By Selwyn Duke

With the loss of the 2012 election, there is much talk of
how the Republican Party must do some soul searching. How will the GOP wage
successful campaigns when demographic and cultural changes favor the
opposition? Increasingly, the answer is that the party’s party is over, that it
must move into the future or be relegated to the past. “Dispense with the
social issues!” we’re counseled. “Don’t trouble over abortion or faux marriage
and instead just focus on fiscal matters.”

Yet this appeal is the result of critics expressing what
makes them uncomfortable, as opposed
to actually observing the facts on the ground. How do I know? It’s simple: the
minority voters everyone is so desperate to woo are more socially conservative than are whites. Where are they more
liberal?

Fiscal matters!

Hispanics are well-known to be pro-life; in fact, one poll showed
that only 25 percent of them support legal abortion. And remember the 2008
Proposition 8 vote
in California banning faux marriage? While a slim majority of whites voted
against it, 53 percent of Hispanics and 70 percent of blacks voted yes and won
its passage (prompting all those nice leftists to have hissy fits and hurl
racial epithets).

In fact, if you want to know how to capture Hispanic voters,
just learn from people who’ve done it for 100 years: Mexican politicians. It’s
rumored that Mexico has more Mexicans than even Mexifornia, yet while it has
long embraced socialist parties, abortion is illegal nationwide.

So the fiscal-conservative prescription is spot-on — if
you’re diagnosing New Zealand. Otherwise, it’s a proposal to give minorities
what they don’t want in a platform and deny them what they do want in the hope
that they’ll abandon a party that at least offers half a loaf. Can you say, hasta la vista, Republicanos?

Of course, some assume that traditionalist social positions
are the problem because the GOP’s touting of them hasn’t won over minorities.
After all, such matters involve deeply held principle; thus, minorities would
certainly flock to the Republicans if they agreed with the party on the social
issues, right?

But this gets at the problem: the people in question find
fiscal liberalism — otherwise known as getting free stuff — even more
compelling (a few different
kinds of prejudice factor into their preferences as well).

So you want to keep the GOP relevant? Here’s a proposition.
Let’s woo that sought-after Hispanic voting block by offering the whole loaf:
social conservatism and quasi-socialist policies. I’m sure the churches will
help out by preaching social justice in Spanish.

Of course, I’m not serious. But the point has been made.

Yet there is an irony here. Should the republic hold together
as it toddles into tomorrow with a motley mix of polyglot peoples, the Mexican
model is exactly what will be
applied. After all, like water, politicians take the shape of the vessel in
which they find themselves — a jarra de
agua in this case.

A delicious irony it is, too — in a bittersweet way. You American
liberals now bask in victory’s glow, and you’ve been winning the culture war
for a century. You fancy that you’ll build your brave nude world, your utopia
of faux marriage, free abortion, and whatever other social evolution your inner
simian conjures up, unimpeded by conservatives who once, to paraphrase Bill
Buckley, would stand athwart history yelling “Stop!” And, true, should the
American republic survive long enough (doubtful), you won’t have to worry about
old white guys running things or mobs of “angry white males” running their
mouths. Yet the future won’t be what you expect. You naively think leftism will
march forward the next 100 years like it did the last, but civilizations cycle.
And while you know how to tear down the edifice via your cultural 9/11, you’ve
no idea how to build a new one up. And the reality is that you will not be the builders.

This America would be browner and bluer, but likely also
less accepting of homosexuality and abortion. It would be too poor to finance the
big social programs you want; however, while Big Brother might have to recede,
he could be replaced by Big Daddy: society may well be more patriarchal. And if
there’s a huge influx of Muslims? Ha!

Oh, you feminists will wail and gnash your teeth — insofar
as you’re still around. But few of you will remain given your bottoming-out birthrate,
and your new overlords won’t care about the caterwauling of a coven of wizened
old white women. Your only saving grace is that if this society really is more
pro-life, you may be spared an ObamaCare prescribed euthanizing and instead
enjoy a lonely dotage in a quite Spartan, Cuba-like old-age home.

A tad dystopian, you say? Then you’d better get busy now and
hope you have more success convincing America’s “emerging majority” to accept
social liberalism than your opponents have had cajoling them into fiscal
conservatism. Good luck with all that.

There’s a kicker here, too. The above vision of tomorrow is
the best-case scenario for you
liberals. The worst one is ending up Winston Smith(ez) living in a totalitarian
super-state, with the cage of hungry rats on your head when you think bad
thoughts.

Yet I don’t think either scenario most probable. I’ve long believed
the U.S. will go the way of the Roman Empire, not just insofar as collapsing,
but also in dissolution. After all, we’re so divided — nay, fractured — along
racial, ethnic, and ideological lines, that, ultimately, only the iron fist of
tyranny could hold us together. This break-up could be precipitated by severe
economic turmoil coupled with a series of disasters.

Sound crazy? Well, history teaches otherwise. We could still
say in 1939 that the sun never sets on the British Empire; now it hardly shines
on her. And how many in 1985 foresaw the dissolution of the all-powerful Soviet
Union?

To suffer the same fate would certainly make for
interesting times. If they come, however, perhaps we can forge one of the
resulting nations into a leaner, cleaner land where fiscal frugality and social
sanity both reign. And if I have anything to say about it, there’ll be a big
sign on the border reading, “Liberals need not apply.”

       Contact Selwyn Duke or follow him on Twitter

         © 2012 Selwyn Duke — All Rights Reserved