The Culture Wars, Part 6 The Conservative Culture Wars Battle Plan

Some recent feedback I’ve gotten from friends on this series has indicated that many have loved the series, but I’ve gone a bit too fast on terminology and some people have gotten lost. To remedy this matter I’m going to back up and define the terms again, to make sure everyone reading this can follow what’s going on.

Culture Wars: This is a "war" that has been going on between political liberals and political conservatives, for at least the last 50 years, and which has intensified over the last 20 years. It is called a "culture" war because to a large extent it concerns cultural issues such as ethics and morals, religion, education, and the quality and content of entertainment. For much of the last 50 years, liberals have been winning handily. Only over the last 15 or so years have conservatives started making headway in the war.

Radical Egalitarianism: This jaw-cracking term refers to a belief that all persons should have equal outcomes in life. Equal outcomes (as opposed to equal opportunity) means that the results of people’s efforts and work should result in the same amount or level of possessions or standard of living for all individuals. This concept comes originally from Marxism and communism.

Radical Individualism: This is the concept that a person should be able to do whatever they want to, that there should be no limits placed upon a person, especially in the sexual arena. This concept is heavily reflected in current day movies and television, not to mention the personal lives of many of the stars. Note that those who believe strongly in radical individualism are at the forefront of the attacks on religion today, most notably Christianity, since they rightly recognize religion as one of the standard-bearers of morality in the society.

Radical Modern Liberal: A person who has embraced radical egalitarianism and radical individualism and a wide variety of issues that forward those concepts in society. The true modern liberal, as opposed to what we could call the "classic liberal," embraces an ideology that was born in the radical student movement of the 1960s.

——————————————————————————————————————————

A Conservative Battle Plan

For those of you who have been following this series, this is arguably the most important part, the battle plan. This is how we’re going to defeat the radical liberal left, bring sanity and societal calm back to America, and create a new Golden Age in the 21st century.

0. Use the left’s tactics but don’t descend to their depraved ethics level

In part 4 of this series (see) I described some of the radical modern left’s tactics. It is vital that we fully understand what their tactics are, and use them ourselves against them.

But it is also vital that we not descend to their depraved ethics level. This is not mainly for PR value or to take the "moral high road," though those factors exist.

The main reason we should not descend to the modern radical liberal’s depraved standard of ethics, is that by actually maintaining a higher standard of ethics, we will know that we are doing the right thing. Ultimately, it is we who have to look ourselves in the mirror each morning, and knowing that we are carrying out this campaign in an ethical fashion will give us strength. And the liberals’ use of unethical methods will hurt them in the long run, because presumably they look in the mirror every morning too, at least to comb their hair.

A. Reinforce and continue the conservative alternative media revolution

There has been a revolution in the media over the last 15 years. Prior to that, the mainstream news media were literal gatekeepers. They could (and did) decide what news we would hear and what we wouldn’t hear, and it was virtually always liberal. It has had a liberal slant, not only on the commentary, but on the actual news itself. Not only has the news had a liberal slant, but the news outlets would tell us only the news that would help the liberal cause and withhold the news that would hurt the liberal cause.

Several excellent books, including "Bias" by Bernard Goldberg, "Slander" and "Treason" by Ann Coulter, "The Thought Police" by Tammy Bruce, "Journalistic Fraud, How the New York Times Distorts the News and Why it Can No Longer Be Trusted" by Bob Kohn, and "Off With Their Heads" by Dick Morris, cover the widespread liberal bias in the mainstream news media. I’ve read and I recommend all these books, especially to anyone who still believes the ridiculous assertion that there is no liberal bias in the mainstream news media, or even more preposterous, that there is a conservative bias.

The mainstream media are still as liberally biased as ever and are still trying to act as gatekeepers. But they do not recognize a revolution that has happened outside of their hallowed halls.

Largely because of this liberal bias, a conservative alternative media has grown up and is being hungrily consumed by conservatives nationwide who have been looking for news and commentary sources that agree with their views. As I mentioned in my last article, the book "South Park Conservatives" by Brian C. Anderson, discusses at length how Fox News, conservative web sites and blogs, talk radio, and a large selection of conservative political books, have changed the media landscape forever.

Conservatives must continue and reinforce the reach and quality of message of the conservative alternative media revolution.

