While walking through my local neighborhood, I was struck by a young man sporting a “Reagan-Bush ‘84” T-shirt. Dressed casually in stone-wash jeans and sunglasses, he embodied a certain confidence that drew attention. This shirt, reminiscent of iconic band merchandise, has become a popular emblem among Gen-Z conservatives in the U.S., signaling a resurgence of right-leaning cultural aesthetics.

This casual display reminded me of a recent cover of News, post-Trump’s second inauguration, which depicted young right-wingers reveling in their aspirations of cultural influence. Journalist Brock Colyar pointed out that “conservatism—as a cultural force, not just a political condition—has surged back in a meaningful way for the first time since the 1980s.” Given the increasingly intertwined nature of British and American cultures, the rise of conservative fashion statements in unexpected places may not be so surprising.

The right in the U.S. has long aimed to seize control of culture, feeling stifled by a perceived liberal orthodoxy in the arts. This frustration resonates even in Britain, where debates about BBC “wokeness” parallel similar conversations. For members of the MAGA movement, it’s not merely about electing their candidates; they yearn for a cultural landscape that reflects their worldview. This desire drives Trump’s critiques of institutions like the Smithsonian, which he claims harbor “improper ideologies,” as well as his threats of imposing steep tariffs on foreign films.

As 2023 comes to a close, the question remains: what has emerged from the anticipated conservative cultural takeover? Early claims of victory have surfaced. In an article for News, commentator Helen Lewis hailed the latest season of *The White Lotus* as “the first great work of art in the post-woke era.” Similarly, Kevin Maher from News proclaimed that “woke is dead,” citing the return of figures like Mel Gibson, long criticized for alleged bigotry, as evidence of a shift.

Another notable point of contention arose around Sydney Sweeney, the breakout star from *Euphoria*, who starred in an American Eagle ad. Some critics perceived the ad as hinting towards white supremacist eugenics. Sweeney’s choice to identify as a Republican prior to the 2024 elections has led to her being viewed as a proponent of “traditional” beauty norms in contemporary culture.

In a recent interview with News, Sweeney addressed the backlash regarding the ad, asserting, “I think that when I have an issue I want to speak about, people will hear.” Supporters view her statements as part of a broader conservative shift in Hollywood, suggesting that celebrities no longer need to bow to the pressures of cancel culture. However, her latest film, *Christy*, which depicts a female boxer, has suffered one of the worst opening weekends in box-office history, even amid her year-long attention.

This leads to an essential question: while the right wishes to disrupt Hollywood and the arts, do they genuinely engage with it? Purchasing a political T-shirt is a superficial commitment; attending a film screening to support a conservative actor requires a deeper investment.

Despite the right’s electoral successes and the desire to reshape institutions, cultural domination remains elusive. Calls for conservative representation in events like the Super Bowl’s halftime show confront a reality where pop culture figures like Bad Bunny, an outspoken critic of Trump, are celebrated instead.

Contemporary conservatism has not yet carved out a “cool” identity, often prioritizing provocative statements over genuine artistic appreciation. Even Kelsey Grammer, Hollywood’s preeminent conservative, has maintained a commitment to diversity, illustrating that art’s true value lies in its ability to broaden our horizons rather than narrow them.

The predictions about a post-woke Hollywood now seem untenable, especially with the successes of diverse films this year, such as *Sinners* and *One Battle After Another*, both of which have received critical acclaim and box-office success. These narratives suggest that the conservative grasp on culture may be more illusion than reality.

Ultimately, audiences gravitate towards what resonates with them, regardless of ideological labels. The prevailing question remains: “Is it good?” rather than “Is it conservative?” Perhaps Sydney Sweeney and her peers would be better served focusing on imparting the quality of their work rather than the political implications attached to their identities.