Yutes and Benders

by Brad Nelson   2/3/15

Pedro Gonzales has another interesting article at American Thinker: How to Make Young People Conservative. Even though he asks a good question (or at least Mark Levin did), and even though he seems to have a good general grasp on the ideas of conservatism, I’m not sure he has the answer for how to attract yutes. All that he says makes sense. And yet at the end of the day, I think he answers his own question:

So which appeals to you more – unlimited condoms, or a thriving job market?”

In some respects, I’m going to agree with Jonah Goldberg (at least the old Jonah Goldberg, before he started to slip further left). Appealing to the youth movement is what the Left does. There are no politics of the right that are inherently “hip” and there’s no changing that fact. That is exactly why the Left wants to keep yutes eternally dumb, young, and dependent — to keep the juvenile mindset (which, as we look around us, we notice in many adults as well). The Left works hard to keep that answer “condoms” instead of “jobs.”

That’s a very rough synthesis of Jonah’s and my own thoughts. The question perhaps is really: How can parents assure that their children grow up and face the lessons of life like mature adults instead of reaching for vapid, Utopian false promises?

Anyway, it’s good to see a new thinker on the scene. Pedro has had three good articles in a row now, at least that I’ve noticed. He certainly may have had more.

By the way, on a totally different topic (but I didn’t want to have to write a new blog post just for it), you heard it here first: The new menace on the roads is young women and cell phones who are texting themselves into fender benders all over the place. The old menace (young men who drive drunk and/or too aggressively) is still there.


Brad is editor and chief disorganizer of StubbornThings.
About Author  Author Archive  Email

Have a blog post you want to share? Click here. • (846 views)

Share
Brad Nelson

About Brad Nelson

I like books, nature, politics, old movies, Ronald Reagan (you get sort of a three-fer with that one), and the founding ideals of this country. We are the Shining City on the Hill — or ought to be. However, our land has been poisoned by Utopian aspirations and feel-good bromides. Both have replaced wisdom and facts.

This entry was posted in Blog Post. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Yutes and Benders

  1. Timothy Lane says:

    It seems a key aspect of Gonzalez’s case is providing examples — either real ones or, if those aren’t readily available, thought experiments. This might work, since even the victims of our system of public miseducation can probably follow them. (Incidentally, I want to point out here Poul Anderson’s underrated novel Orbit Unlimited, in which the establishment of “free, compulsory” public education rightly sparks a rebellion.) Of course, I’ve been pointing out for some time that liberalism seeks an infantilized population.

    I will note that one reason liberalism has all the “cool” is that liberals are the ones who control the culture in which “cool” is defined. I have no idea what can be done about it (legally, anyway).

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      You would think the examples would work. What else can you do? But people these days have been so programmed into a Marxist/materialist/Kumbaya view of reality that I’ve had more than one person tell me that even if the other person admits that your argument is rational and factual, they’ll tell you that it’s still just not right somehow.

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        even if the other person admits that your argument is rational and factual, they’ll tell you that it’s still just not right somehow.

        The Left’s motto, “don’t confuse me with the facts, I know what I believe.”

        • Timothy Lane says:

          The traditional version is “My mind’s made up, don’t confuse me with the facts.” Ironically, this is based on comments by conservative Republican Earl Landgrebe (who represented Purdue for 6 years) explaining his refusal to consider voting to impeach Nixon. (Not surprisingly, he was defeated in 1974, when the GOP lost 5 seats in Indiana.) But liberals today routinely act on that basis.

  2. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    VDH has an article very much worth reading:

    Regarding the VDH article, a very astute commentor named WalkingHorse said:

    The normalcy bias has been strong with much of the public and the bulk of the commentariat and political class. People have been unable to wrap their heads around the proposition that they elected a person to the office of the presidency who happens to be an enemy of the United States.

    For those who remain naive about this reality: this is what it is like to be governed by someone who hates you. Please do not forget this, because having once done this to yourselves and the rest of us, you have demonstrated the capacity to do it again.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      I had a similar comment, but his is much harsher. And no one deserves that harsh criticism more than Barry Screwtape Obama.

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        I thought the “normalcy bias” was right on and exactly gets to the heart of the difficulty of changing minds when the default propaganda has placed it elsewhere. Great phrase in my opinion.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *