If Young Liberals Are to Save Our Democracy: What William F. Buckley Jr. Taught Us
If the call of duty has given young liberals conviction and cause, then it was the election of a populist President Donald J. Trump to a second term that catalyzed the vast expanse of op-eds who stand as one in demanding us ‘enfants’ to action. My message to these writers is simple. If young liberals are to save democracy, they must choose intellectual seriousness over the populist mimicry of those who came before us.
I do not condemn these writings, but I ask that we decide the true future of our own democracy and nation through defending our debate and welcoming opposing views. Many decide to speak on matters of polarization while actively lending their hand to the algorithms who strangle the public through social media.
While reading the biography and memoirs of William F. Buckley Jr. I learned an important lesson from the late intellectual and founder of the conservative anti-populist National Review. The dedication to stand up debate and understanding is more important to overcoming the rise of populism and polarization than any ideology or protest. Whether modern liberals will accept the arguments of Buckley, or refrain from attacking the fact that his early work on civil rights was unacceptable is irrelevant to my position. Understanding the basis of conservatism is the groundwork for any successful conversation.
The young liberals like myself must come together with the moderate conservative opposition, not through immature ad-hominem attacks but through well-spirited debate. There is a reason William F. Buckley’s Firing Line was so important to politics at the end of the previous century. We cannot build a nation collectively through separation and division of news but only through cross-reading and understanding.
Perhaps it is the ideas of liberal IR theory mixed with the values of neoliberal free trade in economics that will bring us together. Lowering the cost to information and allowing all parties to negotiate will invoke the promises of the Coase Theorem and allow us to reach an efficient outcome. William F. Buckley was a key figure in lowering the barriers to trade in Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.’s ‘marketplace of ideas.’
Young liberals need to separate from our previous generation not through the rise of a populist left but through a dedication to intellectually honest debate. Buckley rightfully believed the only way to quell a rise of populism was through a presentation of pragmatic politics in a give and take match of debate. While he embraced the spectacle of politics, being a great entertainer on television and a paragon of linguistics and wit, he was not without his mental fortitude and political might. Liberals must be able to embrace the opposition like William F. Buckley did without alienation.
It is up to us to develop our understanding of politics, not through the lens of modern society but based on the history of not just our political beliefs but those of opposition. Placing a wall between the world of tribe-based populism and that of honest political discussion is of the utmost importance. Agreeing with and granting a respectable platform to conservative ideas and accepting certain economic truths should be at the heart of a young liberal and moderate movement.
I am aware of the great ravine that is believed to be between our left and right but that can be sorted only through the means of cross-party dialogue. Providing temporary relief is our first step in bringing modern society back from the brink.
While MAGA has now been lodged into the American life blood, it is the cracks within the movement that show the most promise in uniting our world. In order for MAGA to not to be countered by populist Democratic Socialism, it is necessary to establish a new meaning for “establishment democrat”, a meaning that is not trite. The young generation is increasingly opposed to our older representatives who remain in our office far too long.
The platform of a temporary bridge can be taken from the populist agenda. Solving these issues must come before a new permanent party platform can be built. Common ground like banning stock trading in congress and establishing term limits for representatives are at the forefront of agreement. To bring back the populists to realism, I present these statements to show I hold no illusion to the need for moderates to grant life jackets to populists, but exiles must be willing to put out their own hand for help. For ‘New Liberals’ to truly succeed we must first grant haven to those lying closest to our ideological left and right.
Why is it that we are asked, nay pushed, to further distance from our kin through older members of media and populist politics? Should we not be the fabricators of our own future? We have a serious reckoning ahead and we must come to face it before we are left alone as the next leaders of the nation. We must reconcile which generation we want to be, one of unity, or one of parity with those before us.
We must move towards establishing a free market between all liberals, conservatives, and socialists who are open to distancing from populism. We must create a permeable sphere that can help us endure the fight against populism. Creating a realm of politics that will survive in a generation ever being pushed towards hatred. The only question left to ask is: can we finally make the world of debate that William F. Buckley Jr. would have wanted for us?
