Here's a solution which could actually establish a traditionalist/conservative norm in the United States.
First part of solution, people's tendency to socialize. Looking through many social networks, I've found a lot of accounts having not only their real names and faces, but also posting several things from their personal lives.
Second part of the solution is the easy accessibility of these social networks. Anyone with the internet can easily access most social media sites (including Twitter and other Big-Tech ones), and thanks to the technologies available to the general customer, nearly every Western civilian has Internet access.
Third part of the solution, people love to be rewarded for small things.
Fourth part of the solution, practice of bonuses and discounts at various places.
If there are enough conservative/traditionalist people -who own a business, they could do this: Offer some sorta bonus or a discount to conservative/Christian/traditionalist/moralist employees and customers.
What?
In case an employee or a customer has a social media account they're willing to show to their employer/seller, the account can be scanned for its content - and, yes, accounts with:
- predominantly conservative posts;
- photos of family events (Yes, people even post this shit in social media quite often) which show them as a good, stable and happy family;
- frequent quotations of Bible/prayers/other signs of faithful devotion to Christ;
- photos of guns, lots of guns, owned by the account owner; (This one is debatable, though);
- posts expressing respect/admiration towards military and police officers of the United States of America;
- posts expressing sympathy towards order, authority and discipline;
- expression of high moral values as defined by the Society;
- expression of willingness to serve the Society, national unity and patriotism;
(other elements might be added later - I know the whole list is far from being exhaustive)
Those accounts' owners will be rewarded somehow by the conservative business owners. Say, one shop would offer you some 20% discount on bakery, the other one will wash/fix your car for 30% less, the place where the account owners work will give them a monthly bonus... long as they're on the right team.
Yes, the whole idea is taken from Chinese government-issued social credit, but with two crucial modifications: first, the system is decentralized - each business owner runs their on system of rewards/punishments or may even not have one (And, by extension, efforts are constantly being made - both by the conservative populace and the others - to keep the Gov away from this phenomenon), and second - no compulsory data gathering. No surveillance. Only using the data users provide voluntarily.
How to void the "I've created a traditional-looking account, and now I show it to those dealers and my boss while fucking whores at the nightclub every day" trick:
Those customers aren't isolated entities. They know someone and someone knows them as well. Many people know them, expectedly. Also, the business owners are likely expected to want to reward their kind only, and not some pretenders, so...
...they might offer a "Cheater Catcher" reward of sorts.
Persons having evidence of someone being a dirty fuckin' cheater who smokes weed every day, never visits the church and occasionally gang-bangs a chick, they can use it to assist a shop owner in ensuring that the rewards go only to those who deserve them. might provide the evidence - for a small reward. Say, you catch a cheater, this time the shop gives you a gift - the good thing is, you can even be anonymous since the gift is given for punishing the cheater and not for being a good father. The gift is one-time in this case, but hey, who doesn't like a reward anyway?
So what? Without the Gov we'll never force everyone to follow our rules!
Of course, not every shop will have such a system. BUT here's the situation: we have shops which give you a discount if you're one of the Right Wingers, and the rest will jut buy the product for normal prices/work for their wages as stipulated in contract. (They're expected to not punish the rest since that will NOT lead to universal obedience, but instead creates a bunch of non-conservative businesses offering rewards for watching porn, fucking whores, smearing Christ and smoking pot. Is that what you want?)
So, what shop do you think the people will choose? Right wingers will expectedly choose to support right wingers, getting a neat bonus as a reward. The rest will choose either the right-wingers' businesses or alternatives, because hey, it isn't like right wing enterpreneurs are forcing their customers to buy their shit for more money if they're not conservatives, huh? That's Phase One, though.
Phase Two might occur if those right-wingers get an influx of customers. Which automatically leads to their increased prosperity, since:
A = Non-conservative customers/employees. i(a) is the individual non-conservative person's contribution to the business.
B = Conservative customers or employees. Conservative individuals are defined as i(b).
s = Business significance coefficient (The more prosperous a business is, the higher is it.)
A' = Non-conservative businesses
B' = Conservative businesses
x = A business and his revenue.
The equation: x = (Σ(i(a(x))) + Σ(i(b(x)))) * s; roughly defines a business's success. In other words, a sum of both conservative and non-conservative contributions, multiplied by that business significance coefficient, equals revenue for that business, expressed in some units or just as a number.
It is known that many people prefer big businesses to small ones and even in case they support small businesses frequently, they occasionally buy stuff and services at big companies, because they can often provide greater comfort thanks to their sheer power. In other words, the business significance coefficient is expected to rise as a business grows.
The coefficient is here to show a business' tendency to grow or fail. Say, it might have lots of customers, but its reputation might be low so its popularity drops, resulting in less ad services willing to promote it, less potential partnerships, less future customers and employees...
so when you create such a conservative-rewarding business, more conservatives are expected to switch to conservative shops. So here we have this...
