What we are seeing is not so much a multipolar world order replacing US dominance, as the reassertion of pragmatic nationalism in multiple nations now threatening Globalist ambitions.
JUPPLANDIA
I’ve spoken before about the impact of letting Marxists frame the lessons of World War Two, and how since World War Two the central assumption of the ruling class in the western world has been that their own populace cannot be trusted to make the ‘correct’ decisions, can at any moment be swayed by a demagogic Hitlerian orator, and should therefore be shut out of decision making as much as possible by transferring most power to transnational bodies who will co-operate on preventing the return of Zombie Hitler.
This really is the ludicrous basis for much of the absurd hypocrisy in educated circles and the ruling class on the issue of Democracy. Once you think your own population cannot be trusted, and decisions are much better being made by the UN, the EU, the WEF, or by a small class of internationalist technocratic ‘experts’, the whole idea of representative democracy breaks down and what you get instead is a kind of new aristocracy, focused on transnational institutions, whose version of responsible and ‘democratic’ governance is actually one in which their key function becomes to prevent the People getting it wrong, to subvert and redirect genuinely free political choice, and to ensure the total control and untroubled continuance of policies considered wisest by the ruling class whether or not those policies have public support.
Real Democracy, where the People have a genuine choice of policies, where parties present different ideas openly in manifestos they then follow, and where the decision of the public vote is allowed to go ahead without interference and then be enacted without interference regardless of whether transnational institutions and a narrow political, media and permanent bureaucratic class agree with it, is the thing that must be prevented. Instead ‘Our Democracy’, with the emphasis on the ownership of that alleged Democracy by a small group of likeminded people rather than by a large group of voters, becomes what the administrative State, the bureaucracies in place, and the transnational institutions are all defending.
When they invoke Democracy they do not mean democracy as traditionally understood and as you or I understand it, or even as the Founders of the US feared it. They don’t mean you all have a vote and the majority wins. They mean that the institutions which call themselves Democratic are to be automatically respected and obeyed, and that every challenge to them must be regarded as the next coming of Adolf Hitler. Only the continuance of the policies selected by and endorsed by the bureaucracy, the institutions and the ruling class count as democracy, and everything else counts as “a threat to Our Democracy” not because it doesn’t really have popular support or doesn’t really reflect the wishes and hopes of the electorate, but ESPECIALLY when it has popular support and DOES reflect the wishes and hopes of the electorate.
Because those stupid fools can’t be trusted with the power of decision making.
Once this mode of thought is in place, once the meaning of democracy stops being the enactment of the will of the majority and becomes the allegedly, ideologically determined prevention of the will of the majority, the ineluctable logic becomes that the only way to Save Democracy as you now understand it (saving a set of policies the People don’t want) is by becoming increasingly repressive, authoritarian and anti-Democratic by any real understanding of what Democracy is.
Globalist policy protection is inherently anti-Democratic, as are transnational bodies and the transfer of power to them. The EU is designed to be anti-democratic. The founding fathers of the EU were aristocrats, banking magnates and former Nazis. The UN was designed and created by patrician British and American lawyers who all accepted the central lie that nationalism inevitably leads to Nazism. Just as Statist totalitarian Nazis had dreamed of something like the EU spanning Europe before its actual creation and former Nazis took as much a part in its creation as they did with the US space program, that other great mid century totalitarian system, the USSR, had a hand in shaping and building the UN. As a permanent member of the elite governing Security Council of the UN, Soviets were embedded in its formation and Soviet lawyers worked alongside British and American ones in drafting its rules, structure and principles.
So much of the inherent contradictions of today are built on the actions of 1945. It is 1945 and the false reactions and solutions to Nazism after the event that defined the world up to and including 2025. Even that fixation on 1938/9 and appeasement that we see uniting the radical progressive Marxists on campus looking to ‘punch a Nazi’ with tweed suited modern Colonel Blimps and Polite Conservatives and Republicans in slavish devotion to Ukraine, is a level of understanding fixed in place in 1945.
1945 told everyone in power you can’t trust the voters and it’s moral to ignore them. The Nazis were elected (never mind that banning other parties and censorship came before the final assumption of total power, you aren’t supposed to recall that bit when modern defenders of Our Democracy…ban other parties and enact censorship). Therefore it’s the moral responsibility of the ruling class, as educated, informed, enlightened people who scoff at things like loving your country and see them in the first instance as laughably archaic and in the second instance as incipient Nazism, to crush any deviation from the pre selected Good Ideas which they prefer.
