But now, I think more and more, we are seeing these pundits moving either into an outright anger stage, or a kind of bargaining stage, like we see with Mark Blyth of Brown University; he is a committed globalist, a committed liberal, but he is coming out and saying, you know, nationalist populism is the new normal, you better get used to it. Perhaps he qualifies as having reached the full acceptance stage. And by the way, we have been talking about Mark Blyth and others recently on The Turley Talkers Facebook Mastermind Group which you can join by clicking on the link below and signing up as a VIP Patron.
But I came across an article in particular that I thought we could look at because I think it is so instructive in how secular liberals are starting to come to terms with the fact that the world is in fact turning to the right, the nationalist populist traditionalist right, but yet don not really have the capacity of making much sense of it. The article I am referencing here is entitled “How populist uprisings could bring down liberal democracy,” published in the Guardian written by Yascha Mounk, who is a lecturer on government at Harvard University. It is a fascinating insight into the ways in which professors within the secular globalist university are currently thinking and how they are coming to terms with the fact that their secular globalist world order is starting to collapse. When all is said and done, they are panicked. I remember listening to a lecture by Mark Blyth, a video from Harvard University, and he basically said if you are a globalist or a secular liberal, ‘Things suck.’ He actually ended his lecture with those two words: ‘Things suck.’ Things are really, really bad. They are recognizing more and more that secular globalization is in fact waning; that it is approaching a doomsday scenario where it is so inherently flawed and so despised by the masses that it is beyond saving.
Here is some excerpts from this article by this Harvard professor:
“There are long decades in which history seems to slow to a crawl. Elections are won and lost, laws adopted and repealed, new stars born and legends carried to their graves. But for all the ordinary business of time passing, the lodestars of culture, society and politics remain the same.
Then there are those short years in which everything changes all at once. Political newcomers storm the stage. Voters clamour for policies that were unthinkable until yesterday. Social tensions that had long simmered under the surface erupt into terrifying explosions. A system of government that had seemed immutable looks as though it might come apart.
This is the kind of moment in which we now find ourselves”
Did you catch that? According to this Harvard professor, and he is certainly not alone, we find ourselves at a historical moment when “A system of government that had seemed immutable looks as though it might come apart.” Notice, we are a FAR FAR FAR cry from, ‘Oh, no one is gonna vote for Brexit. Oh, give me a break, Donald Trump will never be president of the United States.” Notice that such confident prognostication is dead here; these were not just flukes This Harvard prof recognizes that we are facing nothing less than a total overhaul of the globalist political world order. This is a sounding of the alarm here.
He goes on:
“Until recently, liberal democracy reigned triumphant. For all its shortcomings, most citizens seemed deeply committed to their form of government. The economy was growing. Radical parties were insignificant. Political scientists thought that democracy in places like France or the United States had long ago been set in stone, and would change little in the years to come. Politically speaking, it seemed, the future would not be much different from the past.
Then the future came – and turned out to be very different indeed. Citizens have long been disillusioned with politics; now, they have grown restless, angry, even disdainful. Party systems have long seemed frozen; now, authoritarian populists are on the rise around the world, from America to Europe, and from Asia to Australia. Voters have long disliked particular parties, politicians or governments; now, many of them have become fed up with liberal democracy itself.”
What is so fascinating here is how the author sees anything other than liberal democracy as authoritarianism. What is so fascinating to me at least is how these pundits are so completely unable to see or appreciate how those of us who are on the other side, those who side absolutely with traditionalist and nationalist sentiments, like those expressed in the recent Italian elections, how we view corporatist globalism and its elite aristocracy as itself authoritarian. They cannot see how we believe that the globalists such as the bullies in Brussels are demanding the dissolution of the three main securities that were promised to us in the nation-state configuration: border security which gives us a basic protection from foreign and hostile invasion; economic security, which promises to provide us with opportunities at a decent living so we can provide for our families and our neighbors and our communities; and cultural security, where we can celebrate our customs, and traditions, and religion as the primary means by which we are bound together as a people with a common meaning and purpose, a common sense of right and wrong, a moral foundation by which our society can flourish. This is nothing new; the Greek city-states all attempted something very much like this.
But these secular globalist liberals actually believe that having borders are now racist and nativist, that economic protectionism is inconsistent with a sound monetary and inflation policy, and that our traditions and customs and religions are inherently oppressive, bigoted, and homophobic. This is what this author cannot seem to see; his vision of liberal democracy is inherently oppressive and dictatorial.
He goes on:
“Donald Trump’s election to the White House has been the most striking manifestation of democracy’s crisis. [I’m sorry, I thought his election was the paragon of democracy, but I’ll move on] It is difficult to overstate the significance of his rise. But it is hardly an isolated incident. In Russia and Turkey, elected strongmen have succeeded in turning fledgling democracies into electoral dictatorships. In Poland and Hungary, populist leaders are using that same playbook to destroy the free media, to undermine independent institutions and to muzzle the opposition.
More countries may soon follow. In Austria, a far-right candidate nearly won the country’s presidency [he doesn’t mention that they won the parliament a few months back]. In France, a rapidly changing political landscape is providing new openings for both the far left and the far right. In Spain and Greece, established party systems are disintegrating with breathtaking speed. Even in the supposedly stable and tolerant democracies of Sweden, Germany and the Netherlands, extremists are celebrating unprecedented successes.
[Now listen to what he says here] There can no longer be any doubt that we are going through a populist moment. The question is whether this populist moment will turn into a populist AGE – and cast the very survival of liberal democracy in doubt.”
Ok, welcome to our world! What’s our slogan? “A New Conservative AGE is Rising”, right? And by conservative, we mean a resurgence of nationalist, populist, and traditionalist sentiments sweeping quite literally the entire world. Wherever globalism is, which of course is everywhere, we are seeing a mass backlash against it in the form of a renewed nationalism, populism, and traditionalism. And, by the way, for our European friends, I know that populism is a bit of a dirty word in Europe, but here in the States it simply means an anti-elite economic movement that seeks to restore a measure of protection over a nation’s customs and traditions, so we use it in a positive sense here.
We believe here that this age has already begun. Whether this fellow at Harvard likes it or not, scholars are increasingly recognizing that we are entering into what they call a post-secular age, an age where religion, custom, and tradition become the basis for a sustainable and flourishing social order. And to that WE here would add a religious nationalist age, that seeks to reconfigure economics around traditionalist norms that protect a nation’s culture, customs and traditions. In many respects, we are already there; and there is a simple reason for that, what this Harvard professor appears absolutely oblivious to: we are already there because the very modernist foundations of globalism have rotted out, died. The very modernist foundations of corporatist globalism are no longer believed in by the vast majority of Western populations; with the end of the cold war, end of the Democratic West and Soviet East, we no longer believe in a one-size-fits-all political, economic, and cultural system rooted in scientific rationalism as the one true way of understanding reality. Because these modernist roots have died, more and more populations are looking elsewhere, they are looking inward, turning to nation, culture, and tradition as the basis for a post-modernist, post-globalist social order. And there is nothing, absolutely nothing globalists can do about it; they can continue to insist on exporting the fruits of modernity in the form of globalization, but they are doing it all the while the roots have completely rotted out. And eventually the fruit is going to wither as well; it’s only a matter of time.
Anyway, the article goes on to rant and rave, in my opinion, in the hope of trying to save the corporatist globalist world order; but to no avail. It’s not gonna happen; we are, whether liberal profs like it or not, we are moving into a new conservative age.