Saving Elephants | Millennials defending & expressing conservative values

As Millennial conservatives know, conservatism gets a bad wrap in our generation.  Conservatism is a hard sell on the young in general because it begins by challenging our natural inclinations towards innovation, novelty, and the pursuit of progress and revolution over gratitude and reform.  And far too often, older conservatives fail to understand the unique historical inputs—the Great Recession, 9-11, our increasingly digital and automated world, the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street—that have formed our worldviews.  As such, they tend to dismiss Millennial concerns as trite, unappreciative, ignorant, or dangerously unpatriotic instead of engaging our concerns head-on and offering better solutions.  We’re depicted as the “kids these days” and largely written off as hopeless causes who will eventually swing to the Right when we learn what’s good for us.

But the oldest Millennials will soon be forty—which hardly qualifies as the “kids these days”.  And as Millennials age and eventually take charge, are we in danger of repeating the same mistakes of our elders?  Do we understand the unique inputs that are forming the next generation of Americans—COVID-19, civil unrest and police misconduct, the Trump era—and how the message of conservatism might be tailored to meet their concerns?

To that end, Saving Elephants host Josh Lewis (a Millennial) welcomes Nate Hochman (Gen Z) to the podcast to discuss conservatism through the eyes of younger Americans.

Nate Hochman is the Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Athwart, an online publication that offers a platform for dissent from Colorado College’s political orthodoxy.  Hochman is currently majoring in political science with a minor in journalism at Colorado College.  He has interned at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C. and National Review and has been published in National Review.  He is currently interning with Steve Hayes and Jonah Goldberg’s media start-up The Dispatch.  You can follow Nate on Twitter @njhochman

Josh forgoes the podcast guest this episode and offers some thoughts on how the conservative worldview differs from the worldview of secularism, scientism, and materialism.

Secularism can mean the belief that governments should remain neutral on the matter of religion and should not enforce nor prohibit the free exercise of religion, leaving religious choice to the liberty of the people.  However, this describes a viewpoint held by many religious and nonreligious people and is not wed exclusively to a materialistic worldview.  Secularism, for the purposes of this discussion, has less to do with whether a person has fine feelings about government neutrality on religious matters and everything to do with whether or not they believe religious matters comport to reality or hold any weight beyond mere private superstitions.

Secularism, then, is more than the principle of separating institutions of government from institutions of religion—though that idea is present.  But the secularist also possesses an indifference, rejection, or exclusion of religious considerations or appeals to supernatural explanations.  This would include both a person who rejects all supernatural explanations as well as a person who—though they may consider themselves to be religious personally—for all practical purposes behave as if all that exists is the material world.

Some secularists ascribe to scientism; the belief philosopher and theologian J. P. Moreland defines as “the view that the hard sciences—like chemistry, biology, physics, astronomy—provide the only genuine knowledge of reality.”  Other secularists hold that personal introspection, reasoning, logic, and philosophical inquiry are also means of discovering truth—not just the scientific method.  But all secularists agree that religious traditions and divine revelation—that is supernatural methods—are illegitimate means of discovering truth.

In fact, many would describe religious truth claims as not only nonsensical, but destructive to the form of modern, Western society we live in today.  The conservative staunchly disagrees with this notion.  For, while conservatism isn’t a religion, it is interested in conserving things of value in our culture (among which are certain religious traditions).  That is, the conservative defends religious convictions not out of some sense of loyalty or nostalgia, but because the conservative believes religious convictions play an important role in the formation of culture and—even more importantly—comport to reality.

Are reason and science sufficient for acquiring knowledge?  Can they sustain a society of ordered liberty?  Can they provide us with a moral code rivaling religious doctrine?  Can they fulfil humanity’s desire for the transcendent?  Can they answer our deepest questions?  The secularist says “yes” the conservative says “no”.

Saving Elephants host Josh Lewis was interviewed by J. Cal Davenport and Seth Root on their podcast In The Trenches Podcast back in May.  Their conversation has been released in this bonus episode and includes a discussion on:

• Josh’s decision to step down from the Republican party in 2016.
• How Saving Elephants came to be
• How Millennials are similar to other generations in how they respond to persuasion on political questions and how are they unique and different
• Understanding conservative “first principles” and what younger Americans should know about them
• Whether conservatism is about adhering to the “old consensus” or charting a new way forward
• Underrated conservative thinkers

Today the term “neocon” is often used to depict someone as war hawkish or part of “The Establishment”.  And it’s often used as a pejorative.  To call someone a neocon is to imply they are part of the problem, unsympathetic to the plight of the average Joe, and, quite possibly, evil.

