Is conservatism dead? If it means fidelity to constitutionalism, individual liberty, limited government, moral order, and a commitment to truth over tribe (Or our dwindling attendance numbers at Furman Conservative Society), then yes, it is. What has replaced it is something else entirely. Until we as conservatives reckon with the rupture at hand, and take off our silly little red hats, the movement will remain a shadow of what it once was.
In 1960, a group of young idealists gathered at the Connecticut home of William F. Buckley Jr. and authored what would become the philosophical cornerstone of modern American conservatism: the Sharon Statement. Bold, principled, and unflinching in its defense of liberty, limited government and moral order, it charted a course for a movement that for decades would define Republican identity and American right-wing politics. But today, over 60 years later, the Sharon Statement reads not like a mission still in progress—but like an obituary for a worldview that has been co-opted, corrupted and ultimately abandoned.
The Sharon Statement was clear in its convictions. It affirmed the individual’s right to freedom, the importance of market-based economics, and the necessity of defeating communism both at home and abroad. It was grounded in constitutionalism, advocating for the separation of powers and federalism as essential to preserving liberty. It envisioned conservatism as a moral force, not just a political strategy.
But fast forward to the present, and what passes for “conservatism” in America bears little resemblance to that vision. Today’s right is less about classical liberalism or laissez-faire principles and more about power. We have traded ideology for identity politics, constitutional restraint for culture wars and fiscal responsibility for performative populism. In many ways, our movement has hollowed itself out, retaining only the branding of conservatism while discarding the beliefs that once gave it substance.
Nowhere is this more evident than in the shift from individual liberty to authoritarian impulse. The Sharon Statement’s commitment to personal freedom and constitutional limitations has been flipped on its head. From calls to ban books in public schools to legislative efforts suppressing protest and manipulating electoral processes, many of today’s self-proclaimed conservatives are not defending liberty—they’re restricting it. Instead of limiting government power, they’re all too willing to wield it as a cudgel against ideological opponents.
Economic freedom, too, has become a casualty. The Sharon Statement praised the free market as the best mechanism for prosperity and liberty. But in today’s conservative rhetoric, the market is no longer sacrosanct. The new right embraces tariffs, government intervention and corporate punishments if companies don’t toe the ideological line. Rather than championing innovation and entrepreneurship, they vilify tech companies, academic institutions, and entire industries as enemies of the people, ironically mirroring the very collectivist tendencies conservatives once warned about in their opposition to socialism.
Even on foreign policy, a core tenet of the old conservative movement has withered. The Sharon Statement advocated for a strong national defense and the moral imperative of opposing tyranny. Yet modern iterations of conservatism often veer into isolationism, conspiracy and sympathy for authoritarian regimes, particularly in Russia. Once the party of Reagan’s “shining city on a hill,” conservatism now shrinks behind walls, nicknames and hashtags, unwilling to articulate a sentence or slogan beyond “America First.”
What replaced the principle is performance. The loudest voices in today’s conservative movement are often the least interested in governance or policy. Cable news hits, viral soundbites, incompetent billionaires and social media outrage have replaced the patient work of building coalitions and articulating ideas. Politics are then a spectacle, not a substance. Conservatism, once a serious ideological movement, is now largely a brand for unfounded grievance and reactionary sentiment.
This transformation is not just aesthetic, it’s existential. Conservatism’s intellectual leaders once engaged in debates about human nature, the limits of power and the tensions between liberty and order. Today’s figureheads trade in conspiracies and culture war slogans. The Sharon Statement aimed to build a movement rooted in timeless truths. Modern conservatism seems obsessed with the next 24-hour news cycle.
To be clear, the Left has its own ideological struggles and hypocrisies. But the crisis on the Right is distinct in that it represents a near-total abandonment of the very values it once loudly championed. Conservatism didn’t just drift from its principles, it sprinted from them.
What remains is a zombie ideology, animated by rage, but devoid of thought. Conservative in name only, today’s movement is shaped more by resentment than responsibility, by tribalism rather than timeless truths. It survives in the shell of a once-robust tradition, clinging to nostalgia while undermining the very values that once defined it.
The Sharon Statement offered a roadmap for principled leadership in uncertain times. It deserves more than to be forgotten or misused as a talking point. It deserves to be resurrected or at the very least, properly mourned.
But in that mourning, we have an opportunity. If the conservative movement refuses to revive its founding ideals, then perhaps it’s time to look elsewhere for their modern incarnation. In many ways, moderate libertarianism, rooted in the same commitments to individual freedom, free markets, peace, and limited government, represents not just a logical successor but a necessary evolution. It resists the authoritarian drift that has consumed the right, and it offers a future grounded not in nostalgia, but in liberty..
If we are to salvage anything from the ashes of conservatism, it will be by embracing the core values that once animated it, and pushing them further. Not with blind allegiance to party or pundit, but with a renewed focus on liberty, pluralism and principled resistance to state overreach. Libertarianism isn’t just an alternative. In this political moment, it may be the only viable path forward for those who still believe freedom is worth fighting for.