When attempting to describe individuals on opposite ends of the political spectrum, we often use stereotypes. Conservatives are considered members of the prevailing institutionalized culture, and progressives are seen as the brave and intrepid members of the counterculture.
These stereotypes developed in part out of the 1960s, when the far-left in America (the "hippies," to use a popular moniker) rebelled against an all-encompassing traditional society. Progressives of the 1960s were seen as part of the counterculture because, at the time, social values were largely imparted by parents.
When these radical youths rebelled against their conservative families, they were rejecting the prevailing institutions. When the denizens of this movement extolled the virtues of pacifism, free love and the overturning of cultural norms, they were indeed countercultural, for when they were presented with the prevailing culture, they said no.
However, the problem is we still use these stereotypes today. We assume that the prevailing culture is conservative and the counterculture is progressive because we are still stuck in the same political paradigm born out of the hippie generation. The prevailing culture, in fact, is no longer conservative in the least.
This stems from the fact that the primary educators of young people are no longer their parents; instead, the primary educator is the media.
Hollywood is now the prevailing institution rather than the family unit. And unlike the traditional family unit, Hollywood has never labored under any accusations of conservatism.
As a conservative, when I watch TV, I am ironically forced to do the same thing as the progressives of the 1960s — I have to say no.
Whether it's watching Rachel and Ross jumping into bed together before marriage or Gob Bluth erecting a "Mission Accomplished" banner in a mockery of the Iraq War, conservatives are forced to swallow their pride if they wish to engage in the popular culture.
Conservatives are now the members of the counterculture, not progressives. This is not a natural balance and leads many conservatives to embrace a form of radicalism that is not flattering. When the mainstream media became largely progressive, clever individuals such as Rupert Murdoch and Rush Limbaugh saw a vacuum from which to prosper.
Distasteful individuals such as Bill O'Reilly and Limbaugh now dominate mainstream conservative culture — men who bear little resemblance to previous luminaries such as Edmund Burke and Russell Kirk.
Conservatives have become so incensed at their current cultural standing that they are willing to listen to such radicals in order to obtain a cathartic release of their woes. This status quo must change in order for conservatives to regain cultural and intellectual relevancy.
Conservatives should reflect on how to be true to their ancestral and cultural lineage. It is time for conservatives to end the current age of insecurity and phobia and lead by example — to be compassionate, thoughtful and morally honest.
William F. Buckley Jr. often said to be a conservative meant "to stand in front of the locomotive of history and yell, ‘Stop!'" Conservatives should once again embrace that role rather than follow spiteful radicals who only want to blow up the tracks.
Luke Bailey is a history junior at UF. His column regularly appears on Wednesdays.
