Let us start from the beginning. I am aware this title is provocative (perhaps even clickbait) and borders on the politically incorrect. However, it addresses a genuine crisis in contemporary society: the paradox of mainstream (post)modern conservatism.

I do not intend to generalize conservatives. I know more than a few who are respectful, who express their opinions thoughtfully, and who acknowledge that life can be lived differently. Their conservatism is generated from genuine ideals and a philosophical investigation into the meaning of life—meaning is not fixed. Whether we agree or disagree, I enjoy speaking with them. We can learn from one another, adapt our views, and encourage mutual growth.

This profile of a conservatively oriented person, using the word in its best sense, is one of the wonders of life. They direct their orientation inward while maintaining respect for the collective. From my observation, they are in a state of poiesis, pure mental creation, embodying what Scheler might call "Geist" (spirit)—what fundamentally makes us human.

But this breed of conservative is rapidly becoming an endangered species. Ever since the COVID-19 pandemic, I have found it increasingly difficult to converse with colleagues who loudly broadcast their conservatism. For the majority today, conservatism has merely become a fashion, a brand, and an identity. It is a badge worn to show the world how smart they are and how, amidst the mainstream "madness" of woke culture, they have fiercely guarded their own viewpoint. Consequently, conservatism of the philosophical manner has devolved into a conservatism of narcissistic drive.

So, let us dive into this unhealthy, 21st-century iteration of the ideology. What is the dominant profile of the (post)modern conservative? Today, the intellectual establishment has been largely eclipsed by a national populist profile. The (post)modern conservative prioritizes cultural preservation, national sovereignty, and a deep skepticism of elite institutions over strict economic libertarianism. That is the general idea. However, from the inside, they feel helpless in the face of a changing world, and for that very reason, they build a grandiose picture of themselves within their own imaginary reality. Who feels the need to express themselves this way? Those who are losing their presumed, unearned right to dominate. These are often men (although there are quite a few women as well) from the middle and lower classes who were promised relevance and the world, only to receive the cold shower of emancipation, a new reality where you must earn your spot.

In its own way, the average (post)modern conservative is now one of the most vulnerable groups in society, lacking resilience against the world around them. Theirs is not a conservatism born out of ideals, but out of desperation. Their loss of meaning, dominance, and identity is a heavy burden. Yet, instead of pushing their own boundaries and striving to become more, they allow themselves to become puppets for populist politicians who know exactly how to exploit their vulnerabilities.

Albert Camus spoke of philosophical suicide in his theory of the absurd, and I would argue we are witnessing this phenomenon to the highest degree. It is an escape into dogmatic faith and decided certainty. Conservatism, just like (post)modern progressivism, which I will not spare in the future, is detaching itself from intellectualism. It has become sheer affect: emotion over reason. This type of meaning, taken for granted, stops us from growing. It traps us in a closed circle of rage, resentment, sadness, and helplessness. Philosophical suicide has been committed. Affect has hijacked our capacity to reason, to critically evaluate, or to embrace ambiguity and meaninglessness. Conservatism is practically dead because it refuses to accept the irritation of being challenged. The proof lies with the few true philosophical conservatives I know: if they dare say something outside the accepted dogma, they are immediately met with harsh judgment from their own ranks. Just as cultural liberalism and progressivism have become dogmas, so too has (post)modern conservatism.

Primary narcissism: the "whiny baby" syndrome

Let us now continue the analysis. The core idea of contemporary conservatism is no longer to work on oneself, to learn, or to embrace the different. The goal is simply to ensure one feels safe. Every trace of unsafety or discomfort produces revolt, anger, and whining. They also need to keep their relevance and importance.

This is exactly why the conservatives of today’s world act like babies. They whine at anything that does not revolve around their own ego or identity. Boohoo, Helen is not white; Zendaya is Athena, and the new video game or superhero protagonist is not sexualized enough. If something is not a reflection of their relevance, they deem it "wrong" with the world.

This childlike state is what Freud would refer to as primary narcissism. Every one of us is born with it; it is a state we are meant to be detached from through nurturing and socialization. The social world pushes us toward compromise. We trade the unconditioned desire-fulfillment of infancy for a reality where satisfaction must be earned. If a baby wants milk, they cry; if they are ill, they cry; if they need attention, they cry.

The same can be said for (post)modern conservatism. If the world does not direct itself toward their specific, idealized stereotype, they throw a tantrum. This is the core of my argument. They have become narcissistic individuals who care little about real changes in the world (or the world in general) and obsess only over their own identity and realization, regardless of who gets hurt. That is not conservatism; that is destructionism camouflaged as moral value and societal care. Inevitably, they only care about themselves. The ultimate proof could be the reaction to this text. Instead of reflectively reading this argument and accepting the critique in the very spirit of "political incorrectness" they claim to champion, many would possibly attack me (or maybe I am overstating my relevance). Instead of engaging with the argument, they would attack the persona, branding it as "liberal," "lefttard," or "woke."

The banality of grievance

But there is a far greater danger here than individual narcissism. The easiest person to control and manipulate is a vulnerable narcissist exhibiting these exact traits. Unlike grandiose narcissists who project unshakeable superiority, vulnerable narcissists are driven by a deep sense of aggrievement, hidden shame, and perpetual victimhood. Because they have lost their internal anchor, their capacity to independently evaluate and make meaning of the world, they require constant external validation to regulate their self-esteem. Populists, politicians can easily use that force. In the context of conservativism being destroyed in its core, it leaves us with the worst kind of people running our states, societies, and institutions. Furthermore, it paves the way for evil in its purest form. No matter what they do, they will support them, as the primal drive is not one of rational judgements, but fear.

The constant, desperate struggle to "fix" a society back to a mythical, comfortable past can only produce evil of the worst kind.

So, please, do not be such a whiny baby. The world is not one big liberal conspiracy simply because you are losing your naturalized power. Reclaim your agency through growth and by embracing the world, not by trying to disempower those who have finally earned their place in society. Find your value through empathy, not sadism. And please, stop whining that the world is unfair. Get in line.

And do not worry, cultural progressivism of the contemporary making is next.