B. Expose and ridicule liberals, as we have been doing

Much of the conservative counter media has been engaged in exposing and ridiculing liberals and their ludicrous message and tactics. Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and other conservative commentators have been doing a masterful job of this. In her new book, "How to Talk to a Liberal If You Must", Ann Coulter says:

"You must outrage the enemy. If the liberal you’re arguing with doesn’t become speechless with sputtering, impotent rage, you’re not doing it right."

That’s the kind of outrageousness that got her on the cover of Time magazine, even if they did choose the most unflattering picture possible.

1. Paint/expose/position the radical liberals as being very radical, in order to alienate them from mainstream Americans

We must point out the most outrageous and radical elements of the liberal agenda, which isn’t hard, because the radicals have basically taken over the Democratic Party. The more they are positioned or painted as radical, the more they will be rejected by mainstream American which just happens to have, for the most part, common sense.

2. Position the radical modern liberal with the failed ideology of communism, which is the truth

We must point out that much of the liberal agenda comes from Marxism or its offshoot, cultural Marxism (which gave us affirmative action). This is completely true, because welfare and other social redistribution programs, the idea that business and business owners are inherently evil, anti-Capitalism, being against religion, and being against the family, all have their roots in Marx. It’s very interesting to read the "Communist Manifesto," because it’s all in there.

One of the reasons it is good to associate liberals and their radical agenda with communism and Marx is because, to a large extent, communism is in disfavor with the broad American population today (not with liberals who secretly think Marx is wonderful). After all, the prototype of communist utopia, the USSR, kind of fell flat on its face (which oddly doesn’t reduce the devotion of liberals to it by one iota).

Another great reason to associate liberals with Marx is because you’ll note that they all sort of downplay or underplay their Marxist roots. They know the public isn’t crazy about Marx so they just sort of don’t mention it. So of course it’s fun to re-tie that line, if nothing else just to watch them squirm and try to deny it.

3. Expose what the radical modern liberal is really working towards

As I have covered elsewhere in this series, if you take all of the parts of the radical modern liberal agenda, really look at them, put them all together, and actually envision the successful completion of all of them, you’ll incredibly wind up with the destruction of western civilization. If you think that’s a wild or unreasonable statement, review part 2 of this series, the issues, and take a look at those issues and what it would mean if they were all accomplished.

One of the problems in communicating this to the broad public is that it is too unbelievable that any sane person would want to work towards that. And of course that’s true. No sane person would.

This point needs to be promoted heavily and repeatedly until the public really gets it.

4. Expose and explain why radical egalitarianism and radical individualism are inherently destructive to society

If you’ve read this entire series, I think you can see how radical egalitarianism (equal outcomes for all) and radical individualism (anything goes, especially on the sexual front) are inherently destructive.

But this case needs to be made, passionately, intelligently and repeatedly with the American public. In too many cases, deviancy has already been "defined down" to the point where previously deviant behavior is now accepted. Plus we have to fight the ideas of socialism and make the case that these do not work and should be rejected.

C. Affirm the conservative platform and world view

Although much of what the conservative media and commentators are doing is exposing and ridiculing the liberals (I have done this extensively myself), we need to also promote and affirm the conservative platform itself to the public and get them to see the inherent wisdom in it. This includes, in a nutshell:

1. Welfare reduced or abolished
2. Religious freedom and morality promoted
3. Less government
4. Lower taxes (and equal taxes, not progressive taxation where those with higher incomes pay nearly all the taxes)
5. Promote personal responsibility
6. Equal opportunities, not equal outcomes
7. Close the borders to illegal immigration
8. Abortion severely limited or abolished
9. Gun ownership protected
10. No gay marriage
11. The environment is doing much better than the environmentalist activists tell us
12. Get the federal courts back to their proper role of interpreting the Constitution (the "originalist" position), not legislating from the bench
13. Promote and strengthen the family

D. Re-educate the public away from the socialist safety net idea

We must re-educate people away from the socialist safety net idea that has been promoted heavily to them for the last 75 years. It is this idea which has given rise to the welfare society, the "entitlement" mentality or "get something for nothing" mentality, and the idea that the government will take care of you no matter what.

Recently we saw the Mayor of New Orleans go on the radio and curse at President Bush because aid did not arrive fast enough in New Orleans. The socialist safety net idea has become so pervasive that he thinks the federal government should basically be able to stop a hurricane, and save his city from the worst devastation the area has ever seen. And then get really indignant if it doesn’t. As if evacuating one million people would be easy or fast.

