Posted on 01/03/2013 12:09:45 PM PST by SeekAndFind
In case you've forgotten, many conservatives had sought to explain away Mitt Romney's loss by reasoning that we had finally reached a tipping point where Americans were voting for candidates who supported the welfare state, based solely on their own pecuniary interests. And I argued that voters do want to be given something by Republican politicians: Hope, optimism, and vision.
But while I dismissed that premise, there may be an even larger fundamental problem that should alarm conservatives even more: Too many Americans simply no longer agree with them on the merits.
We should have seen it coming. Back in 1999 — on the cusp of George W. Bush's presidency, and as Republicans controlled both chambers of Congress — conservative leader Paul Weyrich issued a controversial open letter declaring that conservatives "probably have lost the culture war."
As Weyrich wrote:
In looking at the long history of conservative politics, from the defeat of Robert Taft in 1952, to the nomination of Barry Goldwater, to the takeover of the Republican Party in 1994, I think it is fair to say that conservatives have learned to succeed in politics. That is, we got our people elected.
But that did not result in the adoption of our agenda. The reason, I think, is that politics itself has failed. And politics has failed because of the collapse of the culture. The culture we are living in becomes an ever-wider sewer. In truth, I think we are caught up in a cultural collapse of historic proportions, a collapse so great that it simply overwhelms politics.
In recent months, it has been especially depressing to be a conservative. In the past, one could more easily endure the ranting of liberal commentators by taking solace that — outside of New York City and Washington, D.C. — most of the country was center-right. Thus, whenever an elite liberal commentator said something fringy, one could always console himself by saying (or at least thinking): "I hope you push that idea, because you'll keep losing elections in real America."
Today, conservatives have made a shocking discovery: They are the ones in danger of appearing out of touch with middle America.
Weyrich, it turns out, might have been a Cassandra. At the time, of course, his letter was criticized by many of his conservative friends, who had, after all, toiled in the trenches for years to elect Ronald Reagan. They were still optimistic that we were on the verge of some sort of permanent governing majority that would allow a new leader to finish what Reagan started. But today, it looks as though Weyrich was quite prescient.
To be sure, his idea wasn't entirely original. Years earlier, the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan observed, "The central conservative truth is that it is culture, not politics, that determines the success of a society." Years later, Andrew Breitbart would popularize this notion, and introduce it to a new generation of conservatives. But Weyrich was making an observation at a time when it would have been easy to dismiss such reflection as premature — or even pessimistic. (Indeed, many of his contemporaries did exactly that.)
Predictably, conservatives tended to ignore this inconvenient truth about the culture, persuading themselves that winning elections — and ostensibly passing conservative laws (though they did that less frequently) — were what mattered. (Or maybe it was that they convinced themselves that because they could win elections — because the American public supported their politics — it implied a "silent majority" of Americans were still traditional, salt-of-the-earth types.)
In the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s, Republicans did quite well electorally. Simultaneously, however, our society became coarser, more permissive, less traditional, and more socially liberal. And while politicians won elections, our young people turned to Hollywood for guidance. For every Republican elected, there were 10 films or songs (many of them quite good, actually) selling sex, drugs, and violence. Of course, this all comes down to that clichéd line about the breakdown of the family unit. It's clichéd because it's true.
Now: In the wake of the House GOP's capitulation on the Senate-passed fiscal cliff bill (which does nothing to rein in entitlement spending), some prominent conservatives are beginning to notice that today's electoral and public policy defeats are a natural byproduct of having lost the culture war.
For example, over at Red State, conservative commentator and blogger Erick Erickson argues, "Republicans should turn their attention toward — family." Erickson quotes Rick Santorum, who, during a 2012 Republican primary debate said:
The bottom line is we have a problem in this country, and the family is fracturing.
Over 40 percent of children born in America are born out of wedlock. How can a country survive if children are being raised in homes where it's so much harder to succeed economically? It's five times the rate of poverty in single-parent households than it is in two-parent homes. We can have limited government, lower tax — we hear this all the time, cut spending, limit the government, everything will be fine. No, everything's not going to be fine.
There are bigger problems at stake in America. And someone has got to go out there — I will — and talk about the things.
Democracy, of course, requires individuals who are moral and responsible. Strong families are the cure for much of what ails us. You pick the problem, and stronger families would probably render the solution moot. Consider a recent debate: We can put warning labels on violent games and movies, but that won't replace mom and dad being involved in their children's lives and being aware of what they are watching.
Conservatives have largely lost the culture, and it can't be won back by passing some landmark piece of legislation. Instead, it's going to be a long, hard slog. The good news is that, though conservatives typically hate the term "reactionary," most conservative victory is first predicated on liberal overreach.
It may be that if things get bad enough, America will finally start looking inward.
