Gen Z Conservatives Prioritize Entertainment Over Policy and Ideology
TL;DR
- Gen Z conservatives prioritize "vibes" and entertainment over policy or ideology, favoring figures who are funny, combative, and "piss people off" rather than those with strict conservative doctrine.
- The modern right faces internal conflict over antisemitism, with figures like Ben Shapiro attempting to excise criticism of Israel while previously platforming actual antisemites like Candace Owens.
- Younger conservatives exhibit a desensitization to political issues, viewing politics as entertainment and performance, which influences their media consumption and admiration for figures like Nick Fuentes.
- A significant portion of Gen Z conservatives express negative views on Israel and US support for it, viewing it as "pure evil" and questioning the alliance, reflecting a breakdown in elite foreign policy consensus.
- The "heritage American" concept promoted by some on the right is critiqued as a "woke" DEI for white people, focusing on ancestral claims rather than present-day contributions or achievements.
- The shift in conservative discourse reveals a growing acceptance of controversial figures and ideas, with some Gen Z respondents admiring Hitler's "leadership values" and "strong executive" approach, detached from his atrocities.
- The podcast highlights a generational disconnect in political engagement, suggesting younger conservatives are less motivated by material insecurity and more by a desire for authenticity and provocative content.
Deep Dive
The current conservative movement is fractured, with internal conflicts over identity, acceptable levels of racism, and leadership, exacerbated by a generational shift towards "vibes-based" politics that prioritizes performance and humor over policy. This manifests in a surprising embrace of figures like Nick Fuentes and an admiration for historical strongmen like Hitler, not for their atrocities but for perceived leadership qualities. This ideological drift challenges traditional conservative outlets and figures attempting to maintain party discipline, particularly concerning foreign policy and antisemitism.
The discourse surrounding the Epstein files reveals a striking incompetence and lack of foresight within the Trump administration's handling of sensitive information, contrasting sharply with previous administrations' more strategic approaches to managing damaging revelations. The casual redaction of photos and the subsequent illogical justifications highlight a detachment from reality. Simultaneously, the pardoning of Jelly Roll by a Republican governor exemplifies a liberal "hug-a-thug" policy, albeit from an unlikely source, while Bari Weiss's intervention to spike a 60 Minutes segment critical of the Trump administration exposes a pattern of prioritizing political narratives over journalistic integrity. The media landscape is further complicated by the rise of figures like Candace Owens, whose antisemitic rhetoric has been amplified by outlets like The Free Press, and the perplexing focus on Charlie Kirk's legacy, including a recreation of the scene of his death, demonstrating a profound disrespect for the deceased.
The generational shift within conservatism is further evidenced by a focus on "aura farming" and entertainment, with younger conservatives expressing a desire for leaders who are cool, funny, and provocative, rather than those adhering to traditional policy or ideology. This is particularly apparent in their views on Israel, where a significant portion expresses opposition to US support for the nation, framing it as an issue of American humiliation and jealousy rather than a principled stance. The embrace of figures like Nick Fuentes, who is seen as funny and unapologetically provocative, underscores this trend. This phenomenon is mirrored in the Democratic party, where the transmission of elite consensus on foreign policy is breaking down among younger generations. The podcast concludes by noting that this shift is not unique to any one political stripe, with similar trends observed in the past concerning figures like Gaddafi and Castro, suggesting a broader societal inclination towards personality-driven politics and entertainment over substantive policy.
Action Items
- Audit media consumption: Track 3-5 hours weekly on political commentary to identify "aura farming" trends and their impact on policy perception.
- Analyze ideological alignment: For 2-3 political figures discussed, compare stated policy positions against expressed "vibes-based" or entertainment-driven appeal.
- Evaluate rhetoric: For 3-5 instances of controversial statements (e.g., regarding Hitler, Jewish people, or specific political figures), assess the underlying justification beyond "strong leadership" or "humor."
- Measure impact of content: For 1-2 media outlets or platforms mentioned, assess their role in normalizing or amplifying fringe viewpoints within mainstream discourse.
Key Quotes
"well you know like i know a lot of people have been you know libeled by you know figures in silicon valley and the mainstream media but like the head of the head of the doj's civil rights department uh just posted a random guy and said uh let's kill him pretty much you know which that happens that's the if you're in charge of the civil rights division that's your job you know just to take random people and be like i think he killed all these people sorry it would be irresponsible it would be irresponsible not to speculate at this point because you know like this is a serious crime we're talking about"
The speaker highlights a perceived pattern of behavior from the head of the DOJ's Civil Rights Department, suggesting a tendency to publicly target individuals with accusations. This quote points to a critique of how certain figures in positions of power might operate, particularly in the context of serious crimes. The speaker implies that such actions, even if speculative, are part of the job for those in charge of civil rights divisions.
