Posted on 06/28/2021 8:18:23 AM PDT by Kaslin
The way to solve America's issues and connect with Republican voters is not to parrot libertarian talking points that enable leftist power.
I am always wary of those who purport to speak for their respective generation, and a recent New York Post op-ed by a self-espoused libertarian student at New York University put on full display exactly what the Republican Party must abandon in the years ahead.
In close to 700 words, writer Rikki Schlott calls for the GOP to “compromise on social and environmental issues and stand up to leftist extremism,” ignoring that these two are different sides of the same strategic coin. Schlott concedes a talking point that merely assists the left in its campaign to smear Republicans — especially those in Gen Z — as operating in “extremist fringes” who need to be like their predecessors and champion old neoconservatism.
“As the GOP rebrands in the post-Trump, post-pandemic era, it has a huge opportunity to make inroads with this new, open-minded contingent,” she writes. “But appealing to Gen Z will require significant modernization — and compromise. Calls for progress are coming from young voters of every political persuasion. In fact, while Gen Z Democrats are almost politically identical to their older counterparts, generational differences among Republicans are far more stark.”
Even if we are to submit to polling that finds Gen Z is “driven by anti-Trump backlash” and more Independent than categorically conservative “appealing to Gen Z” and its supposed more moderate nature should be far from the primary, secondary, or tertiary objective of the Trump-shifted GOP. As Evita Duffy pointed out in The Federalist last year, polling indicates Gen Z, even while in their likely most liberal youthful years, are significantly more socially moderate than millennials.
Thus, the idea that “appealing to Gen Z will require significant modernization — and compromise” is ill-supported, and a losing strategy. Conservatives who wish to target the left’s institutional monopoly and overhaul of morally shared principles would lay themselves a booby trap by continuing to compromise with the radically left Democratic Party of today.
The GOP ought to instead focus on reinforcing social conservatism as advantageous. Not doing so is a naive rejection of the last four years, which proved there is a massive constituency for taking on the culture war rather than conceding it. Republicans in the past have neglected these voters in favor of the same old fiscal promises that never materialize.
“If the GOP can deliver viable, free-market alternatives to the restrictive environmental policies coming from the left, their appeal to Gen Z would skyrocket,” Schlott argues. “Pushing for innovation and offering economic incentives to businesses fighting climate change is just one way the GOP could show it’s on team green.”
The very last thing Republicans should be doing is keeping government’s dead hand on the scale to push one scientific understanding of climate change and its effects, which Democrats have universally campaigned on as a means to expand government and harm the American worker. Worse, Schlott also claims it would be wise for the GOP to join this effort to destabilize the energy industry and provide more opportunities for corporations to yield even more power. In making this claim, the writer cites John Olds, the president of the essentially liberal group Gen Z GOP.
Olds says, “If the GOP were to reshuffle its priorities a little bit to address generational issues and present conservative solutions, they would make huge progress with Generation Z,” producing a blanket statement all too familiar from the work Gen Z GOP does.
As Saagar Enjeti rightly pointed out last summer upon the group releasing a promotional video, Gen Z GOP is “basically Bidenism-lite” and a product of the corporate elites who have run the Republican Party for far too long. More than just playing the old game of conservative defense, Schlott and Olds essentially call for Republicans to not be conservative at all. In all this, one wonders as always what is the point of being Republican if it is, as Phyllis Schlafly once said, merely an echo of Democrats rather than offering voters a clearly different political choice.
“Meanwhile, Gen Z Republicans say society does not do enough to accept gender non-conforming people at a rate three times higher than some older Republican generations,” Schlott writes. “Many Gen Z voters imagine Republicans as rigid, evangelizing traditionalists. By adopting a more live-and-let-live philosophy in favor of cultural conservatism, the GOP would appeal to more young people.”
A “live-and-let-live” philosophy is exactly what propelled America into the mess we find ourselves in today. While American jobs got shipped overseas, leftists manipulated language, sexual anarchy took over the country, and Big Tech and Big Business grew into oligarchies, Republicans pushed tax cuts and never seriously cut federal spending.
If “appealing to more young people” means forfeiting a moral society in favor of worshiping the application of market activities through open borders, the killing of the unborn, and allowing critical race theory to hijack the education system, you can count me out. If a “free market” means putting the force of law behind constituencies that demand “bake the cake, bigot,” it’s clear once again that libertarian slogans are being deceitfully deployed to destroy historic American freedoms.
“In short, the GOP should work on rebranding as the modern, reasonable, solutions-oriented party,” Schlott concludes. “If Republicans succeed in crafting this new identity, it will make enormous strides with young voters and secure its future.”
Schlott is operating on a very different definition about what is “modern” and “reasonable” than those seeking a GOP that works for more than just Wall Street. The way to solve America’s issues and connect with conservative voters is not to parrot libertarian talking points.
No apologies.
No compromises.
No surrender.
Play to win. 100%. All the time.
That’s what the other side does.
We have to stop electing people who want to meet the Democrats halfway on destroying the country.
Absolutely.
Bump.
The GOP doesn’t care.
90% of republican congressional members are WORTHLESS.
WHY are they NOT screaming their heads for Trump voters to be RELEASED FRO
SOLITARY CONFINEMENT???
Of COURSE they will not win anything - but that’s not the goal of many RINOS.
They are careerists who have positions and wealth to protect with the deep state.
aka "Assistant Democrats". 
We need fighters in all three branches of government.
No, it's not.
Pollsters lie for The Agenda and The Narrative.
Do republicans agree with holding POLITICAL PRISONERS??
Obviously, they do!
DO NOT VOTE FOR ANY REPUBLICANS UNTIL THEY GET POLITICAL PRISONERS RELEASED.
Bow down before the one you serve
You’re gonna get what you deserve
Repulsicans will never win anything.
Conservatives will.
And we had better start making Democrats cower in their homes as much as we do.
Really.
It’s either fight or bend over and assume the Dorkbama/Biden position of “do me, I’m yours”. Now spoken in (one of many) Chinese dialects. Check the NYT for the latest, since they are very well schooled in both the language and in bending over.
Ive heard this talk before. We are supposed to be libertarian and not talk about social issues such as same sex marriage, transsexual anarchy, or abortion. We are told we should focus only on taxes and economic issues not social issues. The social iszues are allegedly too divisive.
I would just point out that if we are silent on the social issues, then the liberals always win by default.
excellent point.
we sure do.
Blah blah blah.
Kill it.
That is the only solution to the federal government.
Defund it, burn it down, cut it out, it is a cancer.
Or, we’re better off without the three branches of government.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.