Neocon is, of course, short for “neoconservative”.  But what is neoconservatism?  Is it simply a group of elitist gloooobalists on the Right who profit from the status quo and ever-increasing military ventures at the expense of the rest of us?  And who is a neocon?  Politicians ranging from George W. Bush to John McCain to Hillary Clinton have all been labeled neocon.  Is it a label without any meaningful distinction?

Saving Elephants host Josh Lewis is joined by Matthew Continetti to untangle this often misused, misunderstood, and definitely underappreciated term.  Josh and Matthew talk through the three iterations or waves of neoconservatism from the godfather of the movement—Irving Kristol—in the 1960s to the conservative responses to the Vietnam War to the post-Cold War iteration with Irving’s son Bill Kristol on to today, and what this historical tradition can tell us about our own political dilemmas.

From Continetti’s bio with AEI:

Matthew Continetti holds a BA in history from Columbia University and is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), where his work is focused on American political thought and history, with a particular focus on the development of the Republican Party and the American conservative movement in the 20th century.  A prominent journalist, analyst, author, and intellectual historian of the right, Mr. Continetti was the founding editor and the editor-in-chief of The Washington Free Beacon.  Previously, he was opinion editor at The Weekly Standard.

Mr. Continetti is also a contributing editor at National Review and a columnist for Commentary Magazine.  He has been published in The Atlantic, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post, among other outlets.  He also appears frequently on Fox News Channel’s “Special Report” with Bret Baier and MSNBC’s “Meet the Press Daily” with Chuck Todd.

Mr. Continetti is the author of two books: “The Persecution of Sarah Palin: How the Elite Media Tried to Bring Down a Rising Star” (Sentinel, 2009) and “The K Street Gang: The Rise and Fall of the Republican Machine” (Doubleday, 2006).

You can find Matthew Continetti on Twitter @continetti.

In the wake of the global pandemic, American attitude on trade with China is beginning to sour.  Is president Trump’s hawkish stance on free trade the right way to go?  Has free trade made us more prosperous or mere stooges of foreign governments who take our jobs and rob us of billions in trade deficits?  Joining Josh to untangle these important issues is Scott Lincicome, international trade attorney and adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute.

This episode was inspired by a listeners email:

“Hello I’m a new listener and big fan of the show all the way from Massachusetts. I was hoping you would cover some economics like the supply side vs demand And maybe the debt deficit and why it matters. I know some of it can be wonky but I think your listeners would really enjoy it I know I would.”

Regards,

Raphael

While a discussion on trade touches only aspects of a broader discussion on conservative economic ideas, this episode will at least serve as an introduction to the subject with many more to come in the days ahead.

From the Cato Institution’s biography of Scott Lincicome:

Scott Lincicome is an international trade attorney with extensive experience in trade litigation before the United States Department of Commerce, the US International Trade Commission (ITC), the US Court of International Trade, the European Commission and the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) Dispute Settlement Body. He has also advised corporate and sovereign clients on US bilateral and regional trade agreements and US trade policy, as well as WTO matters, including accessions, compliance and multilateral trade negotiations. Scott is also a Visiting Lecturer at Duke University, where he teaches a course on US trade policy and politics.

From 1998–2001 Scott was as a trade policy research assistant at the Cato Institute. Since 2009, Scott has authored or co‐​authored several policy papers published by the Cato Institute and other organizations. He also blogs on international trade politics and policy at his personal blog, lin​ci​come​.blogspot​.com.  Scott has a BA in Political Science from the University of Virginia and a JD from the University’s School of Law.

You can find Scott on Twitter @scottlincicome.

Versatile author, stand-up comedian, and podcaster Andrew Heaton joins Josh to untangle the complex web of models and metrics for identifying someone’s political persuasions.  Both Andrew and Josh feel uncomfortable with the simply Left/Right scale—and it’s not just because they’re chary of adopting the political paradigm of dead Frenchmen.  No political identification model is perfect, but Andrew and Josh attempt to weigh the merits of some of the more perfectible models.

