The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPat Buchanan Archive
Is the Liberal Hour Ending in the West?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Hillary Clinton called them “the deplorables.” Barack Obama called them losers who “cling” to their Bibles, bigotries and guns.

To President Jean-Claude Juncker of the European Commission, they are “these populist, nationalists, stupid nationalists… in love with their own countries.”

Well, “stupid” they may be, and, yes, they do love their countries, but last week they gave Juncker a thrashing, as they shook up the West and the world.

Elections in the world’s largest electoral blocs — the 28-nation EU, and an India of 1.3 billion people — showed that the tide of nationalism continues to rise and spread across Europe and Asia.

In India, the Hindu Nationalist BJP party of Prime Minister Narendra Modi won a smashing victory. So strong was Modi’s showing that he rushed to reassure non-Hindus, especially India’s 200 million Muslims, that they remain equal citizens. But in India the Hindu hour is at hand.

Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party, formed just months ago, ran first in Britain with 31%. No other party came close. Labor won 14% and Prime Minister Theresa May’s Tories ran 5th with 9%, a historic humiliation.

In the French elections, Emmanuel Macron’s party lost to the National Rally of Marine Le Pen, whom he had defeated 2-1 in the last presidential election.

Matteo Salvini’s populist-nationalist League, with 34%, ran first in Italy in a showing that could lead to national elections that could make him prime minister.

The nationalist Law and Justice Party in Poland and the populist Fidesz Party of Viktor Orban in Hungary were easily victorious.

In Germany, however, the conservative-socialist coalition of Angela Merkel bled support. Both the CDU and SPD lost strength in defeats that could shake the Berlin government.

What do these elections tell us?

If the Conservatives wish to remain in power in Parliament, they will have to leave the European Union and, if necessary, crash out without a divorce settlement with Brussels.

The Tories cannot defy the will of their own majority on the most critical issue in 50 years — a nationalist demand to be free of Brussels — and still survive as Britain’s first party.

Whoever wins the Tory competition to succeed May will almost surely become the prime minister who leads Britain out of the EU.

Nor is that such a tragedy.

The first Brexit, after all, was in 1776, when the 13 colonies of North America severed all ties to the British crown and set out alone on the path to independence. It did not turn out all that badly.

Last week’s election also saw major gains for the Green parties across Europe. Laser-focused on climate change, these parties will be entering coalitions to provide center-left and center-right regimes the necessary votes to create parliamentary majorities.

The environment is now likely to rival Third World immigration as an issue in all elections in Europe.

While nationalist and populists control a fourth of the seats in the EU Parliament, they are isolated. They may have the power to block or veto EU actions by Brussels, but they cannot impose their own agenda.

Yet even larger lessons emerge from these two elections.

Liberalism appears to be losing its appeal. A majority in the world’s largest democracy, India, consciously used their democratic right to vote — to advance sectarian and nationalist ends.

Why is liberalism fading away, and nationalism ascendant?

The former is an idea that appeals to the intellect; the latter, rooted in love of family, faith, tribe and nation, is of the heart. In its potency to motivate men, liberalism is to nationalism what near beer is to Bombay gin.

To be a proud Pole, Hungarian, Italian or Scotsman has a greater grip on men’s love, loyalty and allegiance than to be a citizen of Europe.

“Whoever speaks of Europe is wrong,” said Bismarck. Europe is but “a geographical expression.”

Identity politics, people identifying themselves by their ethnicity, nationality, race, culture and faith, appears to be the world’s future.

Even leftists are bowing to the new reality.

“Identity politics is exactly who we are and it’s exactly how we won,” says Stacy Abrams, the African American Democrat who almost won the Georgia governor’s race. “By centering communities in Georgia, we… increased voter participation, we brought new folks to the process.”

The Democratic Party is now a coalition easily identifiable by race, ethnicity, ideology and gender — African American, Hispanic, Asian, LGBTQ, feminist and Green.

Our Founding Fathers believed we Americans were a new people, a separate, unique, identifiable people, a band of brothers, who had risked their lives and shed their blood. Liberals believe we are held together by abstract ideas and ideals, such as democracy, equality and diversity.

But did Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Calhoun, Clay, Jackson, Sam Houston, Tyler and Polk really believe in equality and diversity as they drove Indians, French, British, Spanish and Mexicans out of this land to create a continentwide nation of their own?

Or was Manifest Destiny really all about us, and not them?

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of “Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.”

Copyright 2019 Creators.com.

 
Hide 34 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Anon[336] • Disclaimer says: • Website

    Liberal?

    If EU is so ‘liberal’, why is so supportive of the Zionist nationalist state of Israel. No one is calling for Open Borders for Israel.

    It’s not between Liberalism vs Nationalism.

