Our next move is obvious: we must concentrate our efforts in winning the culture war. We must dig the trenchs and mount the maxim guns. Buchanan makes this same point:
But it is culture and values that matter for Mr. Buchanan, who for more than 40 years has helped shape American conservatism. In his 1992 speech to the Republican National Convention in Houston, he declared: "There is a religious war going on in our country for the soul of America. It is a cultural war, as critical to the kind of nation we will one day be as was the Cold War itself." He is still fighting that war. "American culture has become toxic and poisonous," he says. "Take a look at what Hollywood produces today and what it produced in the 1950s. The alteration is dramatic."
Indeed. But unfortunately Buchanan and I part ways at his lack of confidence in the conservatives' ability to win the culture war:
He suggests that in some respects, traditionalists might be fighting for a lost cause. "We say we won a great victory by defeating gay marriage in 11 state-ballot referenda in November," he says. "But I think in the long run, that will be seen as a victory in defense of a citadel that eventually fell." As he later says, "I can't say we won the cultural war, and it's more likely we lost it."
It is never too late. The culture war can be won. And with such a victory the final and ultimate destruction of liberalism would not be far away. But the cancer inflicting society is a very powerful one. It has become resistant to many antidotes used against it in the past. Yet laying siege to the liberal stronghold may not be as tough as conservatives once thought, especially if we figure out which part of the wall to put the battering ram against. Thomas Sowell gives good indication where conservatives should focus their main efforts:
Indeed, the left in general has increasingly favored unelected institutions which impose their views, whether the federal courts, environmental agencies, or such national bureaucracies as the National Park Service or international agencies like the United Nations or the International Court of Justice at the Hague.
The reduction of the beauracracy, reformation of public school curriculum, and the passing of a constitutional amendment that reduces the power of the Supreme Court would strike a fatal blow against neo-liberalism. It was the "social revolution" or rather debacle, imposed by the same institutions mentioned above, that gave impetus to the conservative movement, we should turn our eyes to that history and renew our efforts against that same enemy that is with us. As Buchanan says:
Supreme Court decisions in the 1960s and '70s, Mr. Buchanan says, sparked a conservative response. "The conservative movement is in large part a reaction to the social revolution that had been imposed on this country from above, without the consent of the people, by the Supreme Court. "Frankly, you would not have a cultural war in this country if the Supreme Court had said, 'Look, free speech is one thing, but pornography is not covered by the First Amendment.'"
A needed reminder, indeed.