Also discussed: What puts the “OK” in Oklahoma, Heaton’s eventful journey from Goldwater Republican to eventually landing somewhere on a spectrum between George Will and Andrew Yang, the commonality of those who feel alienated from political tribalism, and why Andrew doesn’t want to make America great again by fighting trade wars with China.

From Heaton’s website:

Andrew Heaton is a comedian, author, and political satirist.  He’s the host of The Political Orphanage comedy and news podcast, and scifi deep dive podcast Alienating the Audience.  He’s a frequent Reason TV contributor and hosted the popular webseries Mostly Weekly.   He’s performed standup comedy at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival, as a finalist in the China International Standup Competition, and throughout the United States and Europe.  A former congressional staffer, he’s the best-selling author of “Laughter is Better Than Communism,” as well as two funny novels.  He once opened for William Shatner, who said he’s “very funny.”  So there.

As a UCB-trained sketch writer and improviser Andrew Heaton comprises half of the comedy duo Lost History, which has performed improvised historical reenactments at the Del Close Marathon and Austin’s Out of Bounds Comedy Festival.  He’s a founding member of the popular New York indie improv team Lumberon, and an alumni of the sketch troupes 17:38 and First Runner Up.

As a political comedian Andrew Heaton has entertained numerous think tanks and advocacy groups, student associations, and sinister political action committees.  He’s a regular at Electoral Dysfunction at the People’s Improv Theater in New York, and the Totally Dishonest Media Show at Stand Up New York.  He hosted the award-winning series EconPop, a comedy show which explained economics through popular culture.

Andrew Heaton is the author of the best-selling work of political satire Laughter is Better Than Communism, and two funny paranormal novels: Frank Got Abducted (about aliens) and Happier as Werewolves (a tender coming of age novel involving werewolves).

You can follow Heaton on Twitter @MightyHeaton

What is the real purpose of getting an education?  And what benefits does a proper education bring to the individual and to society at large?  What became of the radically conservative cult(ure) of ATI, Bill Gothard, I Kissed Dating Goodbye courtships, and denim-skirt-wearing coalitions of Christian home schoolers of the 80s and 90s?  Does homeschooling have its cultish elements today, or are conservative homeschoolers more…conservative?  Aren’t all students just homeschoolers now that COVID-19 has us social distancing from educational facilities?

Saving Elephants host and former homeschooler Josh Lewis is joined by perennial educator and fellow former homeschooler Brooke Medina to answer these questions and many more.

Brooke Medina is a homeschool mother of four and the Director of Communications at Civitas Institute where she manages Civitas’ outward facing platforms, oversees messaging strategy, and handles all press relationships.  The North Carolina based Civitas Instituted is a nonprofit policy organization dedicated to removing barriers to freedom so that all North Carolinians can enjoy a better life.  Brooke also co-hosts Civitas’ podcast Civitalk, which focuses on drawing connections between civics and culture.

Brooke is a graduate of Regent University, holding a B.A. in Government and a minor in English.  She has also completed several programs with the Charles Koch Institute, including the Koch Leaders Program and Koch Communications Fellowship, focusing on the philosophical underpinnings of market-based management and classical liberalism.  She also sits on the board of directors for ReCity Network, a Durham-based non-profit committed to empowering civil society in combating poverty-related problems.  Brooke’s writings have been published in outlets such as The Hill, Entrepreneur, Washington Examiner, Daily Signal, FEE, and Intellectual Takeout.

But most importantly, Brooke’s hot takes, insights, and shenanigans on social media are worth following so be sure and check her out on Twitter @Brooke_Medina_

Russell Kirk contributed more to modern American conservatism than arguably anyone else!  Yet few who call themselves conservative today are familiar with the name “Kirk”—unless they’re referring to Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA.  No offense to Charlie but comparing him to Russell is like comparing the works of William Shakespeare to whatever the last thing Bill Mitchell tweeted.

