Conservative Treatise, Part I

So often, well intentioned individuals mark elections as the beginning and the end of a particular era. But I tend to view things very differently. Wars are not won by counting the number of battle victories. In the end, some battles are more significant than others and turning points do occur. Ultimately, victories come only when the enemy recognizes their defeat. They must either be converted or willing to submit to whatever reality exists.

Trivializing the defeat suffered by the conservative movement on November 4, 2008 would be foolish and demonstrate a lack of humility that will ensure future defeats. Victories are won by setting goals, by being collectively introspective about past failures, by studying foes, and ultimately by doing what is just.

Therefore, I have developed a series of proposals I believe that conservatives must consider in order to regain momentum and ultimately take back our nation. I will post these ideas periodically over the course of a few weeks to provide adequate time for commentary on each idea.


1. Conservatism is the paradigm of our founders- don’t be duped by those who suggest that conservatism is the problem.
"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. ... Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." – Barry Goldwater
Talking heads, like those we witnessed since our defeat in November, have already launched into their analysis of what went wrong. As I said, collective introspection is necessary, but beware! Their “inside-the-beltway” reaction has been nothing less than predictable. I have already heard disseminators of propaganda from both parties speak of Republicans “running right, when they should have run left”. First, let us remember that John McCain had no traction in this election until he demonstrated to the conservative base of his party that they were part of his vision. By nominating Sarah Palin, a social and fiscal conservative, as his running mate he energized his base and saw the ONLY surge he experienced at any part of his campaign until “Joe the Plumber” entered the fray (from all indications, another social and fiscal conservative). Pundits like now Republican leaning Dick Morris (the man who engineered Clinton’s 1996 victory), Republicans need to ignore those on the “fringe” of their party (as he puts it), because they have no place else to go. Morris’ advice should be quite telling to us! We are seen by the dominating forces of the Republican Party in Washington as dim-witted step-children who are allowed to go for the drive, providing that we sit in the back seat, shut up, and keep our thoughts about the direction we should go to ourselves. There must come a time when we unite and forcefully reclaim the Republican Party. And yes, that could be a long and grueling process.

Another pundit suggested that we need to be a more “inclusive” party, appealing to those in the broad spectrum of America, and therefore we must abandon our stringent and “intolerant” commitment to national sovereignty by opening our borders. This is the type of rhetoric we should get used to… The most effective tactic employed by liberals and the media (but I repeat myself) is to contrive erroneous claims and reiterate them over and over until they are believed, and ultimately embraced. The entire “open borders” argument stems from another globalistic view which posits that because Americans live a good and healthy lifestyle, the world is entitled to equal status. In a sense, it calls for the “redistribution of lifestyles”. The problem with this view is that is that it fails to recognize that the United States is not merely a nation with borders; it’s an idea founded on the basic rights of man, the value of personal industry, and the embrace of a unique social contract. Once upon a time, immigrants to this nation sought to become Americans, and they had a clear understanding that of what constituted citizenship and they relished the opportunity. Today, many immigrants seem obstinate about assimilating to the values of their nation, and come only to line their pockets with US currency while maintaining a loyalty to the nation of their birth. Finding English speaking citizens along the US Mexican border in Texas is often an arduous task. Entire communities within the United States along the Mexican border show signs of national unity to their ancestral neighbors to the south, and little gratitude for the freedoms they have earned through US citizenship. Yesterday evening, I watched a boxing match between Oscar De La Hoya and Manny Pacquiao. Three national anthems were sung at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas, Nevada; The Anthems of the Philippines, Mexico, and the United States. I could certainly understand singing the national anthems of the Philippines and the US… Manny Pacquiao is from General Santos City, South Cotabato, Philippines. Oscar De La Hoya was born and raised in East Los Angeles, California, hence the US national anthem. But why the Mexican anthem for a man who is American by birth? Because we have perpetuated a culture (as Teddy Roosevelt referred to it) of “Hyphenated Americanism”. So long as we perpetuate the idea that the US is merely a “place” with political borders, we are doomed to become a nation of strangers. We are doomed to become a nation in which citizens enjoy the benefits of being Americans, whilst allowing their loyalties to belong to other nations. We must recognize that assimilation and the ultimate embracing of this nation the bearer of all of our loyalty is absolutely necessary. But I digress…

Another pundit suggested (as many have) that conservative thought runs counter to the “needs of the global community” and that the standing of our country in the eyes of the world is far more important that the vision Americans have for America. These individuals have an obvious affection for the European world view which sees sovereignty as an antiquated and obtuse concept. For years we have heard leftists complain about the deleterious effect George W. Bush has had on the American image abroad. We are a nation that fights tyranny while others placate despotic leaders; we contribute more foreign aid than any country on the planet; and we are still mobbed by foreigners trying to get into this country to escape poverty and/or oppression. Therefore, I think it is time that we stop asking “why don’t foreign nations like us” and begin to ask “what’s wrong with foreign nations that they do not like us.” And then, we need to let them work that problem out for themselves. Diplomacy is important, but when we set forth to do all the right things and still find no friends, then diplomacy becomes a token of weakness.

Finally, others demand greater populism, crediting Obama’s victory to his ability to speak to “all people” and give them a sense of ownership of this nation. Ownership of this nation? I always believed that if you embraced the basic rights of man and gave your greatest measure of devotion to our sacred principles, ownership became yours. Now, students in this nation are indoctrinated in the rewards of the culture of dependency. There was a time in the US when our parents told us that if we wanted something deeply enough, that we should work keenly toward that goal. There was never a guarantee, and failure was a necessary part of the pursuit of happiness. Unfortunately, the belief that we are all entitled to “happiness” has replaced the pursuit of it. To a liberal, this is achieved by taking from some and giving to others and by legislating away inequity through policies that lower standards to meet the least common denominator… among others.

So we must fight and expect to be bloodied. We must embrace truth and righteousness as our guiding principles and become unyielding in the fight to speak with passion and eloquence about those issues that are key to the survival of this nation. Conservatives are often very much like the loyal family dog. They do what is expected of them, and will only snap at their masters when beaten and trapped in a corner. Well, that time has come.