Let’s talk about the word “bohemian”. The noun/adjective conjure up images of a mud-caked, free-loving, pretentious artistic type on enough medications to fill a pharmacy. This aforementioned person has become disenchanted with the confines of society in the preachiest possible sense, and has decided to dedicate his/her life to scholarly pursuits such as poetry, music, and hallucinogens. Yes, this person is a living stereotype of the 1960’s. The young and privileged liberals of the mid-twentieth century founded a cultural phenomenon based on peace, love, and an unfamiliarity with the bathroom.

However, that culture, despite beginning openly socialist, is now domesticated. The warriors of the twentieth century are now seniors, so they stink for different reasons. That is the inevitable result of cultural revolutions. There is a point in which the revolution becomes the establishment. Not necessarily in the political sense, but in the cultural sense. That’s what happens. The old guard is replaced by the new guard. The fire of rebellion cannot burn forever in one hand. Something has to replace that social energy.

The millennials, at the least the first three-quarters, were a wash. They adopted the ideology of the previous cultural movement. They profess, as the late Andrew Breitbart would say, cultural marxism. This is the belief that all people are essentially equal, and any disparity in situation or affluence between two cultures, is inherently unfair. The basic tenet of this ideology is emotions, rather than pragmatism. It is sometimes derisively referred to as the “culture of me”, in which the emotions of a maligned group are more important than the cultural reality. It is not individualistic, rather the opposite. The culture works on victimization, and seems to have a hierarchy. Those who belong to a historically victimized group are placed at the top of the social totem pole, and their needs and feelings are paramount. It is, essentially, an identity culture.

What began as cultural marxism, however, has become cultural fascism. The new wave of political correctness has turned the naive ridiculousness of the 1960’s into a malevolent force known as “social justice”, which is ironically anti-justice in that it places guilt and innocence based on membership in a particular group. Preaching inclusivity has turned into the inevitable result of preaching exclusivity. Cultural pride has morphed into cultural arrogance. Universities across the United States have seen safe spaces: not safe from actual threats or legitimate mental stress, but safe from differing ideologies. They have seen people of certain races attacked for choosing a fashion historically associated with a different race. They have seen protests against speakers, not policy.

However, the torch is being passed. A new counter-culture movement has appeared. In opposition to cultural fascism, is cultural libertarianism. The proponents of this culture believe in the sanctity of the individual. They believe that every opinion, no matter how unsavory or deviant, has the right to be thought or spoken. They believe there is no social totem pole. It is simply a collection of individuals, and each person is culpable for their own thoughts.

The previous culture, however, despises this. This has resulted in an all-out war between freedom of expression, and forced social consciousness. The cultural fascists have declared these views, to quote a presidential candidate, deplorable.

In this war the cultural fascists are losing, because the cultural libertarians are fighting in a most unorthodox way. They are taking this opportunity to present themselves to the other side as everything the opposition hate. They deliberately profess ideas in a manner that is incendiary to the opposing force. They pride themselves on the deviation. This angers the cultural fascists, but it has no effect. The angrier they become, the more the hypocrisy is exposed. The public does not correlate level of outrage with level of justification anymore. So, the more ridiculous the protests and rhetoric become, the stronger the cultural libertarians get.The ultimate goal is to change culture so it becomes conducive to change in policy. Politics has a direct relationship with culture. The battlefield is not on paper, but in society.

The ironic truth is that the same group that rails against this change, created the movement. The cultural fascists took over, but they became arrogant. They believed they could extend this power from persuasion in coercion. They did not anticipate retaliation. This is what happens. The prevailing force in society is going to be put on notice by an opposing force. They have lost control. People are beginning to wake up. The cultural libertarians are moving, and moving fast. They can’t be stopped. They incite, anger, and infuriate. The sad fact is the cultural fascists must face is that they did this to themselves.