Recent political history should make conservatives wary of assuming that voters will reject a dramatic alternative simply because it carries obvious risks. When people believe the status quo has failed them, they can be willing to discard political conventions and support candidates promising sweeping change.

That is what makes socialism’s growing appeal among younger voters worth taking seriously. Conservatives cannot count on the failures of socialism elsewhere to make the case for them. If voters are dissatisfied with the economy they have, they will listen to people offering something different — even when that alternative is deeply flawed.

That challenge is especially acute because many younger people have good reason to be dissatisfied with the economic status quo. The cost of housing, groceries, and other necessities has strained household budgets, while questions about wages, the value of a college degree, and the impact of artificial intelligence have added to the sense that economic security is becoming harder to attain.

Conservatives should not dismiss that anxiety simply because they reject the policies socialists prescribe to address it. Nor should they assume that tax cuts and deregulation, however important, speak for themselves. Voters who believe the American dream is slipping out of reach want to know what those policies will mean for their rent, their paycheck, and their chances of building a better life.

That requires conservatives to acknowledge something their opponents have successfully tapped into: For too many people, the economy feels rigged.

And on one point, conservatives should be willing to concede more than they often do: Parts of the economy really are rigged in favor of the well-connected. Cronyism is pervasive, and the well-connected and well-heeled benefit from tax breaks, subsidies, and carveouts unavailable to everyone else.

But the answer isn’t socialism.

Instead, conservatives need policymakers willing to take on special interests — even those aligned with their own party. That means pursuing free-market policies that expand opportunity rather than protecting the politically connected. Cronyism does not make markets fairer or more competitive — it tilts the playing field toward those with the influence to secure special treatment.

Giving government more control over the economy will not solve a system distorted by government favoritism. Conservatives should offer a different answer: less favoritism, more competition, and fewer barriers standing between people and economic opportunity.

Much of this work must happen in Washington, but it will also need to happen at the state and local levels, where a food truck owner in Las Vegas or a nail salon owner in Orlando, Florida, should be able to grow a business without unnecessary government barriers.

It means opposing subsidies that pick winners and losers, whether they benefit a green energy conglomerate or a legacy industry with a well-paid lobbyist. Reducing the size and reach of government cannot remain an abstract principle — conservatives have to show how it can lower costs, expand opportunity, and make it easier for families to get ahead.

Conservatives understand much of the problem. Big government, cronyism, and unnecessary regulation can make the economy feel rigged. But a diagnosis without a prescription doesn’t win elections — or change lives. Conservatives need to explain, in plain language, how greater economic freedom can translate into lower costs, higher wages, and more opportunity to move up. “Reduce the size of government” cannot just be a bumper sticker — it has to connect to a grocery bill, a rent payment, and a paycheck.

BREAD LINES OR BREAD WINNING? THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY’S FATAL LEFTWARD DRIFT

That also means conservatives need better messengers, not just better messages. Voters under 30 are not consuming political arguments the same way previous generations did, and socialism’s most effective advocates have adapted accordingly. Conservatives need credible, relatable voices who can make the case for economic freedom in ways that are sharp, direct, and suited to the platforms where younger voters actually get their information.

Being against socialism is not enough. Conservatives will earn the trust of a skeptical, cost-conscious electorate only by showing that economic freedom is more than an abstract ideal — it is a path to lower costs, greater opportunity, and an American dream that once again feels within reach.

Israel Ortega is a national spokesperson for The LIBRE Initiative, the country’s largest center-right Latino advocacy group.