Matt K. Lewis writes for The Daily Caller and co-hosts The DMZ on Bloggingheads.tv.
Wait until the Liberals’ actions hit Americans in the wallet...then we’ll see that this battle isn’t over.
Look at Red Hampshire, for example...FOUR radical pro-abortion, pro-sodomite women elected to office in November (Governor, both House seats, one U. S. Senate). What an immoral sewer.
Strictly in general:
Women can handle plenty of truth. They can see exactly what goes on between people and are very suited to keeping corruption out of the home out of their husbands’ business and keeping their kids tuned into who’s good and who isn’t.
They do not know what to do with political power when they get it in order to preserve the Constitution they swear to uphold. THey make stuff up as they go along in this regard and they think emotionally they decide emotionally. It is key to running a home, and a family.
They are giving in to a lot of crap.
Did you not read the first sentence of my post?
When leftist win elections, they ban and outlaw things they don't like.
And they enact things that they DO like.
Oh, "conservatives" wring their hands about it, but when THEY come into power, the first thing they do is try to accomodate leftists.
I'm still at a loss as to why the Bush tax rates weren't made permanent at the time when we held the House, the Senate and the WH.
Republicans are morons who want to be liked.
Democrats are morons who use their power.
And as for culture, why isn't there a billionaire conservative who will provide an alternative to liberal Hollywood crap?
It is truly amazing to me that in less than 2 generations we have turned biological self-interest, all the teachings of our Lord, and 2 millenia of cultural instruction into something evil and repressive, and now made female promiscuity not only acceptable, but privileged.
Quite right, which makes it all the more remarkable there are any conservatives left at all. Unfortunately, the last two national elections show the number of those willing to climb out of the Orwellian group-think sewer are declining.
Women are disregarding their feminine gifts Of intuitiveness, protection of virtue of ther homes, being virtuous themseves - chaste, charitable, generous, humble, prudent and strong in character.
They look around themselves for approval, instead of seeking their own counsel, to other people, rather than the creator.
It goes to abortion, birth control, and everything predicted in Humanae Vitae (Of Human Life). It is a spiritual issue and as all such things, it will come out in history as a blip or an era, and it will be ugly.
Women will do best who demarcated themselves as having been against this, as their progeny will want to know just like folks now will want to know their forbears were abolitionists.
But that’s just speaking about history.
Bless you too my friend.
LLS
It’s not just families that’s under attack. It’s our civil society that’s being destroyed. This is the work of revolution and subversion. Once they tear down the underpinnings of our traditional culture, they’ll have gotten the revolution they’ve been foaming at the mouth for. Democracy cannot flourish without a strong civil society. It’s beastly and savagery.
Since when is anyone entitled to other peoples’ money? Poor or not?
There’s no incentive anywhere to get off public assistance. Many people crank out kids to get more benefits. There was a story out here about the woman making a hundred grand a year for her 9 kids from a bunch of different men. Deliberately having kids to get all sorts of eligibility for ebt, child assistance, free phones, etc.
And they have no shame working the system. the mindset is now I am entitled to all of this. Poorness is celebrated and rewarded and all the libtards feel good and get a slef-esteem boost for redistributing other peoples’ money to the people they believe deserve it because those people were somehow kept from making it themselves by those who actually earned it.
So, so many things wrong with what you said ...
Where to begin?
Save it.
And Romney was able to at least stay at least somewhat competitive because of his big vote lead in Texas and much of the south. The point is that Hussein won by 5 million votes. The election really wasn't that close. What reason is there to think that 450,000 votes should be flipped the other way? Heck, Obama won in 2012 by a couple million more votes than Bush beat Kerry by. Sad, but that's the reality of it.
“And I argued that voters do want to be given something by Republican politicians: Hope, optimism, and vision.”
Reminds me of the ambitious little commissar in `Enemies At The Gate’ telling Kruschev, “Give them hope!” Or Obama.
I’ll remain the sole member of the Can’t party: The federal government can’t keep spending more money than it takes in. It can’t threaten free men with tyranny. It can’t keep murdering 1,500 babies every day. It can’t keep encouraging an ongoing invasion of our country.
It can’t ... or not for much longer.
cva prefers to revel in his wrongness LOL
Finally, we need to drop out of this culture, and find places, even if it is where we physically are right now, where we can live godly, righteous and sober lives.
Very sound advice. This is why I hate popular culture, I may go the the movies once every 2 years, but only family friendly movies, I don't watch TV, I don't listen to talk radio or even watch Fox News. My main problem is spending too much time here at FR engaging in silly political debates that don't mean a damn thing.
I love my country, but there is nothing politically that can be done to save it.
But they lost and lost dreadfully. So maybe theirs wasn’t the only way. Maybe they didn’t have the right idea after all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.