A populist understanding is that the moral responsibility of a democracy is to represent and enact the wishes of the majority (even if constrained in a constitutional Republic or by ancient notions of liberty to those actions which do not impinge on basic inalienable rights which are SPECIFIC to the People, that is, actual citizens). For a populist, any part of the institutional structure of the nation acting directly against the interests of the People represents a moral crime, a betrayal of the duty of those institutions, the purpose of any existing Constitution, and the whole point of a nation state existing in the first place.
For a populist, and for anyone who still believes in literal dictionary definitions that haven’t been recently adapted to some Orwellian new form, a version of Democracy that exists to prevent the people having a say is an oxymoronic tyranny. You can’t have an anti-democratic Democracy. That’s a tyranny, whether it’s some old Communist State with ‘Democratic Republic of….’ in its name, or whether it’s a modern Globalist State vigorously fighting against the majority opinions of its own people.
As pragmatic realities, too, the Nation State and Globalist rule of a Nation State represent an inherent set of morally despicable contradictions. You can’t have a viable Nation State with open borders. The moral purpose of that State is the protection of its citizens from foreign rule, foreign crime, foreign invasion. So the State that is borderless becomes both meaningless AND immoral. It’s betraying its own people. Similarly the State that doesn’t distinguish between citizen and non citizen, that doesn’t understand that citizens are its priority and that citizens rights are the rights that the State exists to protect (not the rights of non citizens and citizens of other nations) destroys the very point of its existence in the first place, a well as rendering any rational treatment of both the citizen and the non citizen utterly impossible.
A State which actually prioritises non citizens above citizens is a state with no moral legitimacy at all, providing an ‘order’ that is even worse than anarchy, that indeed mirrors anarchy in its pragmatic effects, while still insisting on the right to tax, imprison and rule the very people it has betrayed.
Now here is a very important point which again illustrates that this kind of betrayal transcends ‘left’ and ‘right’. It is a betrayal of the fundamental purpose and moral justification of the power of a State over its citizens to prioritise non citizens….including those of an allegedly allied nation. Care over the sanctity of the borders of Ukraine while your own borders are not treated as important is just as morally invalid and just as inimical to true democracy and true representation of the people as, for example, treating asylum seekers and immigrants as having greater rights and deserving greater protections than your own existing population.
These seemingly different issues, together with for example releasing violent criminals while imprisoning people who expressed widely held and often truthful opinions, are all reflections of the crisis of priorities which occur when you begin from the false understanding that the anointed political and bureaucratic class are there to prevent the inherent folly of the general public from doing things the anointed consider foolish or dangerous. ‘Our Democracy’ not only inverts the genuine democratic understanding of who is the master and who is the servant between the People and the State, it not only converts representatives into unquestionable authorities, it also does all this on the basis of a fundamental inversion of who is being foolish and who is being wise.
Because the ruling class which assumes the people are too stupid to have a full say is also the ruling class which assumes that it is itself wise at all times, and the mere status of being that ruling class becomes what they understand wisdom to be, rather than any other logical or moral framework being applied to their policies and testing, for example, whether they actually work or whether they make rational sense to an objective observer. This is why appeal to authority and reference to status and credentialism are so important to Globalist attitudes, precisely because they have abandoned both the real democratic mandate of majority support and because they have equally abandoned any other criteria (like making sense or being true) for determining what policies are and aren’t valuable.
And again, this applies just as much to the Polite Conservative who considers a transnational body like NATO as an axiomatic good, as it does to the radical progressive ‘citizen of the world’ who considers the UN as some kind of ultimate arbiter of moral authority superior to any individual country. Both have come to fetishise the settlement of 1945, prioritise the transnational authority above the Nation State, and oppose any genuinely democratic deviance from an understanding of the world in which all things can be accurately viewed through the lens of an internationalist or Marxist misreading of nationalism as the inevitable precursor of Nazism.
By all these conceptual understandings of political morality, that of the technocratic elitist, that of the credentialed university educated expert, that of the established foreign policy professional, that of the street level Antifa activist, that of the university politics or sociology professor, that of the comfortably affluent media talking head or journalistic political commentator, the consensus holds based on a fundamentally anti-democratic reading of what caused Nazism, a reading (ironically) the Nazis themselves would have shared.
Which is that the people are easily conned, the people are too stupid to be trusted, and that true power should be limited to the anointed and’ informed’. The current ‘defenders of Our Democracy’ have a 1945 defined obsession with Nazism that actually completely blinds them to the moments when they think exactly the same way, especially about people who dare to oppose them or think differently to them. That is is of course most evident in the kind of fanatical progressives who are today running around painting swastikas on Teslas but it applies in the same way to Polite Conservatives unable to acknowledge the Western Globalist drift into totalitarianism and still pretending that it is Democracy we are supporting at home and abroad.