"the shooter was a portuguese guy who was just a portuguese guy who was caught due to a tip uh source to reddit of course felix obviously i had one thought and one thought only which is oh no decretio decretio decretio did you shoot up an economics class because you were mad at engineering and also kill a cold fusion professor at mit in boston the day before decretio decretio got really dark when hbo bought the show and ryan murphy became the showrunner that's it been on bbc in a number of years it's no longer a light comedy about a portuguese buffoon it's got it's a real fucked up show now"
The speaker connects a real-world shooting incident to a recurring comedic character named "Decretio." This quote illustrates the podcast's tendency to blend current events with their established inside jokes and fictional narratives. The speaker humorously speculates on the shooter's motives by referencing the character's supposed backstory and its evolution into a darker, more complex narrative.
"tennessee governor pardons country star jelly roll who has sought redemption from his criminal past says here tennessee governor pardons kelly jelly roll jelly roll it was the first federal rico case about stealing pies from window sills it said the governor acknowledged the national natives long road back from drugs and prison through soul searching songwriting and advocacy for second chances the rapper turned singer whose legal name is jason deford has spoken for years about his redemption arc before diverse audiences from people serving time in correctional centers to concert crowds from morons to imbeciles fuck off clods shit heads republican governor bill lee issued a pardon after friends and civic leaders of the grammy nominated musician joined in an outpouring of support"
This quote details the pardon of musician Jelly Roll by the Tennessee governor, highlighting the artist's past criminal convictions and his subsequent advocacy for second chances. The speaker presents this as an example of a "liberal hug a thug policy" enacted by a Republican governor, framing it as a point of contention. The quote also touches on the musician's public narrative of redemption and the support he received from civic leaders.
"i want to say something about trust our trust to each other and our trust with the public the only newsroom i'm interested in running is one in which you're able to have contentious disagreements about the thorniest editorial matters with respect and crucially where we assume the best intent of our colleagues anything else is unacceptable i held a 60 minutes story because it was not ready while the story presented powerful testimony of torture at secot it did not advance the ball the times and other outlets have done previously done similar work the public knows that venezuelans have been subjected to horrific treatment at this prison to run a story on this subject two months later we need to do more and this is 60 minutes we need to be able to get the principles on the record and on camera our viewers come first not the listening schedule or anything else that's my north star and i hope it's yours too"
This quote is a statement from Bari Weiss explaining her decision to hold a 60 Minutes story. Weiss emphasizes her commitment to editorial integrity and assumes the best intentions of her colleagues, while also stating the story was not ready for broadcast. She argues that the public is already aware of the issues presented and that the segment needed to offer new information or perspectives to be valuable.
"the question of what do you think of adolf hitler ashley replies i think he was a great leader to be honest i think what he was going for was terrible but i think he showed very strong leadership values this is the funniest possible way to be a nazi it's to be like look obviously world war ii the holocaust the tens of millions of people he killed that's all very bad but i gotta say he was just i i liked his i liked his highway building policies yeah like he was like he was jack welch and this is just like and this is the tenor of a lot of their replies"
The speaker introduces a question posed to Gen Z Republicans about Adolf Hitler and then presents Ashley's response, which praises Hitler's leadership values despite acknowledging the terrible nature of his actions. The speaker finds this response humorously contradictory, likening it to praising a figure for their policies while disregarding their atrocities. This quote highlights the perceived normalization of problematic historical figures within certain segments of the right.
"i myself am actually jewish ancestrally this is just bryce bryce just got in this focus group this is another another bryce belden another bryce belden prank rachel jake back at it again but uh so bryce says i myself am actually jewish ancestrally i'm christian by faith but jewish by blood i've actually read mein kampf the end conclusions that he came to absolutely abominable but i strangely understood where he was coming from as far as wanting to improve the national state of germany"
This quote features a focus group participant named Bryce, who identifies as Jewish by ancestry and Christian by faith, discussing his reading of "Mein Kampf." Bryce states that while he finds Hitler's conclusions "abominable," he "strangely understood where he was coming from" regarding the desire to improve Germany. The speaker uses this to illustrate a complex and potentially concerning perspective on Hitler's ideology, even from someone with Jewish heritage.