'Conservativism' is no longer enough; it's time for something new

[mystery-ak]

December 13, 2022
'Conservativism' is no longer enough; it's time for something new
By John Dale Dunn

Glenn Ellmers, a conservative scholar, has looked at the American political scene and concluded that myriad divisions have turned us into two separate nations, half of whom believe in a constitutional America, and the other half of whom subscribe to the values the leftist revolution introduced. Despite this manifest schism, he argues, “Conservatism, Inc.” remains clueless and, therefore, dangerous. For those who are disheartened, though, he has a plan of action for fighting back with a counter-revolution.

Ellmers is an intellectual: He’s a research fellow at the Claremont Institute, which is trying to re-imagine an American civil society true to the Founders’ vision. He’s also a Fellow at the Institute for American Greatness and a visiting research scholar at Hillsdale College. Additionally, Ellmer is a writer (The Soul of Politics: Harry V. Jaffa and the Fight for America) and was a speechwriter for the Secretary of Energy in the Trump administration. This is a smart man with a proactive plan for helping America recover.

In the essay Conservatism Is No Longer Enough, Mr. Ellmers concludes bluntly that America is no longer one country or people and that “most people living in the United States today—certainly more than half—are not Americans in any meaningful sense of the term” but are, instead, aliens and native-born fallen away patriots and socialist progressives who don’t ascribe to the national traditions and ideals that are essential to E Pluribus Unum.

Call the non-citizens what you will, but the reality is that there is a majority who are not loyal Americans. Divisions in America are growing, disrupting families and certainly the population at large, as everyone is fired up by the socialist promoters of polarization and societal conflict.

more
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/12/conservativism_is_no_longer_enough_its_time_for_something_new.html

[Bigun]

We were warned Mr. Elmers!  Several times in fact.

“The mobs of the great cities add just so much to the support of pure government as sores do to the strength of the human body. It is the manners and spirit of a people which preserve a republic in vigor. A degeneracy in these is a canker which soon eats to the heart of its laws and constitution.”

Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia Q.XIX, 1782. ME 2:230

"I think our governments will remain virtuous for many centuries as long as they are chiefly agricultural; and this will be as long as there shall be vacant lands in any part of America. When they get piled upon one another in large cities as in Europe, they will become corrupt as in Europe.”

Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1787. Papers 12:442

“I view great cities as pestilential to the morals, the health and the liberties of man. True, they nourish some of the elegant arts; but the useful ones can thrive elsewhere; and less perfection in the others, with more health, virtue and freedom, would be my choice.”

Thomas Jefferson to Benjamin Rush, 1800. ME 10:173

[rustynail]

 it's time for something new: Gibbeting.

[Bigun]

Here's a link to the original Elmers article:

https://americanmind.org/salvo/why-the-claremont-institute-is-not-conservative-and-you-shouldnt-be-either/

Let’s be blunt. The United States has become two nations occupying the same country. When pressed, or in private, many would now agree. Fewer are willing to take the next step and accept that most people living in the United States today—certainly more than half—are not Americans in any meaningful sense of the term.

That's obvious to any objective person.

[aligncare]

There’s nothing wrong with the basic message of conservatism, but in the arena of ideas it just can’t compete with the promise of utopian perfection offered by the international left (democrats).  Liberty doesn’t seem to appeal to the woke automatons of the left—and you just can’t fix stupid.

[Bigun]

There’s nothing wrong with the basic message of conservatism, but in the arena of ideas it just can’t compete with the promise of utopian perfection offered by the international left (democrats).  Liberty doesn’t seem to appeal to the woke automatons of the left—and you just can’t fix stupid.

Most people in this country have never experienced real freedom and thus don't have any idea what it would require of them.  If you told them, they would reject it out of hand. They LIKE having a nanny. @aligncare

[Free Vulcan]

We definitely need a refocus to more 'basic governance' issues - energy, education, crime, spending, etc.

Don't know what you want to call it, but that's the path we need to go.