The settlement of 1945 wasn’t just a geopolitical structure or reality built on Allied victory. It wasn’t just the institutions established at the end of World War II and an American led consensus in the Anglosphere with Western Europe generally attached to that and militarily protected by the US. It was an entirely false conceptual understanding, becoming the imposed consensus and the thing by which respectable and mainstream thinking would be defined, of what Nazism was, what had led to it, and how to avoid it in future. That false understanding of Nazism contained within itself an attitude to Democracy that the Nazis (and all totalitarian ideologies) shared.
The people are stupid and they need us to tell them what to think.
The Citizen of the World supposedly from the Left, and the Polite Conservative supposedly from the Right, are united in a distrust, from progressive radicalism or from class based snobbery and both from a failed understanding of World War II, in a deep distrust of the ability of the ordinary voter to make responsible choices, and are both just as likely to prefer somebody else (activist courts, transnational bodies, politicians who refuse to enact popular policies, the mainstream media, the UN, an NGO….literally anyone other than the average voter) having the power to both ignore what the majority want and impose what they very categorically do not want.
It doesn’t matter whether it’s class snobbery, university brainwashing, Marxist rhetoric, or a locked in deference to the ‘international rules based system’ established in 1945 that gets you there, where you are is the same place.
The place where you have lost all understanding of what democracy is, and all natural and sane prioritisation of the interests and wishes of the majority of citizens in your own country.
The place where Stopping Zombie Hitler, a banished wraith actually less substantial than a zombie and the least likely form of totalitarianism to ever recur, supposedly excuses all of your own crimes and actions which include breaking the Nuremberg Code, spreading radicalised and unjust racial theories, and massively reducing democracy and accountability and the basic rights of your own citizens while pursuing a level of censorship, propaganda and automatic dishonesty that even Goebbels would have considered superior, in malign scale and reach and in technological implementation, to his own efforts.
The place where the fact that, for example, polling and psychological attitude studies showing us that white westerners are actually the least racist demographic and the most likely to possess a neutral view of all races, don’t impinge at all on your ideological presumption that Far Right White Supremacism is either rampant or the most likely avenue by which tyranny will return.
The place where Islamic and Third World attitudes to children, to women, to gays, to free speech, to religious liberty and freedom to worship or not worship according to individual conscience, and to all genuinely classical liberal positions and social attitudes, doesn’t impact on your championing of mass migration, asylum seekers, refugees and Muslims even though you also champion (or are yourself from) groups and ideas Third World Muslims are likely to attack.
Simple and obvious aspects of objective reality, like the lack of Far Right terrorism and the lack of any significant white supremacism in modern white majority societies, have to be overcome by reclassifying almost EVERYTHING non Globalist as white supremacism, fascism, Nazism and ‘Far Right’, as every Globalist leader now does. White people who protest about anything, especially if they are working class, are automatically described as Far Right. Globalist governments redefine both the desires being expressed and the tactics being used as analogous with Nazism when objective assessment renders such comparisons absurd. Defensive and reactive protests, for example, ones centred on harm already done to white communities or general social ills created by Globalist policies are redefined as completely unjustified attacks on other groups. Protesting against child murder or child rape becomes being a Nazi. Attacking State fraud and corruption becomes being a Nazi. Wanting free and fair elections that aren’t rigged via fraud becomes being a Nazi. Wanting to feel safe in your own country, to not be abused for your own colour and identity, to not be lectured or told that your children are born evil on a racial basis, to want a colour free or genuine equality under the law, all becomes being a Nazi.
Wanting free speech is being a Nazi.
All of this may seem that I’m only talking about the most radical and hysterical Democrats in the US. I wish that were the case. I’m actually talking about the consensus attitudes of our societies as a whole, which are being challenged for the first time since 1945. Because the understanding of nationalism, of racial politics, of what is most likely to result in tyranny and hate, is ALL false and has been since 1945.
At its very core, the whole set of metropolitan ‘liberal but no longer classically liberal’ and Shouting Democracy but not Accepting Democracy contradictions don’t just show themselves in the hypocrisies of racial politics and in more modern creations like Critical Race Theory. They show themselves in the ease with which these most radical and most extreme and most hypocritical ideas captured the postwar institutions and came to dominate the Western World out of all proportion to the validity or even the sanity of their approaches.
