The Folly of Western “Conservatives”

Political Philosophy

November 2024

Let us first dispel the pitifully small view of the American “conservative”, who seems too dense to grasp the real meaning of the word “liberal”. They are liberals. All American political parties are liberals. All Americans, except the lack of a seldom few, are liberals. Liberalism is merely the belief in liberal democracy and that power rests in the individual. The dominant political parties in the U.S., however, have monopolized the words “conservative” and “liberal”, which blinds the American. Similar has happened elsewhere, but the American seems particularly blinded. 

There is an obvious lack of conserving done by the so-called “conservatives” of the U.S., U.K., France, Italy, etc. The whole history of the U.S. has only moved in the direction the progressives have yanked it. Each successive generation of “conservatives” is more left than the last, which should be telling enough for any of them wise enough to take a step back and examine themselves. What should it say? Firstly, that they are Leftists. Secondly, that they are failures.  

“Conservatism” is only defined in opposition to the progressive. Whatever the progressive is advocating in the current year, that is what the “conservative” opposes. At best, all a “conservative” can say to define themselves is they are a “classical liberal” or a “libertarian”. In either case, they use “liberal” or “libertarian”. Note the first syllable of each word. The etymology should say enough about their sisterhood ideologically. As specific as a “conservative” could be is that they believe in “small government” and the right of the individual to do as they please as long as they don’t tread on anyone else. How are either of these things going? If all “conservatism” serves as is an opposition party, then it can do nothing but float on with the river it fails to dam – just at a slower pace. Think of the average opinions of a “conservative” 100 years ago. He certainly is more conservative in every respect: economically, culturally, etc. What about 50 years ago? Certainly, he is also more conservative, yet less so than the “conservative” of 100 years. Even 30 years ago, both Republicans and Democrats opposed homosexual marriage. Now, even the Republicans tacitly endorse it, if not outwardly praise it. They are already onto the next current year hit: transgenderism. Any current “conservative” is so far leftward that they are entirely out of the boundary of political discourse at this country’s inception, let alone 100 years ago. 

All a “conservative” can do is arbitrarily draw lines in the sand. When the sea inevitably washes away that too, they simply retreat and draw another line. Even the idea of conservatism is, in itself, arbitrary and illogical. “I am drawing my line in the sand here. The state of society in year X is how it should be run. Moving any further will hurt us.” Time only moves on. Whether it moves at the behest of the progressive is their doing. To somehow freeze the state of things is impossible. To go back is also impossible. Any moment in time is formed from the people in it, what informed them from long before, and the pressures of that particular time. None of these can be recreated. As Laski wrote in the opening of “A Formula for Conservatives” (1937): “Perhaps the most grave weakness in American political life today is the absence of a conservative philosophy. The Republican Party represents the impulses of interests on the defense rather than principles which are seeking the expression of action.” 

The progressive has a vision which they actively seek to have society mold to, while the “conservative” can only say: “I wish to stop here.”  

While I fervently abhor what the progressive stands for, I dare say they are at least the more logically consistent option. “Don’t tread on me” is the “conservative’s” moto, yet who is the one seeking to prevent rights granted to transgender people? And who sought to prevent homosexual marriage? Some “conservatives”, the confounded ones, will draw their line just before the introduction of homosexual marriage. Some will draw their line after homosexual marriage, but before transgenderism. Yet, these people clearly are not conserving anything at all. The “conservative” should allow both homosexual marriage and transgenderism if they wish to be consistent with the “don’t tread on me” libertarian philosophy. Those confused “conservatives” who arbitrarily choose one over the other are somehow trying to appeal to libertarianism and some higher transcendental authority simultaneously. Until the “conservative” can learn what he truly is, he will have no footing for his poor defense and no teeth for his gumming attacks. 

What can a “conservative” do but relent? Not only does the “conservative” have no positive affirmations – no formula of how to affect society, only acting according to negatives, ergo what they are not – they also have no formula for action but to relent as well. This is perfectly understood in the most recent relenting. Tony Hinchcliffe, a comedian, made a joke at a Trump rally that Puerto Rico was an island of garbage. He was demanded to apologize. Trump, who did not even make the joke, was demanded to apologize. Even those opposed who recognize the freedom of speech, still said some variation of “There may be freedom of speech, but there are still consequences.” Not too long after, President Biden called Trump supporters garbage. What was the response of “conservatives”? To dress as garbage. Spineless. “You’re right! We ARE garbage! Human garbage!” They chant “trash for Trump!” at rallies. I cannot help but think it is all some sort of humiliation ritual put on by the powers that be. “What can we make them do next?” 

This is why “conservatives” can do nothing but lose. They have no philosophy other than to “live and let live”, which is also the philosophy of their opposition no matter how they try to frame it. They have no philosophy of action other than to embrace their enemy’s taunts. They have no positive stakes in positions. Only negative claims as to what they are not. He will forever lose until he realizes what he is. Yet, to realize what he is, a liberal, will only hasten the things the confounded “conservative” tries in vain to oppose.