Tuesday, February 28, 2017

Most Self-Styled "Conservatives" Aren't Conservatives at all.

The Establishment is globalist. And the idiots who riot in the streets against the Establishment (they think) are globalists, too.

Believe it or not, if we didn't have national governments, but just a worldwide society with open borders, free trade, and other neoliberal nonsense, we'd soon have what would amount to a world government. I used to think that would be a good idea — of course, that was 56 years ago, I was 14, and I'd been reading Stuart Chase [link]. But no, it's not a good idea

Now, the point of this post is that, as the reprint below states, "conservatism," as most people understand it, is as globalist as the liberal establishment. Some of us, of course, recognize that these "conservatives" are actually neocons, and are just another species of liberal/progressives. Because they're all working together, you see. Remember how prominent neocons not too long ago essentially endorsed Hillary over Trump, because she's a committed globalist and Trump seems, at any rate, to be anti-globalist. Just look at the second and third quibcags. Can you imagine any other prominent American politician saying anything like that? Any Clinton or Bush? Nah — that would annoy their globalist masters.

This is from the Paleo-Populist [link]:

Conservatism Has a Globalism Problem

Donald Trump’s success in the GOP primary and general election has highlighted an emerging political dynamic that has long been bubbling under the surface but lacked the prominent spokesman necessary to fundamentally change the conversation. This emerging dynamic is nationalism vs. globalism, and it is not just a phenomenon confined to Trump’s America. It is reflected in the Brexit vote and the resonance of nationalist politicians in Europe like France’s Marine Le Pen. Trump’s success is part of a broader uprising in the Western World against our global elite masters.

This emerging dynamic clearly caught the defenders of the reigning paradigm, both left and right, off guard, and they have struggled with how to respond. I recently asked whether CPAC (which is currently underway in the nation’s capital), as a representative of orthodox movement conservatism, was prepared to grapple with this new reality. As it turns out, I wasn’t the only one who picked up on this tension. David Cowen discusses it here in an article at The American Conservative. Even Ryan Lizza of the liberal Ney Yorker picked up on the conflict, which is saying a lot since liberals notoriously lack nuance when it comes to understanding distinctions on the right.

The subject was discussed in a CPAC panel that included Trump advisor Steve Bannon. Bannon’s comments were apparently well received by Trump supporters as they have been making the rounds on social media.

“We’re a nation with an economy — not an economy just in some global marketplace with open borders, but we are a nation with a culture and a reason for being.”

“They’re corporatist, globalist media that are adamantly opposed — adamantly opposed to an economic nationalist agenda like Donald Trump has.”

But this obvious tension between mainstream conservatism and Trumpian nationalism raises a question.
Why is modern conservatism in tension with nationalism in the first place? The organized right plays on patriotism and the left often portrays the right as a bunch of hyper-patriotic flag waving yahoos. Nationalism would seem to be a natural fit with conservatism. If fact, if there should be any tension on the right, American history suggests it should be in the opposite direction, between regionalism vs. nationalism. I seem to recall from history class that we fought a little war over that matter.

The conflict exists because modern mainstream conservatism is functionally globalist and in many ways is explicitly globalist. The average mainstream conservative voter does not necessarily conceive of himself as a globalist, but the philosophical underpinnings of Establishment approved conservatism is undeniably globalist/universalist and much of the conservative leadership is self-consciously globalist in orientation. For confirmation just check out the Twitter feed of Evan McMullin or Bill Kristol or Eric Garland or any of the other prominent NeverTrumpers who still can’t let it go.

The underlying universalism of what passes for modern conservatism is why supposed conservative spokesmen babble incessantly about “principles” and “values” and abstractions like “liberty” and “freedom” and “democracy,” but don’t seem to be too concerned about the plight of the working class Red voters in Flyover Country who are suffering from the excesses of globalization.

For the globo cons America is not a real blood and soil nation like all others, but a universalist “idea” nation. This conceptualization underlies mainstream conservatism’s historic reluctance to embrace restrictionist immigration policies even though current immigration trends spell demographic doom for the GOP and conservative policies. It also underlies their conceit that the U.S. is somehow uniquely responsible for the security and stability of the entire world.

As I mentioned above, modern conservatism embraces a pretense of patriotism that could be mistaken for nationalism, but it’s not true patriotism when you scratch below the surface. It’s not, “I love my country because it is mine.” It’s, “I love America because she is ‘exceptional’ or ‘essential’ or ‘indispensable.’” The thought of America acting like just another “normal” country frightens the conservative Pooh-Bahs. Their nationalism, such as it is, is less a genuine concern for the wellbeing of their nation and their fellow citizens and more a desire for their country to lead the “free” world, maintain some abstract world order and smite the intransigent holdouts.

The problem for modern conservatism is that this is not conservatism in any meaningful philosophical sense. It’s closer to Jacobinism. What exactly is modern conservatism attempting to conserve or has it conserved? Certainly not the Republic established by the Framers or even the Republic of 1950s America or Reagan’s 1980’s America for that matter. Conservatism is not an ideological attachment to abstractions. It is a desire to conserve something, like a particular place and its people. There are potential excesses of nationalism, but at this moment a renewed and rightly understood nationalism is the necessary corrective to the reigning globalist paradigm that threatens to turn the U.S. into just another third world administrative unit in the grand global economy.
And if that doesn't convince you, here's Jim Goad on globalism with a pop culture twist from Takimag [link]:

What’s So Bad About Globalism?
As far as I can tell, globalism is a scheme concocted by the rich to destroy the working and middle classes through worldwide financial imperialism.

I have a strong hunch that globalism is also a plot hatched to obliterate indigenous cultures and real human differences under the deceptive ruses of “multiculturalism” and “diversity.”

This is why I’m confused whenever I hear someone say they hate “the rich,” oppose “imperialism,” and support “the working class” while being an unquestioning cheerleader for open borders and global government.

Like Marxism’s pipe dreams about an eventual and irreversible dictatorship of the proletariat, the most seductive hook about globalism is the idea that it’s inevitable. Technology has made us an increasingly interconnected planet, and therefore the only logical and moral thing to do is establish a benevolent global governmental authority with the power to tax and imprison and torture and abuse.

But communism proved to be far from inevitable. After peaking last century, it has retreated from much of the globe. I’d like to think the same is true about the one-world-government schemes that underpin what is cheerily referred to as “globalism.”

I suppose that if you fetishize some dimwitted internationalist abstraction of the global “working class,” globalism may suit your emotional needs and your complicated bourgeois psychological issues regarding “wealth guilt” just fine. But if you support the American working class—and more importantly, if you happen to be a member of the American working class—you’d realize that globalism is your sworn enemy.

Read the rest here:
Quibcags: The first is a quote from the Goad article at the end of the post, and is illustrated by the girls from K-On! (けいおん! Keion!)  rebooting a Beatles scene. The Second is a quote from Trump's CPAC speech, illustrate by Asuka from Neon Genesis Evangelion (Japanese新世紀エヴァンゲリオン HepburnShin Seiki Evangerion?, literally "Gospel of a New Century"). Number three is illustrated by the Hetalia: Axis Powers (Axis Powers ヘタリア) mascots for Britain and the US. Number four is also illustrated by those two, plus the mascot for Japan. Finally, the last one is illustrated by Ran and Masumi from Detective Conan (Meitantei Conan  名探偵コナ). Conan, AKA Meitantei Conan (名探偵コナン).

No comments:

Post a Comment