The most urgent problem in the world today is the cultural-Marxist occupation of Western society, and one group that appears to oppose this plague may be broadly described as "conservatives". While they are by no manner of means a monolithic block, they share their aversion to essential exponents of cultural Marxism like the promotion of mass immigration, multiculturalism, multiracialism, individualism, and deviant sexuality, the destruction of the nation state, of the nuclear family, and of Western civilization at large, climate alarmism, softness on crime, and more. Yet, conservatives are not rarely observed to be mistaken when it comes to a certain set of topics. These are discussed below, hoping that conservatives will learn and change their ways.
For a quick impression, a simple list should precede the actual discussion:
Since these topics are intertwined, they will be discussed together:
Conservatives are often religious or claim to be so, and that leads them astray in matters like abortion, euthanasia, and eugenics. Many religious people are dogmatically opposed to those phenomena, and conservatives tend to follow those outdated dogmas, either being religious themselves or just not wanting to offend their religious followers or voters. But one has to consider everything rationally, free from dogma, and then one may find that abortion, euthanasia, and eugenics are benign, useful, and necessary. Their demonization by conservatives is irrational. Abortion and euthanasia, though no cause for celebration, are needed for humanitarian reasons, and eugenic measures can not be missed in countering the dysgenic trend in the West, which will set us back to pre-industrial standards of living by the end of the twenty-first century if not stopped. Regarding the conservatives' inclination to religion, one may consider that religion is empirically associated with ethnocentrism, which in turn is antithetical to the globalist movement of cultural Marxism, making it understandable that religious conservatives are the natural opponents of cultural Marxists. This antithesis is also expressed in the well-documented fact that cultural Marxists have been attacking and slandering the Christian churches since at least the early twentieth century, and been actively campaigning for the removal of any Christian traditions or other visible signs of Christianity from public life.
Then, conservatives tend to see vegetarianism (including its subset veganism) as a leftist thing. But there are both leftist and rightist vegetarians. Again, one has to evaluate these diets rationally, objectively, free from emotion, and then one will find that nutrition is a controversial question, the definite answer to which has not yet been found. We do not know what we need to eat to become or stay healthy. In addition, matters of animal welfare and impact on the environment have to be taken into account. It is irrational to let political views dictate what one eats. A reason for the mistaken conservative opposition to vegetarianism and disregard for animal welfare may lie in the positive association between conservatives and farmers, especially those who produce meat and dairy. Sometimes, the interest of an industry clouds conservative judgment.
As said, conservatives tend to support farmers. This is logical because farming is one of the very few segments of society that are still mostly free of cultural Marxism. Cultural Marxists hate farmers because (1) they do physical labor, which cultural Marxists despise, and (2) they possess much land, which cultural Marxists desire because they want to own the entire world and use the land to keep their human cattle on (serfs deprived of any national or ethnic identity; in other words, you or your children or grandchildren). Next to causing conservatives to promote meat and dairy, this alliance with farmers may also bring them to ignore environmental and public health damage caused by farming: intensive cattle keeping emits huge amounts of fine dust and ammonia, while the production of crops involves herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides. These problems are greatly worsened when farmers produce food for export purposes, because then the local population is exposed to far more exhaust than needed to feed only them. Again, the interest of an industry may cloud conservative judgment in disfavor of public health, the environment, and animal welfare.
Overpopulation, and the resulting overuse of finite natural resources as well as the stifling population densities that make societies unlivable, is sometimes denied by conservatives. They seem to fear a culling of the population with demonized methods like abortion, euthanasia, eugenics, birth control, vaccination campaigns, and much more, and in fact some of those things are indeed taking place. But overpopulation is a real problem that must be addressed without delay, and simple solutions, like making available contraception, will not fix it because of the dysgenic nature of such voluntary interventions; people of higher quality reduce their fertility to near zero, while those of lower quality keep breeding like rabbits no matter what you provide them with. Selectively reducing fertility in some while promoting it in others is the only way to go, and that is what we call "eugenics". It has to be feared that voluntary eugenics will not work. The accusations of secretly trying to affect fertility and shrink the world population that are made against certain billionaires may really reflect what all intelligent, informed people know deep inside needs to be done: We need a strict, rigidly enforced worldwide eugenics program or we are finished.
The issues on which conservatives are frequently misguided seem to relate to their affiliation with or interest in religion, farming, and industry. Of course, this does not concern all conservatives, but a subset of them, possibly those who one might term typical or natural conservatives. There do exist other conservatives who are more atypical and inclined to atheism and individualism; those who do not fit in, are less likely to form traditional families. These, however, may arrive at many conservative values on their own in rational ways, but are less likely to hold the typical conservative opinions on the topics discussed above because they apprehend the world in an abstract, cerebral manner, detached from emotion and dogma. The typical or natural conservatives, on the other hand, may be emotion-driven to a higher degree and thus have their judgment obscured by a red haze when triggered by certain topics.