Why Reagan's conservatism is dead

Across Europe we're seeing a major increase in the number of nationalist parties who are fighting for their nations to remain ethnically homogenous, outside of the EU, and free to govern themselves based on their own people's preferences.

Some of these groups are fairly liberal in how they'd like their elected leaders to govern the state, others are somewhat "conservative" in the American/Reaganite sense, all of them are nationalistic.

Normally US politics are about a decade or so behind the rest of Europe and American conservatism has basically been a gradual retreat on the various progressive issues of the West. The US govt has become increasingly expansive in scope with only occasional, half-hearted checks such as Chief Justice affirming Obamacare while setting limitations on the interpretation of the Commerce Clause.

That kind of, "okay we'll let this one slide, but please don't do something like this again," move has defined GOP conservatism for years and years now.

Intermixed in this fighting withdrawal has been the rise of "neo-conservatism" in which the Republican party abandoned their classical, "just war doctrine", defensive views on foreign policy in favor of aggressive interventionism across the globe and the establishment of a "Pax Americana" in which the US led the way in establishing order in the world...or trying to, at least.

Along with these global interests came a policy that's been described as "invade the world, invite the world" as the US turned the spigot on immigration in the 1960s and have allowed the nation to be flooded with immigrants from all over the planet.

Since that time, the US has seen about 60 million legal immigrants enter the nation along with an untold number of illegal immigrants perhaps as great as 10-20 million.

The US was seriously impacted by the introduction of millions of Irish and northern-European immigrants in the 1800's but the impact has been nothing like the introduction of people from all across the world over the last 50 years.

There have been two results from these policies that have killed Reaganite conservatism in America.

Result 1: "Pax Americana" has been expensive and not particularly effective

Thanks to the rise of Islamic terrorism and the tremendous failures of either US foreign or domestic policy to curtail it, Americans don't currently feel terribly safe. Regime changes in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria have destabilized the Middle East and turned once reasonably stable states into cesspools where increasingly radical groups such as ISIS have been able to flourish.

Meanwhile the plan at home has been to continue to allow immigration from these unstable regions while increasing surveillance. This has led to less freedom (and convenience) for Americans yet has totally failed to eliminate the possibilities of domestic terrorism.

The cost of these policies has been astronomical. Currently the US has a military budget of $596 billion dollars, which is more than the next seven countries combined. I'd say that's an expensive bill for the taxpayer but since the US is approaching $20 trillion it's really the future taxpayer that's on the hook.

Reagan ultimately succeeded in helping Americans feel safer from the threat of Soviet nuclear weapons, but that's not been the case in the battle against Islamic radicalism. Nor is there any coherent strategic proposal on the table that would achieve that result.

Result 2: Raising Western children is becoming increasingly expensive

This is really the biggest problem facing all of Western Civilization and the number one reason that the rise of nationalism was inevitable.

Currently 1/3 of millennials say they don't even intend to have children, typically citing the high cost and responsibility of doing so. The US birth rate is at around 2.0, or replacement level (two parents need to combine to create two children or else the population will decrease), but reaching the replacement level has only been achieved thanks to higher birth rates from immigrant populations. Particularly the more family-oriented Mexicans who are due to become the majority in multiple US States within our lifetimes.

Now here's the element of this issue that people don't like to talk about.

Replacing middle-class Americans with European ancestry with poorer Mexican immigrants really changes the nation in a major way. What's more, it actually decreases the likelihood of white Americans having more children.

One of the effects of mass immigration has been the creation of multiple neighborhoods across the country that are segregated by ethnicity as "white flight" leads whites to establish new neighborhoods where they can be less concerned with violent crime or under-performing schools.

That's not a popular thing to say but it's transparently obvious in every part of the US. White Americans move into as lily-white a neighborhood as they can afford. The stated reasoning is generally a concern about crime or schools, yet the ethnic segregation that results is particularly stark.

As the populations of latinos rises, the costs of that segregation become more expensive and housing prices in the desirable areas goes up. So raising a family in a "crime-free area with good schools" becomes increasingly expensive.

