We Need a Counter-Revolution

The winds of change are blowing. Many of my liberal friends sense it. The decisiveness of Trump’s victory in 2024 sobered them. Put simply, political power is in our hands.

But we have a problem. Very nearly all centers of establishment power remain dominated by the left: universities, museums, media, Hollywood, and a vast network of foundations and activist organizations. These centers of power may have leaders who are sensible (although by no means all of them do). Yet, even when their views are “moderate,” today’s establishment leaders celebrate, honor, and promote those who advance anti-American ideologies.

The Trump administration is taking measures to punish the one-sided partisanship of America’s establishment. But, as Tom Klingenstein rightly observes, we, the American people who love our country, need to be in the fight. The future of America hangs in the balance.

What should be done?

Some of us are intellectuals, not activists. That’s fine. There are many roles on the front lines. Intellectual debate should be civil. But those of us on the right must stop allowing those on the left to define what counts as “extreme.” For example, the Trump administration’s much needed assault on the DEI regime requires clear and detailed support, and that means telling the truth about civil rights.. 

We need detailed plans for rolling back civil rights law. Conservative intellectuals must have the courage to say that landmark Supreme Court cases in the 1970s should be overturned. I dare say that a major conference that takes as its premise the proposition that the Voting Rights Act of 1964 and Civil Rights Act of 1965 were fitting emergency measures that are now harmful and destructive elements of America’s rule of law would spark exactly the right kind of outrage on the left — and clear thinking on the right.

Klingenstein says that essays and conferences don’t work. I disagree. Bold essays and conferences move the Overton window.

But Klingenstein is right to say that we need hard-nosed activism as well. Here’s a suggestion: University students who resent the latitude given to left-wing protests on campus should threaten to boycott classes, and their parents should withhold fees, unless university administrations enforce university rules, and, when necessary, call in local law enforcement. This kind of activism would be very effective in the present moment. In view of the higher-ed policies of the present administration, punitive treatment of conservative students on boycott while accommodating left-wing protests would be a very bad look indeed.

The left believes it controls public discourse. In this setting, one need not protest. Celebration is sufficient. In blue cities, rallies to celebrate marriage as the union between one man and one woman would generate more political momentum than a protest. The same holds for “We Support ICE” rallies.

Whatever one thinks of my proposals, or those Klingenstein outlines, his larger point must be taken to heart. We are in a position not unlike that of civil rights and anti-war activists in the 1960s. They faced down a complacent establishment and changed the direction of our country.

Now the tables are turned. Our present-day liberal establishment is arrogant and complacent. It is determined to continue its thoughtless support of destructive ideologies and failed programs that the American people increasingly reject. We need to challenge, defeat, and dislodge that establishment. That’s a counter-revolutionary project. Conservatives would do well to learn from Saul Alinsky.