We see many examples of the pervasive effect of this socialist idea. We must educate people back to the concept that each person needs to be responsible for his own welfare and his own happiness. It will take a lot to reverse this trend but this is what we must do.

E. Go on the offensive, put liberals on the defensive

This is one of the most important aspects of the battle plan. Conservatives need to find ways in which we can take the battle to the liberals, being proactive and attacking them and their agenda the way they have been attacking us for over 40 years.

1. Federal marriage amendment

The public is overwhelmingly against gay marriage, as evidenced by the fact that a ban on this passed in every state that had it on the ballot in the 2004 election.

Plus, studies show that only 5% of the gay community is monogamous. Think about that for a moment.

If only 5% of gays are monogamous, why are they pushing so hard for gay marriage?

It certainly could not be because they wish to have the right to the same type of marriage that heterosexual people have, i.e. monogamous. Their PR efforts in recent years have been to show that gays are "just like everyone else." This is nonsense, because the whole way they view and approach relationships is much different.

A Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage would strengthen the family and strike a blow against the gay rights activists’ efforts to undermine and redefine marriage, which is what the gay marriage effort is.

2. Outlaw welfare benefits for illegal immigrants, enforce immigration laws

Being soft on immigration isn’t just a liberal fault. Witness President Bush’s guest worker program idea which I oppose.

But it is certainly liberals who push the hardest for welfare benefits for illegals (which is one of the primary things that attracts them), and who argue most heatedly for them not to be deported even after being convicted of serious crimes. And it is certainly conservatives that are at the center of the Minuteman Project, where citizens go to the border with binoculars and cell phones to report illegal immigrant crossings.

America can’t afford to pay for all that welfare for illegal immigrants, especially when that provides an incentive for millions more to come here. Witness California which is nearly going broke but has to pay $4 billion a year in aid to illegal immigrants. And we certainly can’t afford the dangerous Mexican gangs, made up mostly of illegal immigrants, that populate LA and other southern cities in border states.

But beyond that and even more importantly, welfare for illegal immigrants provides an incentive for the wrong type of people to come to the United States. Even though all people should have equal rights, all people do NOT have equal value to society in general or to our country in particular. People who want to come to this country legally to work and become part of our society (not just come here temporarily), are definitely more valuable than people who want to go on the dole and become welfare parasites. We need to have incentives that attract the most valuable, not least valuable people, to come to America.

3. Pass college students’ bill of rights (Horowitz)

There is a great deal of information suggesting that radical liberals have virtually taken over college campuses nationwide. Marxists, radical feminists, gay activists, multiculturists (who basically say that every culture on Earth is better and more important than American culture), and radical anti-America types, have a virtual lock on the university curriculums today.

Just as one example, radical feminists are pushing the idea on campuses (besides their main idea that men are responsible for all the evil ever perpetrated in history) that logic is a paternalistic concept and it discriminates against "other ways of knowing" that women are good at. If you try to criticize their ideas, you are being "sexist" and "discriminatory." This concept is seriously being taught by tenured professors at many colleges today.

See the book "Souching Towards Gamorrah" by Robert Bork and columns by Dr. Mike Adams, a professor at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington (www.dradams.org) for more information on this. Aside from being very informative Dr. Adams is hilarious as well.

Conservative author and columnist David Horowitz (www.frontpagemag.com) has been working on a project to pass a students’ bill of rights at the state legislature level, which has been gaining traction in many states. The idea is that students have the right not to be force-fed any ideology in classes, and not to be flunked or given lower grades for failing to conform to liberal doctrine, as frequently happens now.

4. Social Security reform

President Bush has some excellent ideas on fixing Social Security, which is a broken plan and is predicted to go broke within a few years. The Democrats, as one might expect, are fighting this tooth and nail and might even win in terms of getting the issue off the national agenda for the immediate term.

But conservatives should continue to push for Social Security reform, for a couple of reasons. One, it needs to happen. The system will go broke within our lifetimes if nothing is done. Two, the Democrats feel that Social Security is part of FDR’s legacy and so it is a major, long-term feather in their cap. Even though over the years, Democrats are the ones who have led the way in ruining it due to raiding the fund. But the point is that for Republicans to reform Social Security for the better would solidly position them as the party of positive change, which is actually the truth today. And it would make Democrats look ridiculous, which is also the truth. And that’s why the Dems are fighting it so hard.