At the same time, the increase in immigration has a profound impact on the supply and demand curve for the price of labor. If you have a greater supply of labor, the price goes down, and the increase of available labor in the US has seen real wages drop or stagnate.

It's hard to get the top paying jobs in the US anymore without a college degree, or often even a post-grad degree. The US govt has sought to make these increasingly available by offering debt to anyone and everyone who wants to pursue college without any kind of discrimination (except understandably against those who can afford college without debt).

The result is that we've seen a massive increase in the number of schools operating AND and a tremendous increase in the cost of education (if you artificially increase the demand for education, the price goes up), both paired with stagnating or decreasing wages for average Americans.

So if you want to be a part of the American middle-class, living in the choice neighborhoods, you have to potentially be ready to take on tens of thousands in debt for your education followed by taking on hundreds of thousands in debt to buy the necessary real estate. Very expensive.

I'll point out now that Trump (and Sanders) have been dominating at the polls amongst the white Americans who are either on the outside looking in that can't afford all these increasing costs or who have children who are on the outside looking in that can't afford all these increasing costs.

Trump blames out of control immigration, Sanders blames selfish billionaires who make policy to benefit themselves, both are actually correct.

That's the real reason why there's all this "anti-establishment" anger right now. Ceding ground in the culture wars is bad enough for everyday GOP voters but when they can see the promise of the American dream slipping away while you do nothing? Now you're really in trouble. Same story for young white liberals who want to live the good life in progressive paradises like San Francisco but can't afford the costs, Clinton ain't earning their trust.

The new conservatism

The rallying cry of the #NeverTrump movement has been that Trump isn't a true conservative and he can't be trusted to protect Reagan's movement. This is totally true in the sense that Trump isn't a conservative in the Reaganite sense and he absolutely cannot be trusted to protect the conservative movement's agenda as it has existed since the 70s and 80s.

The problem for conservative pundits and establishment figures is that most Americans don't care about that.

Cutting taxes for the wealthy, resisting massive government expansion, and continuing to wage expensive wars abroad don't do anything whatsoever to deal with the issues preventing most Americans from realizing the lives they want.

You can see this evidenced in online images like this one:

The main problem facing Western civilization is the increased cost of raising Western children, and raising children is the God-given, natural impulse of most all humans.

The solution from both parties, Republican and Democrat, has been essentially to replace Western peoples with immigrants (who, incidentally will work for lower wages and enrich their donors) and then rely on education to teach them to become productive citizens in a Western society.

The dubious effectiveness of America's public schools effectively imparting over a thousand years' worth of values and genetics aside, the result has been increased costs and anxiety for traditional Western Americans.

To further exasperate this issue, Democrats have taken to playing identity politics and rallying various minority groups to their banner by painting white males as this evil, hoarding group that is looking to prevent the minorities from grabbing their own fair share of the American pie.

Liberal Democrats have never been too great at foreseeing the consequences of their policies and now we are seeing the inevitable result. The rise of nationalism.

Trump's "doomsday" electoral strategy is to rally white Americans who feel that the policies of both liberals and conservatives are now actively working against their interests. New conservatism won't be about limited government vs expansive government, but about conserving the interests of traditional Westerners and non-Westerners who got in on the America project early and are now losing just as much.

You take a look at Trump's propositions (or some of Bernie Sanders') and you see that play out:

1. A more defensive foreign policy focused on protecting Americans and saving money.

2. Much tighter controls on immigration.

3. Protectionist trade policy intended to boost the kinds of American businesses that produce middle-class jobs.

4. Increase in the minimum wage.

5. Increased taxes on the wealthiest Americans.

There are several more policies that will likely grow in popularity and get greater mention in the future but new conservatism is going to Trump Reagan conservatism (sorry for the pun).

One of those movements has failed for years to protect the most innate interests of Westerners and the other is promising to put America first. It's a no contest struggle. The days of limited government, or nominal resistance to the expansion of government, are done. Over. The GOP isn't going to be able to trot out a Reaganite-conservative in 2020 and win diddly squat in an election. Ain't gonna happen.

My personal hope is that all of this can go down without a further increase in ethnic tension that leads to violence. In a coming column I'll talk about how America's large evangelical population can try to work to mitigate the risks of this national transition.