When something like wokeness or CRT came knocking on the door of those institutions, and earlier when Marxists and Cultural Marxists went on their Gramsci Long March through the institutions and corporations, they found the door hanging open and the march much shorter than anyone could have predicted. Because in some key ways these instirutions were founded, all of the immediate postwar ones, on the same false lessons.
- The people are stupid and don’t really know what’s best for them.
- Someone better has to guide and control them and prevent their stupid choices.
- Nationalism and Racism are the only routes to tyranny.
- We are morally entitled to do anything to prevent Nazism.
- Transnational rule is the best defence against Nazism.
- Democracy is anything that preserves the 1945 settlement and institutions.
What we are seeing today is a resurgence of rational, sensible nationalism that knows that these 1945 assumptions are all false. This is the result of external geopolitical pressure (the rise of China, Russia and India) but also of growing internal awareness of just how extreme the mainstream becomes after 80 years of being based on a fundamental misreading of WWII.
In 1992 just after the end of the Cold War the influential thinker and essayist Francis Fukuyama shared the idea that history had ended. In The End of History and The Last Man Fukuyama gave a dramatic and hugely impactful reading of what the end of the Cold War meant, which was that the liberal world order really represented the end of history itself. The victory over Nazism followed by the victory over Communism meant the end of history if history is viewed as the interplay of powers, the rise of great men, the battle of significantly different ideas, and the clash of nation states. All these were obsolete since the liberal world order had won so convincingly that the future was both predictable, inevitable and a little bit boring.
Future contests would be minor and managerial. Liberal Democracy attended by transnational nursemaids and serviced by capitalist free markets would be the final form of government.
All this of course was nonsense. History doesn’t stop for neoconservatives anymore than it stops for classical liberals, or anymore than it previously stopped for Marxists, or anymore than it stopped for absolutist monarchs. There is no final government, no real Year Zero, no Frozen Utopia. Totalitarians from Chinese Emperors to Egyptian Pharaohs, from Hitler’s predicted 1,000 year Reich to Mao’s Cultural Revolution, all tell us that prior history can be erased, and history itself can be ended. This rule, this way, this idea is the only permanent thing. All time before the Great Idea is worthless, and all Time after the Great Idea is worthless in a different sense, because the victory of the Great Idea will be final. Islam has this historical determinism, Marxism has it manifested through economics (Marx says that the Communist revolution is inevitable for all capitalist societies). Progressives frequently cite that they are “on the right side of history”.
And even the Respectable Conservatives act as if history ended in 1945. The Russians are still the Communists. The West is still The Free World. Nazism has only just been defeated and is still the biggest threat.
While it was the end of the Cold War that provided the supporting plinth of Fukuyama’s Folly, the foundations were again the assumption that the realities of 1945 and the solutions of 1945 are the axiomatic truths that never end.
ALL mainstream Western understanding of history was frozen by the settlement of 1945. But history itself never ends. You can’t stop it and you can never accurately say it’s on your side either. The effort to fix it in place according to things that no longer apply must be a totalitarian one, because it’s an insane project and an insane effort anyway. Intoning that we must learn the lessons of history or be doomed to repeat it is actually another form of error and stasis if your lessons, rather than looking up and down the line of history as far as you can see, settle on One Lesson at One Point and never look elsewhere. Globalism was fully born in 1945, and has been pretending it’s still 1945 ever since. It built transnational institutions as a crib for itself, and has become an 80 year old baby still sucking on the same baby bottle of desiccated understanding.
So when Fukuyama said history had ended, he wasn’t expressing a truth about the world. He was expressing a truth about the false understanding of the world established in 1945, embodied in the international rules based system and the deferral of national interest to Globalist institutions and ideology. He was telling us that his understanding was frozen, not that time was, and this has really been true of all those who take the 1945 settlement as the final word on what is real and worthy.
What is real and worthy did not begin with the defeat of Nazism, and stretched back far before that, through all the history of every nation, and what is real and worthy is not defined by what was set in place 80 years ago, but refers to much deeper (and much more democratic in the true sense) loyalties that for 80 years have been falsely equated with evil.
History kept working while the mainstream understanding of it stood still. Not being cleverly instructed that time had ceased, the uneducated understood that better than anyone else. They felt the flow of the river of history around them, while the great and the good stood knee deep in the mud announcing that the river was no longer there.
This article (The Return of Rational Nationalism in a Globalist World Order) was created and published by Jupplandia and is republished here under “Fair Use”
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.
Leave a Reply