The results of the political catechism that occurred starting in 2016 have left the globalist class disillusioned. These unprecedented demonstrations of identity politics that define the political skyline in the form of Trump and Brexit should not be viewed at the political, street level, but up from the top floor to comprehend their wider, deep rooted, cultural manifestations and to see them for what they truly are; a permanent spiritual awakening and not just a temporary political shift.
They were demonstrations of implicit white identity politics, voted for disproportionately by white people desiring the priority reestablishment of a culture inseparable from their own particular, homogenous, ethnic profile and past, and to reimpose these particular conditions, values and standards.
Unanimously white, Western cultures are waking up to the unjustified nature of the circumstances of multiculturalism and the political, social, moral and economic compromise that it both causes and requires. These events may have slowed things down or speeded them up, but they were a symptom of something bigger, not an end in themselves.
The less educated fear they are being governed by intellectual snobs who know nothing of their lives and experiences. The educated fear their fate may be decided by know-nothings who are ignorant of how the world really works
David Runciman discusses Identity
The four pillars that held up the temple of Western civilisation are eroding; an honest media that was trusted, faith in desirable outcomes from democratic institutions, a spiritual cause that unified and defined us and an identifiable culture that we understood our places within.
Rival value blocks are opposed to one another along classical economic, nationalist and globalist lines but a subset of more nuanced divisions are also becoming increasingly defined. Between the young and old, north and south, urban and rural, along particular sectarian religious and secular lines, gender divides, education levels and perhaps most pronounced, racially.
These cultural divisions even extend to more abstract definitions of identity too, such as ‘somewheres vs anywheres’ highlighted by David Goodhart, or the long term philosophic considerations vs the shorter term interests of parents, for example. Any ambition to define or achieve a ‘common good’ in such an environment is not possible.
The right to define One’s own concept of existence, liberty, meaning, of the universe and of the mystery of human life
US Supreme Court justice Anthony Kennedy defines freedom, 1992
Francis Fukuyama, Identity
The problem with this understanding of autonomy is that shared values serve the important function of making social life possible. If we do not agree on a minimum common culture we can not corporate on shared tasks and won’t regard the same institutions as legitimate, indeed we will not even be able to communicate with one another absent a common language with mutually understood meanings
The Human being is an intensely social creatures who’s emotional inclinations drive them to want to conform to the norms surrounding them , when a stable shared moral horizon disappears, and is replaced by a Cacophony of competing value systems, the vast majority of people do not rejoice in their new found freedom of choice. Rather they feel an intense insecurity and alienation because they do not know who their true self is, this crisis of identity leads in the opposite direction to expressive individualism, to the search of a common identity that will re-bind the individual to a social group, and reestablish a clear moral horizon
Theresa May recently stated that another referendum would risk ‘dividing the country again’. In actual fact it will just expose the divisions that already exist. Then the question becomes ‘Is it best to expose divisions or hide them?’
The more individuals entrench themselves into identifying as collective members of a group, Brexit or Remain of subsets of these, black or white or any other, the more competition for the finite amount of social capital in the form of respect, cultural influence, political representation, control of institutions as well as for financial resources.
The geography of a nation is reduced to an arena for this economic tribal warfare to play out in short-term battles and long-term wars, and because the more one identifies with one group, they equally unidentify with others, it has the effect of working from both ends to sever any empathy for their opposition. On one side because people only find other members of their identity to be credible and trustworthy, but on the other because they start to perceive any group or interest opposed to their collective as hostile and not simply people advocating their own interests. Opposition become the optima of ‘evil’ for the left or ‘ignorance’ for the right, however where as people are willing to educate the misinformed, they will not open dialog with evil and see only its destruction as an alternative and one they consider moral too given this justification. We can see left wing paramilitary groups such as Antifa advocate violence against their loosely defined opponents because of this.
This Multiculturalism approach has failed, utterly failed
Angela Merkel discussing identity politics
The sentiments expressed in 2016 were also rooted in a core concept of how humans understand themselves, that we are our egos, and our ego is entangled with our identities, and that for these collective identities we do demand dignity and respect, in the same way you are more protective of your own mum than another man’s or even your self. This is reflected in the graphics above demonstrating in group analysis of voting patterns, and the increased use of phrases like ‘culture war’ and ‘identity politics’, as well as the resettlement of the left towards social ground and away from its economic roots as I looked into the origins of here, with reference to political correctness, indeed the ancient Chinese identified three kinds of war, recognising the hostile impact of trade relations and ‘information’ disputes alongside physical combat. Information is digested through an identity filter.
Because we care more about who we are, then what we have, desirable products personify success and are entwined with the ego. In understanding this, advertising seeks to appeal to customers on a emotional level, they sell an idea, what the product says about you or what it could make you and how it would alter others perception of you. So a McDonald’s advert will sell the idea that a relationship could blossom from a trip for a burger, betting adverts will emphasise an appeal to male identity with introductions like ‘lads, lads, lads and everybody’, and perfume brands will associate products with very attractive women with emotive lyrics whispered poetically.
To be poor is to be powerless and to be powerless is to lack dignity and this lack of dignity is often seen as worse than the lack of material resources. This concept was understood in this marketing but misunderstood by capitalist globalists, advocating dogmatically for free markets and placing this economic strategy centrally to the identity and aspirations of society, divorced from public opinion or desire.
