Conservative commentator Jesse Kelly recently posited a question on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter. His question evoked many responses. Some were thoughtful, but as is often the case with social media, many were seemingly clueless.

Indeed, it may have been the nature of some of the responses that motivated Kelly to delete his original tweet. Regardless, his question was worth delving into: “What’s the best explanation for why conservatism failed to conserve anything?”

In some respects, everyone already knows what conservatism is seeking to conserve, which is the first rub.

Speaking in broad generalities, the inherent nature of conservatism is the tendency to instinctively preserve the status quo. Change is secondary and should only occur when necessary and thoroughly analyzed.

But conservatism in the unique American context holds a naturally critical view of government. Our Founding Fathers established government with the goal of prizing Liberty as the highest value and therefore protected the rights of the individual over those of the state. The U.S. is a nation of the people, by the people, and for the people.

Back to Kelly’s question. Why are conservatives failing at conserving?

Maybe the answer is that conservatives have long viewed government as almost being a necessary evil. Given the reality that the nature of man is fallen and easily corruptible, conservatives are averse to endowing the federal government with too much power. Conservatives are less inclined to run for public office than more moderate or leftist do-gooders, and conservatives are usually not motivated to serve in the unelected bureaucracy. Furthermore, when conservatives are elected or appointed, they are reticent to invoke power, often out of principle.

Conservatives place a high view on self-sufficiency and personal responsibility, as they see these values as the primary means by which individuals access their God-given Liberty. In general, conservatives’ first instinct is to look to themselves, family, friends, or local community such as their church before looking to government to solve the myriad problems that arise in life.

For the conservative-minded individual, the way to address discontentment in life is via personal agency. True Liberty is not found in some government guarantee of happiness; rather, it is the promise of protecting the freedom of the individual to engage in the pursuit of happiness.

This may be the crux of the difference between the modern liberal or leftist and the conservative. The leftist views the promise of Liberty as the attainment of happiness. The leftist sees government as the mechanism by which individuals obtain happiness, often by taking things from someone who has “too much” and giving it to a favored constituent. The leftist sees expanding government as a necessity in order to provide the promise of Liberty.

The conservative, by contrast, sees the expansion of government as a direct threat to individual Liberty.

Effectively, Kelly’s question is the same as that being addressed by the viral smash hit song by Oliver Anthony, “Rich Men North of Richmond.” As Anthony laments in his song, “It’s a d*mn shame what the world’s gotten to/ For people like me and people like you/ Wish I could just wake up and it not be true/ But it is, oh, it is.”

The world and, more specifically, America have changed, culturally, politically, and ideologically. A generation of Americans now exist who have forgotten or rather were never taught the inherent value of their Liberty heritage. They’ve been taught to believe that since they are not feeling or experiencing happiness, the America of their forefathers is a failure. As the government has inevitably failed to deliver on the promise of happiness, leftist politicians point the finger of blame at those backward conservatives for standing in the way of “progress.”

It’s the whole “what have you done for me lately?” trope. And too often, conservatives — both politicians and voters — have fallen for this bait-and-switch. Too often, Republican politicians make the argument that boils down to an endorsement for growing government, but just at a slower rate than their leftist counterparts.

Conservatives therefore always find themselves on the defensive, arguing on the terms and the ground rules that the leftists have set. For example, any mention of opposing the expansion of some government welfare programs is disingenuously labeled a “cut” by Democrats, which they insist will “hurt” Americans. Too often, Republicans find themselves scrambling to deny the spurious claim, but unfortunately they’ve already ceded the ideological ground.

To answer Kelly’s question, conservatives have failed at conserving because they have too often been duped into conceding the leftist ideological view of Liberty — that the purpose of government is to provide for and even ensure an individual’s happiness. In other words, the idea that government will progressively become the means of creating utopia. Nothing could be further from the truth.