Modern American conservatism often presents itself as a champion of liberty, free markets, and traditional values. Yet its persistence as a political force relies heavily on undemocratic tactics, including manipulation, suppression, and structural advantages. This reliance highlights a critical flaw: its inability to succeed in a “marketplace of ideas” where ideologies rise or fall based on their merit. Below, we examine how modern conservatism’s reliance on these tactics invalidates its claim to legitimacy as a political philosophy.
1. The “Marketplace of Ideas” Hypothesis
The Concept of the Marketplace of Ideas
The marketplace of ideas assumes a democratic exchange in which competing ideologies vie for public support based on their intrinsic appeal, practical merit, and alignment with societal needs. In this theoretical framework, the best ideas should naturally gain traction. For conservatism to thrive here, it would need to offer widespread benefits such as economic fairness, effective governance, or social inclusion.
The Reality of Conservative Dominance
In practice, modern American conservatism does not prevail through merit but through systemic manipulation. For example:
- Gerrymandering: Republican-led state legislatures in states like Texas and Wisconsin have drawn highly irregular electoral districts to dilute the voting power of urban, progressive communities. This has resulted in state legislatures that remain firmly conservative even when Democrats win more total votes.
- Voter Suppression: Conservative lawmakers have passed restrictive voter ID laws, reduced polling locations in minority communities, and purged voter rolls. For instance, Georgia’s 2018 gubernatorial election saw then-Secretary of State Brian Kemp oversee voter purges disproportionately targeting Black voters, tipping the election in his favor.
- Conservative Media Ecosystems: Outlets like Fox News, Breitbart, and talk radio prioritize sensationalism and misinformation to cultivate loyalty. For example, the spread of the “stolen election” narrative following the 2020 election was largely driven by conservative media, eroding public trust in democratic processes.
These mechanisms demonstrate that conservatism cannot rely on its own ideas to compete fairly, instead using structural advantages to maintain dominance.
2. American Conservatism’s Need for Coercion
A Lack of Broad Appeal
Conservative policies often fail to resonate with the broader electorate because they prioritize the interests of a privileged few:
- Economic Inequality: Conservative tax policies, like the 2017 Trump tax cuts, overwhelmingly benefit corporations and the wealthiest individuals while increasing deficits and doing little to support working-class Americans.
- Social Conservatism: Efforts to restrict reproductive rights, such as overturning Roe v. Wade, and to oppose LGBTQ+ equality through anti-trans legislation, alienate younger generations and urban voters in a diversifying nation.
Polling consistently shows that these positions lack majority support. For example, Gallup surveys reveal that over 60% of Americans support abortion access in most cases, yet conservative lawmakers and judges impose sweeping restrictions.
Forcing Adoption
Lacking widespread appeal, conservatism often imposes its policies through coercive means:
- Judicial Activism: The conservative-majority Supreme Court, bolstered by appointments from presidents who lost the popular vote, has gutted voting rights (Shelby County v. Holder), overturned abortion rights (Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization), and undermined climate regulations (West Virginia v. EPA).
- Legislative Maneuvers: Conservative state legislatures pass laws targeting specific groups, such as Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” bill, which seeks to suppress discussions of LGBTQ+ identities, effectively marginalizing entire communities.
- Cultural Suppression: The rise of book bans in conservative states, such as Texas and Florida, shows an aversion to engaging with diverse perspectives. Conservative lawmakers frame this as protecting traditional values but often suppress dissenting voices instead of debating their merits.
This heavy reliance on forcing compliance rather than earning it reflects conservatism’s inability to inspire voluntary adherence to its ideals.
3. Self-Sabotage in the “Marketplace of Ideas”
Misinformation and Propaganda
Rather than engaging with opponents in good faith, conservatism often constructs an alternate reality to shield itself from criticism:
- Fearmongering Narratives: Conservative media regularly portrays immigration as an existential threat, despite data showing immigrants contribute positively to the U.S. economy. For example, the Trump administration’s focus on building a border wall ignored evidence that undocumented immigration was declining.
- Disinformation Campaigns: The claim that the 2020 election was “stolen” led to the January 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection, showcasing how misinformation can undermine democracy itself.
These strategies reveal a lack of confidence in the power of conservative ideas to stand up to scrutiny.
Anti-Intellectualism
Conservatives often reject academic and scientific expertise, framing it as elitist or disconnected from “real America.” For instance:
- Climate Change Denial: Despite overwhelming scientific consensus, conservative leaders have actively opposed policies to combat climate change, such as by withdrawing from the Paris Agreement.
- Education Battles: Efforts to ban critical race theory (CRT) and diversity initiatives in schools and universities are often based on misrepresentations, ignoring the role of education in fostering critical thinking and societal progress.
By dismissing evidence-based discourse, conservatism undermines its ability to meaningfully contribute to policy debates.
4. The Invalidation of Conservatism as a Philosophy
A Philosophy Rooted in Fear and Power
Modern conservatism’s reliance on fear and division is antithetical to the ideals of a democratic society:
- Fear of Change: Many conservative policies focus on opposing progress, such as blocking renewable energy investments or resisting healthcare reforms like the Affordable Care Act.
- Consolidation of Power: Conservative efforts to restrict voting, gerrymander districts, and appoint ideologically extreme judges reveal a focus on maintaining control rather than fostering democratic engagement.
Dependency on Rigged Systems
Conservatism’s reliance on structural advantages exposes its inability to gain popular support:
- The Electoral College: This system disproportionately favors rural, conservative states. For example, Republican candidates have won the presidency despite losing the popular vote in 2000 and 2016.
- The Senate: Small, rural states with conservative leanings receive equal representation as populous states, creating a significant imbalance in federal policymaking.
- Judicial Power: Lifetime judicial appointments ensure conservative influence lingers even when their policies are rejected by voters.
These mechanisms allow conservatism to bypass the marketplace of ideas entirely, further invalidating its legitimacy.
5. Conclusion: A Hollow Philosophy
Modern American conservatism’s reliance on manipulation, coercion, and structural manipulation reveals a philosophy unable to succeed on its own merits. In a true marketplace of ideas, where ideologies are judged on their benefits and appeal, conservatism would falter. Its dependence on fear, suppression, and undemocratic tactics not only undermines its credibility but also weakens democracy itself.
If conservatism had inherent value, it would attract widespread support without resorting to deception or coercion. Instead, it operates as a hollow vehicle for consolidating power for the few at the expense of the many. This failure to compete fairly and openly exposes the ideology’s fundamental fragility and invalidates it as a legitimate force in a democratic society.