[roamer_1]

Conservatism works every time its tried.

[Bigun]

Conservatism works every time its tried.

When was it last tried in the USA in your opinion @roamer_1 When was the size and scope of the federal government last actually reduced?

[roamer_1]

When was it last tried in the USA in your opinion @roamer_1 When was the size and scope of the federal government last actually reduced?

@Bigun
Coolidge, perhaps... LONG  ago... but do not make light of Goldwater, Reagan, the 94 Congress or the TEA party. Or the movements they created in state houses. That it hasn't made it to federal does not deny the point.

And besides, there is no other balm. And never will be.

[Bigun]

@Bigun
Coolidge, perhaps... LONG  ago... but do not make light of Goldwater, Reagan, the 94 Congress or the TEA party. Or the movements they created in state houses. That it hasn't made it to federal does not deny the point.

And besides, there is no other balm. And never will be.

@roamer_1 I agree but note that every single one of those movements has been tamped down by self serving slugs in and out of government.

[roamer_1]

@roamer_1 I agree but note that every single one of those movements has been tamped down by self serving slugs in and out of government.

@Bigun
NOT at state. Not locally. And some have had grand effect at federal, even if incomplete.
Enough to prove the phrase as true. Seeking for 'something more' , 'something new' , is a fallacy.

[Bigun]

@Bigun
NOT at state. Not locally. And some have had grand effect at federal, even if incomplete.
Enough to prove the phrase as true. Seeking for 'something more' , 'something new' , is a fallacy.

I'm sorry @roamer_1  but that just isn't true! in the most recent election legislative seats were lost to Communists (Democrats).

Heading into the election, Democrats controlled 36 chambers and Republicans controlled 62. A bipartisan coalition controlled the Alaska House.

As a result of the election:

Democrats gained control of four chambers—the Michigan House and Senate, Minnesota Senate, and Pennsylvania House—bringing their total to 40.[1] Wins in Minnesota and Michigan created new Democratic trifectas in those states. Both had previously been divided governments.
A bipartisan coalition gained control of the Alaska State Senate.
Republicans lost control of those five chambers, bringing their total to 57.


https://ballotpedia.org/Election_results...te_legislatures

[roamer_1]

I'm sorry @roamer_1  but that just isn't true! in the most recent election legislative seats were lost to Communists (Democrats).

So what @Bigun ? Base a change for something 'new' on a single election cycle? Or even a trend?

Nah. What works, works. Period. The problem is not in the message, nor in the philosophy. The problem is in getting it applied.

The reason liberalism is winning is not by merit.
It has no merit.
It is winning because it has no opposition.

There's your problem, right there.

[Bigun]

So what @Bigun ? Base a change for something 'new' on a single election cycle? Or even a trend?

Nah. What works, works. Period. The problem is not in the message, nor in the philosophy. The problem is in getting it applied.

The reason liberalism is winning is not by merit.
It has no merit.
It is winning because it has no opposition.

There's your problem, right there.

So you don't think the loss of those legislatures is going to have its effect on the next presidential election regardless the outcome of Moore vs Harper?  If so, we are very far apart.

[roamer_1]

So you don't think the loss of those legislatures is going to have its effect on the next presidential election regardless the outcome of Moore vs Harper?  If so, we are very far apart.

No... Merely that such things can change over night. And whatever effect it may have on the next presidential election is a rather short view... Comparable to throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Certainly no cause to throw out truth. Because if we do, then no one will be standing on truth at all.

[jmyrlefuller]

The time for something new was before the left hijacked your daughters. Now they control the future. It's too late. We are doomed.

[Fishrrman]

Bigun opines in reply 3 above:
"That's obvious to any objective person."

Then why isn't it obvious to you, that it could soon be time to follow the same pathway that the original Colonists took:
- First, convene a Continental Congress (actually two of them), comprised of delegates from the red states, to decide what to do,
and then
- To DO it.
???