5. Constitutional amendment allowing Congress to overturn Supreme Court and other courts by majority vote

The books "Slouching Towards Gamorrah" by Robert Bork and "Winning the Future" by Newt Gingrich, detail how the Supreme Court and other federal courts have gone well beyond their intended Constitutional powers and started legislating from the bench. The book "Men in Black" by Mark R. Levin also covers this, though I haven’t read it yet.

Note how hard the top liberals in the Senate have been fighting President Bush on his judicial nominations, even going so far as to filibuster them and refuse to bring them to a vote (which was never done before the last few years). And that was long before the two recent openings on the Supreme Court.

Anyway, the idea of a constitutional amendment giving the power to Congress to overturn high court rulings, would tend to forcibly restore the balance of power, giving more back to the people (via Congressional veto power). The problem is that the original idea in the Constitution was not that the Supreme Court would be the ultimate decision point for key social issues. That idea has only evolved gradually over the last 100 years.

Even the threat or even the talk of such a Constitutional amendment would tend to keep the high court more in line, though I think the amendment idea is a good one, because it would take power away from unelected high court officials and put it back in the hands of the people, via Congress. And I recommend that this veto power for Congress should require a two-thirds majority.

6. Constitutional amendment(s) exactly defining and clarifying the separation of church and state, and right to own guns

Radical liberals in recent years have perverted the original intention of the Constitution, which was that government would not establish a state religion (as they have in Germany currently) or exert control over the church, to the idea that religion and religious ideas should not be allowed to be expressed in the public arena.

The source of this perversion is the radical individualists, because the last thing they want is for any religious person to be able to say that such and such specific type of behavior is immoral, should be banned, kept off TV or the Internet, etc. They want immoral behavior promoted, glorified, and normalized. So to them religion is the enemy.

We need to amend the Constitution to specifically clarify that the First Amendment means that the government cannot create a state religion, in words "so plain and firm as to command their assent" (in the words of Thomas Jefferson).

Similarly, liberals have argued that the Constitution should not guarantee the rights of citizens to own guns. I am not a gun owner myself, but studies show that thousands of crimes are prevented each year because the perpetrator was scared off by the citizen having a gun. I support the right of citizens to own guns.

I recommend a Constitutional amendment that would clarify and protect the rights of citizens to own firearms.

Critics will say that this is nonsense, that we just have to get the correct interpretation of the original Constitutional passages and that passage of new amendments clarifying them is unnecessary. I disagree. The reason I propose this is that it is part of the proactive method of bringing the battle to the liberals. It is an offensive action. Even if such a measure were not passed, the fact that it was brought up and debated, itself, would tend to prevent future abuses. But I think we should pass it as well.

7. Broadly push for repeal of failed government programs, even dissolving failed government agencies

One thing that government does very well is to increase its size and scope, and one thing that it does very poorly is to eliminate any program or agency, once created, even when it is failing.

Plus government in general, and modern radical liberals in particular, do not operate on the concept of measuring a government program or agency by results.

In keeping with the theme of "less government," "lower taxes," and measuring programs by their results, we need to re-evaluate various government programs and even entire agencies and eliminate the ones that are failures. Like the whole farm subsidy system for starters. There are many examples. This would mean less money wasted, plus in the case of programs that are actually destructive, less harm done.

Summary on Being Proactive

An important strategy in any chess game is to advance your pieces across the board, threaten your opponent’s key pieces, put his King in check, and generally play offensively and keep your opponent on the defensive. This strategy is important in any game.

In the culture wars, the importance of being pro-active and going on the offensive, is not so much that we would get each of these measures passed, though I believe each of them to be positive. It is that we are on the offensive, attacking the radical liberals where they live. Just the fact that we are attacking them, not defending against their attacks, will reduce their number and quality of attacks, because they will have to spend more time and energy defending. And it is a strategy that the liberals have been using successfully on us for over 50 years. So don’t you think it’s about time we used it on them?

F. Allow black conservatives to address and handle black issues, so that no one can be accused of being racist.

One of the tactics of liberals over the years has been to attack anyone who opposes welfare, affirmative action or other liberal causes by labeling them "racist." And once that racist label has been applied, it’s hard to remove it or even prove it to be incorrect (just ask Trent Lott).

