its people who define the political
spectrum). If we want to see matters clearly, however, we must define them differently: in
other words, what do millennials actually believe? Well, never before has an American
generation been so tolerant of intolerable sexual practices, so supportive of faux
marriage and skeptical of actual marriage, so relativistic and disconnected from
Christianity (church attendance is one of the best predictors of voting habits). Never
before has an American generation been to their degree socially liberal.
brings us to the claim that millennials are, at least, fiscally conservative. Now, not
only is convincing evidence of this elusive, but considering it a saving grace is
essentially saying that it profits a man to gain the world but lose his soul. Regardless,
however, while the social liberalism/fiscal conservatism marriage may exist in particular
cases, I suspect that in principle it is an impossibility.
instance, speaking of principle versus particular, if you ask people, Do you believe
government should balance its budget and be frugal, of course theyll say yes.
But if you ask them if theyre willing to relinquish their particular piece of the
pie (government college aid?), their tune changes. Espousing fiscal responsibility
requires only a voice; achieving it requires virtue.
consider the side-effects of social liberalism in modern times. And this should be
prefaced by saying that since this explanation warrants a book, my treatment here will
necessarily be lacking. But just as an example, social liberalism means loose sexual
mores. Loose sexual mores mean a high rate of single motherhood (today its 42
and rising). And what does this mean? Since the modern West wont let
these women twist in the wind, the government will step into the breach and play daddy
with handouts and/or mommy with tax-funded daycare. It is unavoidable.
in point of fact, this cultural decay brings us to the real reason for political drift. It
was something about which the Founding Fathers as well as great thinkers throughout
Christendoms history spoke much. Ben Franklin warned, As nations become
more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters. British philosopher Edmund
Burke observed, It is written in the eternal constitution of things that men of
intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters. And John Adams
wrote in 1798, Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It
is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
does moral and religious describe us today?
course, some will now say, But why do you think millennials supported Ron Paul? They
want liberty! Sure they do.
does a tiger in a zoo.
does a toddler.
however, can be allowed to roam free in civilization without hurting himself or others.
And the less people are civilized growing up, the closer they will be to that infantile or
animalistic state and the more they have need of cages and
truth? Government can be no better than the publics virtue, though it can be worse.
And this morality-government relationship is evident in voting patterns. Is it a
coincidence that every group orthodox Christians label immoral those involved in
alternative sexual deathstyles, criminally inclined inner-city dwellers,
effete college professors, grunge-type youths scarred with multiple tattoos and body
piercings vote left? What fellowship hath light with darkness? The
darkness hates the light. When people have sins they yearn to rationalize away, the last
thing theyll do is support leaders who would uphold, even just through word, a moral
standard condemning their passions.
specificity as to how this affects government is another book-worthy topic, so Ill
offer just two examples. Weve heard about those ruggedly individualistic Americans
whod rather live in poverty in Appalachia than accept government handouts and those
spirit-of-entitlement types who protest violently when they dont receive them. And
society will always contain both kinds, but the ratio can vary greatly. In a nation
characterized by self-sufficiency, honor and virtue, a redistributionist will find barren
ground. But if a spirit of greed, covetousness and thievery prevails, people will be
susceptible to the demagogic appeal, Youve been cheated, but give me power and
Ill get you your piece of the pie, comrade! Or consider lust. If people
resolved to be chaste outside of marriage, do you think the abortion movement or taxpayer
funded contraception appeal could gain traction?
how do you make a civilization susceptible to dark demagogues?
it love the darkness.
wouldnt first and foremost spend time on intellectual appeals. As the Soviets once
did (as explained by ex-KJB
defector Yuri Bezmenov) Id seek to undermine the morality of the target nation.
Id spread the idea that morality is really values and values are
relative all just a matter of perspective, you see. Once this was accepted and
people no longer believed in the rules of morality, it would be as if they ceased
believing in the rules of human nutrition: not thinking any food could actually be
bad, theyd be governed only by taste and would try, and could develop an
affinity for, anything even perhaps poison. Vice corresponds to this on the moral
then get them hooked on their bad moral diet through inundation. Stoke their lusts
fires via highly sexualized entertainment, and portray violence as just as casual and
cool, so lashing out at others seems the norm. Id engorge their egos with media
messages about how they could determine their own morality so that, as the serpent said,
you will be like God. Id provide co-ed dorms and a general party
atmosphere at universities, creating occasions of sin that will ensure the
kids have as much as possible they need to justify. And after robbing them of moral
judgment and creating a visceral craving for vice, Id fill their heads full of
anti-Western, anti-Christian in fact, anti-goodness ideas in college
classrooms. When I was done with them, theyd not only possess the discernment of a
man in the midst of a drug-fueled orgy, their egos would be so bloated theyd
consider their ignorance wisdom.
of wisdom, when conservatives indulge wishful thinking and suppose that millennials will
wake up, they ignore that we actually need a shake up, something that changes
the cultural trajectory on which weve long been (so if an asteroid strikes the
Earth, millennials may turn into conservatives of course, they instead may turn
into cavemen, too). Until then, whatever the keepers of the flame plan had better require
the participation of only a zealous minority. For the masses will not wake up when beset
by a cultural narcolepsy in which nightmares are fancied nice dreams.
Duke is a writer, columnist and public speaker whose work has been published widely online
and in print, on both the local and national levels. He has been featured on the Rush
Limbaugh Show and has been a regular guest on the award-winning Michael Savage Show. His
work has appeared in Pat Buchanan's magazine The American Conservative and he writes
regularly for The New American and Christian Music Perspective. He is a regular
contributor to Ether Zone.
"Published originally at EtherZone.com :
republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact."
Selwyn Duke can be reached at: SelwynDuke@optonline.net
the September 23,
2013 issue of Ether
Copyright © 1997 - 2013 Ether Zone.
We invite your
comments on this article in our forum!