    It’s between Mono-Nationalism vs Poly-Nationalism.

    Mono-Nationalism, the ideology of globalists, says that ONLY JEWS have the right of identity and nationhood. Others don’t.
    Poly-Nationalism, the ideology of ethno-populists, says that each people-and-nation have a right to nationhood and identity.

    Also, Liberalism destroyed itself when it embraced PC and Antifa thuggery. At the very least, Liberalism in the past stood for free speech for all. So-called ‘liberalism’ today is all about speech control and using thug force to shut down discourse. It has bared its Jewish Supremacist face.
    And on the ‘gay’ issue, it went from Tolerance(a genuine liberal value) to Celebration(a mindless sacro-homo rapture that is forced up everyone’s arse). Bend over to holy homo or you will be destroyed.

  2. KenH says:

    Liberalism appears to be losing its appeal.

    Not in America thanks to Jewish brainwashing in the universities and Hollywood where leftists are depicted as advanced thinkers and higher forms of life. The lunatic left wing fringe is now the mainstream of the Democrat party and mass third world immigration will continue to make them stronger.

    I believe Europe is much farther ahead of the nationalist curve than America. It seems American nationalists can still barely organize a two car parade which is pathetic, but in their defense the entire American establishment, including conservatism, inc., opposes them.

    Nationalism and populism has a very large following in America but we just don’t have anyone to lead it. Donald Trump has proven that he’s not that person. Steve Bannon is a fraud who peddles a weird brand of Judeocentrism as nationalism. Israel first American nationalism is a non-starter.

    We need someone who actually means what he says instead of giving us rightist rhetoric at rallies and rightist tweets but delivering centrist actions or no action at all.

    • Replies: @follyofwar
  3. Thinker says:

    Not quite. I fear liberalism will be with us to the bitter end. Deplorables thought we won the last election by the skin of our teeth. But Trump turned out to be an absolute traitor who gave us exactly what we do not want – more wars and more immigration. It just doesn’t seem to matter anymore who we vote for, we end up with the same thing.

    For 2020, we get to choose between Trump the faux conservative (more wars and more immigration) and a candidate who is sure to be a faux liberal who’ll turn out to be another deep state puppet like Obama and Bush and give us more immigration and more wars. The Washington uniparty aka deep state is a cancer that has metastasized and ate up most of our flesh.

    America is a dying empire, Jews will see to that. Neocon Jews will make sure we continue with the warmongering until we’re bankrupt, and as insurance leftist Jews will make sure we implode thru mass third world immigration, internal strive and complete moral degeneracy.

    • Replies: @Realist
  4. Why is liberalism fading away, and nationalism ascendant?

    The former is an idea that appeals to the intellect; the latter, rooted in love of family, faith, tribe and nation, is of the heart. In its potency to motivate men, liberalism is to nationalism what near beer is to Bombay gin.

    There is another reason: the overreach of liberalism. Nobody who voted for “liberal” politics 60 years ago would have guessed that liberalism would now be defined by mass immigration from the Third World, disrespect for law enforcement, and the participation of Western countries in foreign wars that do not serve their interests.

    • Replies: @Miro23
    , @dfordoom
  5. Neither Liberalism nor Nationalism will “save the world”, although both make that claim. The swing to Nationalism is about the realization in the hearts of men that a concern for survival is paramount and the time is approaching when the struggle to survive will be all that matters.

    Part of the swing towards Liberalism since the 1950s has been a fear of total annihilation and a sense that changes had to be made to avoid it. As Liberalism fails to deliver “salvation” men will return to the old values.

    It’s going to be a rough ride.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  6. Miro23 says:
    @James N. Kennett

    There is another reason: the overreach of liberalism. Nobody who voted for “liberal” politics 60 years ago would have guessed that liberalism would now be defined by mass immigration from the Third World, disrespect for law enforcement, and the participation of Western countries in foreign wars that do not serve their interests.

    Many of these old liberals have spent a lifetime in this environment. They grew up with campus radicalism, went to Woodstock etc. It defines them and they aren’t going to change now.

    It’s their radical Jewish leaders who have morphed into Neocons.

  7. peterAUS says:
    @another fred

    Yep.
    Especially the last sentence.

  8. Renoman says:

    In Canada we are preparing toss our Trudeau idiot despite the fact that the Tory Andrew sheer is a real goof who should never get in. Trudeau is so hated we are seeing an “anyone but Trudeau wave”.

    • Replies: @Mike P
    , @follyofwar
  9. Realist says:
    @Thinker

    For 2020, we get to choose between Trump the faux conservative (more wars and more immigration) and a candidate who is sure to be a faux liberal who’ll turn out to be another deep state puppet like Obama and Bush and give us more immigration and more wars.