The solution to this tactic is to let the black conservatives, such as Thomas Sowell, Larry Elder, Armstrong Williams, and Star Parker, who are routinely against welfare and other liberal policies, to fight the fight against those policies. That way, no one can accuse a black of being "racist" against other blacks.

G. Realize that all liberals are not our enemies

Conservatives need to realize that not all liberals are our enemies. The true enemy here is radical modern liberals who are advocating, promoting and fighting for issues and policies that, if implemented, would destroy western civilization. Though it may be tempting to think of all liberals these days as being radical, and these radicals have taken over the Democratic Party, in actual fact the radicals make up a small minority of even those who call themselves "liberal."

There’s a difference between a person who believes that we ought to have welfare and that would be a more compassionate situation, and a person who believes that western civilization is the root of all evil and so should be destroyed.

Both attitudes are born from Karl Marx, but the difference is one of degree and fervor. One believes that a little socialism is compassionate. The other believes that we need to bring about raw, red revolution.

The radical modern liberal is the revolutionary. He is covertly working towards the destruction of the USA and western civilization. He thinks the US is based on an inherently cruel and unfair system and that we must destroy it and replace it with a communist utopian dream. Yet that utopian dream, after 100 years of trying around the world, has yet to exist or work in any country where it has been tried. It has brought only totalitarianism and slaughter.

The radical modern liberal will not admit his true purpose of course. He wraps it in pretty sounding arguments and the idea of "rights," and splits his movement into many "single issue" groups so that the public does not see the big picture.

I personally happen to disagree with both the compassionate socialist and the revolutionary. I believe that even a little socialism is not really compassionate and hurts both the giver and receiver.

But my point is that we need to differentiate between the compassionate socialist and the revolutionary. Not all liberals are revolutionaries. But the revolutionaries are the ones we need to stop, on an urgent basis. The rest of the liberals have been hoodwinked by the revolutionaries, their ideals used against them.

Our task then, is to identify, as clearly as we can, who these radicals are. We need to use every tool at our disposal against them. And an idea of a tool we could use is to alienate those radical leaders from their own liberal base. In other words, show the non-radical liberals who these radicals really are and what they’re really working towards. And then enlist the aid of the liberals against their radical leaders. In other words, appeal to liberals to kick the radicals out on their ear. Think of the power of conservatives and liberals working together to knock these insane radicals out (I know I’m probably shocking you here).

A good place to start in terms of identifying the radicals, is a new book by Bernard Goldberg (author of "Bias," the first book to really blow the whistle on liberal media bias). The new book is entitled "100 People That Are Destroying America," which names a lot of these radical modern liberals.

I will also be covering more in coming articles about just who these radical modern liberals are.

H. Promote religious freedom

Religious freedom and the freedom of man to affirm his spiritual nature, is one of the most important issues of our time. This freedom has been under attack for hundreds of years, but especially the last 50 years.

The Supreme Court began around 50 years ago issuing rulings that not only tried to build a "wall between church and state," but that were actually hostile to religion.

The ACLU has taken on as its main mission at this time, attacking Christianity. Witness their efforts to remove religious expression from the public square, their attacks of the Boy Scouts, their suits to remove the tiny cross from the seal of the County of Los Angeles. I believe that these attacks harm all of us, whether we are Christians or not.

Religions are perhaps the main source of teaching morality in our society, which is why the radical individualist fights them so hard. If morality is no longer taught, we get a chaotic society, requiring more police and more governmental control. Which I believe was the Marxist goal all along. Morality, taught well to all citizens, makes heavy police and more government control unnecessary.

One more comment on religious freedom. Some conservative commentators have written extensively that we need a return to Judeo-Christian values. I have even seen some write columns criticize other religions. My opinion is that the conservative movement needs to embrace, promote and champion religious freedom, freedom for all religions. Not just Judaism or Christianity. All religions.

Summary

While all the above items are important and will form an effective battle plan, I wish to point out which items are the most important. There are four items which are the most important in my view:

1. Pro-actively attacking liberals, their issues and their groups.
2. Affirm the conservative world-view.
3. Differentiate between radical modern liberals (the minority) and the rest of liberals. Attack the radicals, not all liberals.
4. Promote freedom of religion.

Those are head and shoulders above the rest.