Who was Russell Kirk?  Why is he considered the father of American conservatism?  What did he do that was so important?  Does his message hold value for conservatives today?  Why has his legacy been largely forgotten?  Saving Elephants host Josh Lewis is joined by Bradley Birzer to answer these questions and more about this woefully underappreciated, unusually eccentric, and highly ingenious thinker from the twentieth century whose prolific writings still have much to say to us about the nature of conservatism in the twenty-first century.  But aside from all that, Kirk is just a fascinating individual who wrote more than the average intelligent adult will read in their lifetime and was far more comfortable with mysticism, levitation, and cultish practices than you’d ever expect of someone considered the father of American conservatism!

Bradley J. Birzer, Ph.D. is a professor of history at Hillsdale where he is the Russell Amos Kirk Chair in American Studies and Fellow of the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library.  He is the co-founder, editor at large, and senior contributor of The Imaginative Conservative, an on-line journal for those who seek the True, the Good, and the Beautiful, addressing culture, liberal learning, politics, political economy, literature, the arts, and the American Republic.  Dr. Birzer also serves on the boards of the Free Enterprise Institute and The Center for Cultural Renewal and is a Fellow with the Foundation for Economic Education, Intercollegiate Studies Institute, The McConnell Center, and the Center for Economic Personalism (Brazil).

Dr. Birzer is author of several books, including: In Defense of Andrew Jackson, American Cicero: The Life of Charles Carroll, Sanctifying the World: The Augustinian Life and Mind of Christopher Dawson, J.R.R. Tolkien’s Sanctifying Myth: Understanding Middle-Earth, co-editor of The American Democrat and Other Political Writings by James Fenimore Cooper, and co-author of The American West.  He is also the author of Russell Kirk: American Conservative, and is considered an authority on the life of Russell Kirk.

He and his wife (also Dr. Birzer) have seven children and divide their time between Michigan and Colorado.

Conservative Millennials who came of age listening to rightwing radio hosts such as Rush Limbaugh probably associate political conversations about the environment with the likes of Al Gore railing against global warming and sundry other Environmentalist Wacko warnings of environmental apocalyptic doom.  Much of what the Right had to say about environmental concerns was that they were frequently overblown and often used by the Left as an excuse to bring about their calls for central planning.

But as younger Americans have come of age, there’s growing concern on the Right about a whole host of environmental concerns from conservation to endangered species to event climate change.  The late conservative philosopher Sir Roger Scruton noted that “there is no conceivable chance that the conservative defense of property will gain converts among the young without the attempt to show that it is not state control but private ownership that will save the planet from human waste.”  If conservatism hopes to survive and adapt, it must find a what to answer the challenge of environmental concerns in a way that’s not hostile to the free market and limited government.

Fortunately, there are growing voices on the Right who claim conservatives can do just that.  And among the most prominent of those voices spring from a group of young Americans who make up the American Conservation Coalition: a nonprofit organization dedicated to educating and empowering conservatives to re-engage on environmental conversations.  ACC Chief Operating Officer and Executive Vice President Danielle Butcher joins Saving Elephants host Josh Lewis to discuss the work ACC is doing, how conservatives can impact the environment for the better and—shudder—the threat of climate change.

Danielle Butcher is a nonprofit executive who aides organizations in developing and implementing their national strategies.

Danielle currently serves as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of the American Conservation Coalition and on the Advisory Board of the British Conservation Alliance, where she merges her love of leadership with her passions for free-markets and the environment.

Danielle was recently named to 2020’s Forbes 30 Under 30 list. She has spoken at several prominent conservative events including CPAC, appeared as a frequent guest on NPR and Fox News Radio, and has had her work featured in publications such as The Times, The Hill, The Washington Examiner, VOX, and more.

With her work prior to ACC, she served in leadership roles at various conservative nonprofits and organizations. Danielle attended Bethel University in Saint Paul, Minnesota, where she studied Political Science and Rhetoric Communications.

Saving Elephants turns two years old this April Fools Day—no joke!—and we’re celebrating with a bonus episode.  Saving Elephants host Josh Lewis recently appeared in the guest line-up on Calvin Moore’s Leading Questions podcast.  Leading Questions hosts Calvin, Kent, and Steve sit down with Millennials Kelly Cleaver (representing the political Left) and Josh Lewis (representing the Right) to discuss the major differences between Republicans and Democrats, whether progressivism or moderation is the winning ticket, reactions to “the other guy” getting a political victory, political pragmatism, and what the major issues are in the 2020 election cycle.