[Fishrrman]

Title and premise:
'Conservativism' is no longer enough; it's time for something new

While "conservatives" dream of re-uniting the [once] United States of America, The Party is well into the business of conquering it.

Tell me... honestly... anyone here... what have you seen in recent years to prove otherwise...?

[Ghost Bear]

The time for something new was before the left hijacked your daughters. Now they control the future. It's too late. We are doomed.

Agreed.

[EdinVA]

No... Merely that such things can change over night. And whatever effect it may have on the next presidential election is a rather short view... Comparable to throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Certainly no cause to throw out truth. Because if we do, then no one will be standing on truth at all.

@roamer_1
Using a football analogy...
When I read the things you write, it seems to me that you think we are mid field, all time outs left and we have the ball and beginning the 3rd quarter.

What I think is the socialists are at the 5 yard line with all time outs and 81 million (real and imagined) players and our side has lost the defensive line and no time out and we are having to fight tooth and nail to keep the socialist out of the end zone.

Forget throwing the baby out with the bathwater, who has time for a bath?

[libertybele]

Bigun opines in reply 3 above:
"That's obvious to any objective person."

Then why isn't it obvious to you, that it could soon be time to follow the same pathway that the original Colonists took:
- First, convene a Continental Congress (actually two of them), comprised of delegates from the red states, to decide what to do,
and then
- To DO it.
???

I believe you may be confusing a Continental Congress with a Convention of States?  There has to be a majority of state legislatures to call a Convention of States and it is not the same as implementing a Continental Congress, so what you are proposing, please enlighten me.

Again @Fishrrman  and I have asked this several times, who would be the leader or leaders of this Continental Congress that you keep referring to?? 

A Convention of States technically gives the power back to the States but keep in mind that the leftists aren't adhering to any 'change' unless it is the 'change' that they are determining.  Yes States rights, but certainly those in power aren't going to see it that way. 

I don't profess to know the ins and outs of either, so once again, I defer to your knowledge and I'm only asking how you expect that either would proceed and succeed towards conservatism.  I see that it could easily head south towards further liberalism or an out and out Revolution. 

@Fishrrman if you have responded before to this subject, I apologize for missing it.

[roamer_1]

@roamer_1
Using a football analogy...
When I read the things you write, it seems to me that you think we are mid field, all time outs left and we have the ball and beginning the 3rd quarter.

What I think is the socialists are at the 5 yard line with all time outs and 81 million (real and imagined) players and our side has lost the defensive line and no time out and we are having to fight tooth and nail to keep the socialist out of the end zone.

Forget throwing the baby out with the bathwater, who has time for a bath?

Alright @EdinVA ...
Let's say you're right. What then? Sacrifice truth to what end? Is it fixed with untruth?

Makes no difference. Conservatism won't change, even if y'all do. You're just taking the very long and painful way around right back to where you were.

There will not be a different fix found. You're fooling yourself.

As for me, I will stand upon solid ground. I will continue just the way I have, and if it all falls down around me, the path open to me will surely be the one I am already on. Won't keep me from the pain resulting from the idiocy that others prefer... But it will surely lessen it compared to any other path.

[Fishrrman]

bele writes:
"I believe you may be confusing a Continental Congress with a Convention of States?"

NO.
NEVER.
NOT ONCE.
(have I made myself clear about that?)

An Article V "convention of the States" is "in the Constitution", and would be bound by it.

A new Continental Congress is "extra-Constitutional" and WOULD NOT BE so bound -- and that's EXACTLY why I offer it as the better course of action.

We've reached the point where the matter-at-hand is no longer "saving" the country (or perhaps even the Constitution, which can no longer protect us as it's written).

Rather, the future must lie "in something new" -- on BOTH counts.

[Sighlass]

Choose between worshiping Baal or Jesus... Americans have chosen, history has shown us what happens time and time again afterwards. The golden calf is corrupt government, get out of it's way or go down dying. My path does look gloomy if I take my eyes off the true reward.