X' = Σ(i(a)) + Σ(i(b)),
A' = Σ(i(a ⊆ A')) + Σ(i(b ⊆ A')),
B' = Σ(i(a ⊆ B')) + Σ(i(b ⊆ B')),
X' = A' + B'.
Or:
All businesses are divided into conservative and non-conservative, for simplicity. The sum of non-conservatives' revenue equals the sum of individual contributions made by persons (either conservative or not, money don't stink) shopping/working at there. The sum of conservatives' revenue is defined in the same way.
And the sum of non-conservatives' revenue and the conservatives' revenue is the sum of all revenue available. Which means...
...customers and workers flowing to one side are customers and workers flowing FROM the other side. And since there aren't any extra customers and workers, one's gain is another's loss.
Summary:
Conservative businesses are creating bonuses and discounts for right-wingers -> Right-wingers flow to their side -> Right-wingers get more customers and workers -> Right wingers' businesses grow bigger -> Since the draw customers and workers from the same pool their rivals do, their rivals' businesses perish.
And while they grow, their significance coefficient grows, too, while their rivals' coefficients fall - which means... over time, the quality of conservative enterprises increases both absolutely and relatively.
So Phase 2 is conservatives growing while non-conservatives falling... or adopting conservative practices to survive. Effectively switching from set A' to set B'.
Of course, we do not get a complete switch from A' to B'. There are some areas (porn industry, drug manufacturers, videogame producers, sex workers...) which are inherently non-compatible with conservatives, yet the demand for their products and services is high enough, perpetually, for these areas to exist. And banning them leads to nothing but more underground affairs and civil unrest, so they will continue their existence.
These guys are highly unlikely to follow a conservative policy, for obvious reasons. So they stay at A' forever. Banning them will only lead to civil resistance, and eventual trampling of the conservative regime by rebels one way or another (A scenario conservatives would like to avoid because they're conservatives).
One more thing: current society is way too liberal for conservatives and traditionalists to convert it right. fucking. now. into a moralist theocracy. Besides, individuality, natural desires, and free will are going to ensure that a moralist theocracy never survives, and pushing right-wing values past a certain point will lead to increased resistance (China is a good example, as well as Russia and now gladly-dead USSR). So the traditionalst-conservative society will have to stop its cultural conquest where success is not achievable by means other than force and oppression.
In addition, that means business owners are initially recommended to be less aggressive in pushing the right-wing agenda. Expect little, gradual changes; people who're used to the modern liberal regime aren't going to switch to a conservative traditionalist theocracy completely and immediately, even if you give them a hundred free donuts.
Gradual but sure changes are a good thing.
It may and likely will take years. But then again, small changes are usually easier accepted by the masses - because they cause a smaller paradigm shift, so the masses will adapt to them easier. Coupled with lack of legal enforcement (We're encouraging people to shift, not forcing them), such a way might theoretically shift the society towards more of a traditional way.
What do we get out of this?
- A slow and gradual, fully voluntary shift towards traditionalism, conservatism, and a society based on moral and religious values.
- Absence of civil unrest and the need to employ force and propaganda to force the populace into obedience, providing greater social stability (Long as conservatives won't try to ban something like sex-bots or weed, or force people to do something or pay for not doing something).
- A relatively small amount of non-conservative elements which are not dangerous for the traditionalist-moralist right wing regime. (Unless bothered by any restraints. So don't do that.)
- Modesty and decency as the "new normal".
- A self-regulating society, maintaining its own moral values without any need of government intervention.
- Increase of population of the country through natural repopulation more than immigration. Also, heavily reduced number of abortions.
- Strong, monogamous nuclear family.
- Reduction of obscenity and indecency more into private lives. (You just can't eradicate this. However, you can get this stuff out of most public places. Without bugging your senators until they introduce another Anti-Pleasure Law, or launching a massive attack on smut lovers.)
- Increased role of Christian religion in public life.
- More order, discipline and humility among humans. (WITHOUT involving the Gov.)
- A more united, patriotic populace.
Is that really enough?
No, for you guys it's never enough. But you have two options:
either stop aggressive advances at some point, gaining significant transformation of society and understanding that further transformation is either unstable or outright impossible, and any attempts to push even further with force will only ruin your conservative narrative completely and for a very long time,
or go ahead, be a dumbass and start banning stuff - only to have a violent uprising sometime later and witness your children being raped and murdered by extremists, while you're nailed to a cross like Jesus Christ forced to watch every detail of this. Only you won't resurrect because you're likely a puny human and not a son of a god.
Authoritarianism isn't a new idea. Always ends up with a revolution, though. So why don't you try a voluntary option now?..