Enthusiastically waiting to see your enemy’s name appear in the obituary is, perhaps, something a Seinfeld episode should have tackled. But in absence of a half-hour sitcom mocking the ethics of such a scene comes our rather blunt desire to see in big, beautiful text the confirmation of conservatism’s departure from this world for good.
And it would be a mercy. The ideological vagrant of the modern era is in agony; a shadow of its former self that, in losing its mental faculties gave us the playbook for Pauline Hanson’s One Nation; in losing control of its bowels gave us the Party for Freedom to clean up; and in its jittered ramblings at night gave us the Patriot’s Poet to, well, laugh at. And why wouldn’t we laugh?
Who would have thought that acquiring oriental wives, rampant alcoholism and aimlessly flying the Star of David would in any way forms the face of modern conservatism – that safeguard of traditionalism? In a way that says more about the progressive left if this is the standard an acceptable alternative is held to, but nonetheless, we diagnose cancer as cancer when we see it.
As befitting of an extended life, however, conservatism is a broad grouping of ideas and practices that through the centuries melded into particular localities and built up its own organic character.
Before the Tories of the U.K. and the Republicans of the US succumbed to the dreariness of the modern world and became the stock-standard “centre-right” parties – which plague our present-day political institutions with equal parts boredom and treason – there was, if only from a historical standpoint, more character and life prevalent in the internal workings of the party and its duties within the country.
Such a thing can be admitted without the analysing of the good or ill that became of these entities. Suffice to say that compared to its modern manifestation there was something that, from our perspective, draws less ire than the present set against the historic backdrop of actual traditionalism holding ground.
Though conservatism is a term seldom used as the main grouping of its constituent factions, it is the college where civic nationalists, patriots and other assorted fruit loops graduated from even though they try to paint themselves in a different light. As the main tributary, it is conservatism, particularly in regards to combatting the progressive left over the prominent issue of Islam and the extreme end of identity politics, that guides the more hard-line, right-wing groups.
By our standards, they are in their formulation reactionary without the reaction. The scattering of conservatism in Australia is less a developed ideology but rather pub-banter that became a little too rowdy.
Their analysis of a world gone awry fuelled their febrile imagination. Islam, the left, and the agreement that the Liberals had betrayed the core tenets of conservatism amounted to a call to arms of an invigorated force to take to the streets. Through its brief public rallies and continued online presence, it revealed to be inept at forming any manner of lasting policy that actually worked for the best interests of this country. Its tenure among our acceptance went from weak to its now non-existent status.
So when will it die?
The ideas of man are invested with his own similarity, and an idea’s death follows a metaphysical equivalent of the biological process whereby the cessation of its vital functions leads to its absolute end.
The conservative has sealed his own fate because while he sees the nation as the vital organ he refuses, to his fatal detriment, to recognise the nation as the culmination of race and culture; not cosmopolitanism, multiculturalism and every perversion betwixt which he defends and fruitlessly tries to tame in order to avoid the baneful accusation of racism.
It is ironical that conservatives ultimately laud the version of our nation that was designed by their apparent enemies on the left. For what else is the presentation of the 21st century, multicultural Australia but the great fantasy of progressives as the first stage of removing the nation state and its racial identity?
Indeed its days are numbered but there are no doubts conservatism’s last moments will be messy, and there’s no telling what yet-to-be-revealed horrors will spew forth from its ideological orifices in a last attempt to show there’s life in it.
In these times it won’t be bothered to keep up the façade there’s any real difference between itself and the left, but will instead – as we have seen – go after the force that exposed and systemically broke down its lies: Nationalism. It is Nationalism which remains the inextinguishable light of reason.
Its pillars are unchanging. Its leaders – both here and abroad in friendly movements – are some of the most besmirched figures in existence and yet remain defiant to their ideals.
As the leaders of fake conservatism rot, the former adherents to such leeches will atone for their misguidance by embracing Nationalism, in fact, they will realise it was what they were after all along: a place to call home among their own people.
God willing, here is another nail in the coffin of the unconvinced as to why our expedient wish for the demise of conservatism and its inbred children is not morbid gossip, nor a critique for the sake of a critique, nor a selfish ruse on our behalf, but a necessity on which the termination of this foul parasite can allow our own ideals to truly flourish; where those ideals are that of the nationhood of Australia: an Australia that lives up to its historic creation as a nation built by the White man and for the sake of the White man.