The Amoral Majority
How we conserve matters.
Welcome back to The Burnett Breakdown! Don’t forget to subscribe if you haven’t already. Also, please share this far and wide with anybody that you think may find it worth reading.
Win Mcnamee | Getty Images News | Getty Images
Charlie Kirk
The other day I ran across this clip from Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk:
Now, I try my best to stay away from writing about so much of the nonsense that comes with following politics every day. In fact, I think one of the major problems in our country’s political discourse is the tendency to focus on small, insignificant controversies rather than the large, significant debates that call for serious discussion. While whatever Rachel Maddow or Tucker Carlson said last night is far less pressing than debating ways to improve our immigration system, it is much easier and exciting, so that is what we are left with.
I say all of that because it may seem like I am about to do exactly what I criticize; however, my concern isn’t actually with Kirk but with the increasing regularity that I see the idea that he espouses expressed by “conservatives.”
What idea am I talking about? In the clip, Kirk is talking about the Republican representative-elect George Santos. Santos has been in the news recently after an expose from the New York Times found evidence that he had entirely fabricated many important aspects of his background. As a result, there has been some discussion about what the Republican Party should do about Santos; should they censure him? Prevent him from holding committee assignments? Remove him from Congress altogether? Do nothing and let the voters decide?
Setting aside the merits of each of these actions (and I think each has merit), I think it is fair to say that some sort of punishment, whether by the party itself or by the voters of New York, should be done. Kirk disagrees. If Santos is gotten rid of or resigns, then that would mean the Republicans lose 20% of their majority simply “to appease the unethical, immoral, lack of integrity New York Times.” Nothing like getting back at an unethical, immoral institution that lacks integrity by allowing an unethical, immoral politician that lacks integrity go unpunished.
Kirk’s defense is that the Left is just so intent on destroying everything that is good in the world that even somebody like Santos could “play a role in saving the Republic” as Kirk said in the same show. All Santos has to do to “atone” for his lies is put his head down and vote conservative. The moral of the story: do whatever you have to do to get to Congress, just vote in ways that Kirk agrees with and everything is all okay.
This is postmodern, nihilistic, Machiavellian, and amoral nonsense.
Conserving How?
This is the main point of this newsletter: how conservatives conserve matters.
Frequently, those on this “new right” will cite the Left as “destroying” something such as America, Western Civilization, and/or Judeo-Christian values. Here, I largely agree with them that America’s founding in the Judeo-Christian ethic of Western Civilization is worth conserving and that modern, secular progressivism does damage to it.
I think the best place to see the damaging impact of progressivism is on a typical college campus. Universities that were once established as “liberal arts” institutions no longer teach the Great Works of the Western tradition. A libertine sexual ethic reigns supreme with the only limiting principle being consent. Virtue is nonexistent as concepts such as “truth, beauty, and goodness” are determined subjectively, and one’s subjective definition can’t be criticized. If a university has a chapel, then it stands as a cool-looking, old building that no longer serves a religious function.
In many ways, universities are the monasteries of modern, secular progressivism.
So, I reiterate, I am opposed to many of the very same things that people on the new right like Kirk are opposed to. My appreciation for Western civilization and opposition to modern, secular progressivism is, definitionally, the very reason that I am conservative. And yet, I could not disagree more with the new right’s methods of conserving.
This was always my problem with Donald Trump. I largely opposed the very same things that Trump opposed (with some notable exceptions like free trade), but I hated the way he did it. This is what people meant when they complained about his “mean tweets”; the tweets were examples of Trump’s disregard for established moral and social norms.
Unfortunately, this is also the quality that other Republicans appreciated about Trump and now have adopted as their own. What was once deemed as being beyond the pale is now necessary because the Left and the establishment have become so corrupt. Like a decayed and decrepit building, the “system” needed a sledgehammer taken to it in order to replace it with something great again. We don’t need weak squishes; we need “fighters.”
The problem with this is that it doesn’t end up conserving anything worth conserving. When people like George Santos can get by scotch free, there are no disincentives preventing others from acting in the exact same immoral way. These disincentives don’t make politicians angels, but they do prevent politicians from indulging in their worst impulses. As soon as one politician realizes there is nothing stopping them from living out their baser selves, others will quickly follow suit.
The response to the “immoral Left” is to protect and maintain a moral Right. Conservatives shouldn’t punish Santos to “appease the Left”; they should punish Santos to ensure the very thing they are conserving is protected.
I’m not arguing that every mistake made by a conservative should result in that conservative being exiled into obscurity. There is room for forgiveness and grace, but there needs to be some sort of recognition by individuals that they were wrong. When they are caught lying, they need to admit it and tell the truth. When they say something that they shouldn’t, they should apologize (like Glenn Youngkin did recently to Nancy Pelosi). In other words, we should hold politicians to the same standard we hold kindergartners.
House Rules
Speaking of Kindergarten, let’s look at the Republicans in the House of Representatives right now. As many are probably aware, the House of Representatives has been attempting to elect a Speaker this week. Usually, this process is little more than a formality as the majority party usually stands united in support of a member of their party. This year, however, the Republican Party has fractured and been unable to unite around a Speaker.
On the one end, there is Kevin McCarthy who has demonstrated time and time again his lack of principles and eagerness for power. On the other end, there is the Freedom Caucus crowd of the House that is only concerned with tearing down the “establishment” and humiliating them along the way. This whole ordeal is an inevitable consequence of a party that has no moral vision.
Ronald Reagan was able to captivate the Republican Party for so long because he possessed and communicated a moral vision for America. To Reagan, America was meant to be a “shining city on a hill” that set an example for the rest of the world. America’s founding principles of liberty, limited government, and individual rights are what made America great.
It’s not surprising that after years of ignoring and often defending the immorality of Donald Trump, the Republican Party is left without a moral vision. It’s a natural consequence of throwing out the “rules of the game” because the other side is just that bad. By adopting the amoral methods of the amoral Left, the Republican Party has replaced its old moral majority with an amoral one. “Fighting” the Left is the only criterion that a candidate now has to meet, so we are left with Republicans who don’t know what they believe anymore, only that they hate the other side.
Whoever the next Speaker is, this past week has been an excellent preview of what the next two years are going to look like in a Republican-led House. There will be more narcissism, infighting, arrogance, and name-calling because those are the only qualities an amoral majority has to offer.
God Bless,
Hunter Burnett