Conservatives Need To Rediscover Their Paternalistic Side

Harsh, unadulterated economic conservatism is not working. If conservatives want to strengthen families and communities, they need to view the state as a tool, not as an enemy.

Deregulations. Tax Cuts. Privatisations. These are the gospels of Conservative orthodoxy. Ever since Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher took office in their respective countries, conservatives worldwide have followed these doctrines unwaveringly, even when they contradict their overall social conservative aims - which is almost all of the time.

So wedded are right-wingers to neoliberal economic ideology, that they have begun to advocate for a worldview antithesis to their own convictions. No clearer example of this has been the recent debate surrounding free school meals, which are gradually being rolled out in a number of US states, almost entirely by Democrats. You would expect the family-loving traditionalists to be in favour of such a policy - after all, what greater sense of community or Christ-like devotion exists than feeding the most vulnerable children in our society? But that could not be further from the truth; in fact, leading conservative pundits, like Ben Shapiro and Matt Walsh, are the most fervent critics of the policy, brandishing it as government overreach and often equating it to communism. To most people not suffering from fetal alcohol syndrome, this is hyperbole taken to its extreme, an absurd and ridiculous proclamation not backed up by the facts. And it’s just one more example of how the modern right sabotages its own beliefs.

This overreliance on neoliberal orthodoxy manifests itself in almost all of their economic policies, causing them to sneer at even the simplest of suggestions, such as a higher minimum wage or child welfare benefits. Instead, conservatives are willing to submit to an ideology that puts the interests of multi-billion, international conglomerates ahead of the interests of their local communities and people. Surely not all of them are deluded enough to believe that tech barons like Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos are interested in the survival of Western culture? Men who indulge in their own vices, blinded by their material wealth. To them, and all of the other billionaires and millionaires in the world, the pursuit of profit is paramount. Questions of national sovereignty, the nuclear family and preserving Western heritage matter very little. They do not make for worthwhile allies. So why do conservatives tie themselves to them?

The simple fact is that without government intervention, a socially conservative society is virtually impossible to achieve. Young couples can’t raise new families if the wages they rely on are unable to sustain the welfare of children. New families can’t grow and thrive if the parents are struggling to afford their rent. A new generation of children will not grow to love their country if the government turns its back on them. It’s not a matter of embracing every form of government intervention or converting to a diluted form of communism; it’s a matter of knowing which battles to pick and which can benefit the people of their country.

Speaking more candidly, only through a more interventionist state can the aspirations of modern-day conservatives be realised. And what makes it even better is that they’re electorally popular. Alleviating the burdens placed on the younger generation will make them more indebted to whoever helped them. This is an excellent opportunity for right-wingers to connect with a demographic they have long struggled with. Instead of treating them with disdain, offer them help and by doing so many may switch their allegiances from leftist parties to a new paternalistic right-wing.

Socially right-wing policies are broadly popular - people want less immigration, lower crime, stable and homogeneous communities, and less extreme social liberal indoctrination. What’s holding that back is the right’s aversion to assisting it from occurring. Fix that and things become a lot easier.