This situation is a result of corruption in our once virtuous institutions, the free media has caused ideological division, free markets have led to financial inequalities and tolerant, and liberal attitudes have damaged us.
Recognition of the dignity of group identity can be established in the demand for equality of opportunity and outcome between various demographics. Their’s is a conflict between the two theoretically desirable social characteristics of freedom and equality, and imposing one necessarily inhibits the other. When society imposes equality, freedom is compromised, and when freedom is liberated, inequality emerges reflecting the disparity between relative desire, ability, work ethic or any other advantages to progression in a free market. Naturally inequality amongst groups is the rule and not the exception, indeed something can be unfairly equal, if someone has earned something through hard work or exceptional skill, is it not unfair to then give the same to someone who hasn’t?
Inequality to the extent it reflects competence, equality to the extent it doesn’t compromise freedom.
Stephan Pinker on Equality with reference to Identity
Equality is not the empirical claim that all groups of humans are interchangeable; it is the moral principle that individuals should not be judged or constrained by the average properties of their group
The problem with this definition is the moral assumption that it is best for people we know are different to be treated the same. For example it doesn’t tailer educational needs to ability, it doesn’t recognise statistical commonalities that enable effective law enforcement by benefiting from deductive reasoning, with prevention motivated policy through racial profiling, and it assumes current proximity is the central tenant to determining national identity.
As racism is defined as believing in the superiority of certain races, the inequality of them, it can be said that blacks are superiorly fast and this would presumably be a racist belief, in which case one can choose to believe (to the extent it is a choice), what is true, but be racist for it or what is a lie but be ‘moral’ in ignorance.
The trust in mainstream media sources has eroded amongst large segments of the population reflected in decreased viewing figures. Being kept artificially afloat only by operating externally to a meritocratic systems and corporate donations that keep it rigorously clamped in place, like a steel straight jacket fastened over the body politic preventing its natural movement and ability to dance and sprint into the future.
The role of media is to be in-between the people and the corridors of power to effectively do its job as a institution with an obligation to serve the public over the state, a traditional benchmark of western freedom. An elite has formed and the journalistic class has emerged in the mainstream media, defined partly but not exclusively by being metropolitan, cosmopolitan liberals and because of this shared similar collective identity they perceive the world a certain way and have particular social and economic ideas more common to them, than society at large, the people. As such they have views more sympathetic to the political class than their remit permits. We have arrived at the point in cultural regression, in which the press have redefined their job remit, flipping it on its head while pumping out enough propaganda to make it subtle to the majority susceptible to this or compliant with it, instead of informing the public, they convince them, because given their superior middle class identity, education and morality, they know best, and so are justified in failing in their journalistic obligation, because you see the ends justify the means.
We have evolved to confirm our preconceptions, but in the modern world this is too abundantly possible to either side
This is exasperated by the free press which necessarily polarises the public to ensure sales to all sectors, this process has been artificially exasperated by the rate at which traditional media is failing and how they have to attempt to account for this by making sensationalist and hyperbolic claims, however for every article they sell to a hypnotised victim of the state, they don’t realise they are also selling what’s costing them, quiet resentment of the opposition. Be careful what you wish for and promote, you might just galvanise and mobilise a force in response to their resentment of it, capable of preventing it.
Another angle to this is the insecurity of Social Justice Warriors. They have seen the Socialist side they chose to support fail before them whenever practised, and are bitter for alienating themselves from successful and moral economic and social practices and therefore attempt to use words as their only available weapon, to manifest lies to destroy what created the enlightenment and industrial revolution and to dismantle the reputation of the successful operating system.
They do not need to believe their own lies about the relative equality of opportunity afforded through free markets, or about how freedom and equality necessarily counter impose on one another,
The ‘psychological condition’ that has aptly been recognised as ‘Trump derangement syndrome’ by online communities demonstrates this mentality as to them, he figure-heads their resentment. Instead of demonstrating that the West elevated the world in technological achievement they focus instead on disproportionate error, considering the abuses but not the liberations or advances because of their own twisted insecurities and unfounded prejudices.
Somethings we believe because they are demonstrably true, but many other things are believed simply because they are asserted repeatedly.
The radical individualism that was propagated by a generation unexpectedly leads to misery, instead of understanding how we should fit to society, we start to demand society complies with us and our sensibilities and attitudes. People become entitled and spoilt in their hedonism and absence of responsibility, thinking their identity stops at them and has no historical context. However, this is at odds with their ornate spirit and naturally think of themselves in collective terms. Give people too much freedom and they become nihilistic and depressed as demonstrated in experiments with mice. Responsibility is duty and duty is purpose.
Democracy makes us tribal and the liberal media drives these divisions apart, compromise and political solutions then become less possible. The more democracy we have and the more freedom our media has (and the more it is open to corruption of rootless forces without the natural interest at heart) the quicker we will reach irreconcilable hostility. This is the reaction of social science, just as we cannot expect to mix particular chemicals together, and not produce a particular reaction.
We had Speaker’s Corner, the very symbolic beating heart of freedom of speech now resembles a tombstone to that very thing, lost to Omni-Islamic Preaching. Where once such an eclectic mix as George Orwell, Vladimir Lenin, Karl Marx, Oswald Mosley spoke, now only Islamists dogmas echo. These events were an implicit wish to reclaim not just this sight of symbolic significance but a whole lost culture.