    Trump is also a Deep State sycophant.

  10. The fate of the 13 colonies turned out very well. Their break with the British Crown was the beginning of a historical cycle. They grew to be the greatest power on the planet. All such cycles have three general headings: an expanding state gains more power; works to retain it once it has been gained; and tries to regain it when it has been lost. As the world teeters on the brink of nuclear war, it is critical every nation knows what part of the cycle they are in.
    https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/

  11. Mike P says:
    @Renoman

    Trudeau is so hated we are seeing an “anyone but Trudeau wave”.

    That’s right – and he got in because of the previous “anyone but Harper wave”. That is “democracy” in a nutshell.

  12. @KenH

    The biggest problem with the USA is that it is one MAMMOTH country instead of 28 smaller ones (as is Europe). Thus, as the EU falls, many pro-nationalist countries will have the iron will to save themselves while others won’t. In the USA this is not possible without bloody fights for SECESSION – and we know how Tyrant Lincoln decimated the first one. It wasn’t pretty.

    And, does Pat believe that nonsense that Americans were “a new people, a separate, unique, identifiable people, a band of brothers…?” From such false claims came belief in Manifest Destiny and that we are THE Exceptional Nation. This country was born in blood and has exported its rivers of blood to the world ever since. Yeah, we’re exceptional, alright.

    • Replies: @ricpic
  13. The environment is now likely to rival Third World immigration as an issue in all elections in Europe.

    In reality, mass immigration, regardless of source, and 3rd world immigration in particular is an environmental issue. The Greens haven’t figured that out yet.

    • Agree: dc.sunsets
    • Replies: @dc.sunsets
    , @dfordoom
  14. @Curmudgeon

    People now are perpetual adolescents, for whom the present is always and there is no past worth knowing.

    We know this because not one person seems to recall how, in a nation a third SMALLER in population that now, we were worried about clean water, trash, urban sprawl and filling landfills.

    This was just in the 1970’s. Then globalists & the US Chamber of Commerce bought off the Sierra Club and suddenly flooding North America with 100 million new “consumers” was okey-dokey with the Greens.

    One thing our newly-arrived migrants are not known for: cleanliness.

    Idiocracy isn’t a comedy. And there’s few things more pathological than pathological altruism (also known as Virtue-Signaling under a feminist, cat-hoarder rubric.)

    When this long boom, created by turning capital into landfill mass, finally ends and people realize just how much they partied by burning the seed corn and slaughtering the breeding stock for meat to cook, the recriminations and inarticulate rage will undoubtedly set records.

  15. ricpic says:
    @follyofwar

    “…the USA is…one MAMMOTH country…”

    I’ve always felt that a country spanning a continent cannot hold together. Not because it was born in blood. What nation wasn’t? But simply because of the inevitable yawning disparities as its separate communities develop thousands of miles apart. It might have been feasible, barely, for the USA to have held together had it remained 90% white, but that ship has sailed.

    • Agree: follyofwar
  16. Anonymous[381] • Disclaimer says:

    India, Britain and European nations might be on the path to real nationalism or a combination of anti-mass-immigration nationalism and green-ism. European nations might forge coalitions to curtail welfare states that reward citizens & noncitizens with more unearned income, the more natural-resource-consuming humans they produce. But as this interesting graphing of the NYT’s staff’s racism chorus shows, Democrats gingerly inch back their race-baiting when it gets close to presidential election time. They try to draw the prodigal cross-over voters back in. Given that Trump has not done anything to curtail welfare-assisted mass immigration—and in one year even increased legal immigration—the 36% who report to Gallup that they worry every month about covering basic bills might have to put matters of the pocketbook over matters of the heart, especially since nothing gets done on immigration either way they vote.

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/graphing-the-great-awokening/

    By voting populist / nationalist in 2016, cross-over voters just got more tax cuts for the rich, more neoliberal tax favoritism for dual-earner parents with two above-firing, family-friendly, absenteeism-friendly jobs and the same welfare-rigged labor market that favors womb-productive noncitizens and single-breadwinner moms with welfare-hoisted wages. Populist policies turn out to favor groups that can afford to work very cheaply for the top 20% due to their pay-per-birth welfare and refundable child tax credits up to $6,431, no more or less than Democratic neoliberal policies. Cross-over voters are mostly not dual high earners who will have a paid-off house, two streams of SS and two 401ks (or other pension income) per household at retirement. Most of them must worry about trading off cuts to the future SS retirement check that will barely cover rent. They were taxed for it at either 7.65 or 15.3% of every paltry penny earned, while citizens & noncitizens got all of their main bills from rent to food covered by taxpayers—tax free—all during their womb-productive years. This includes many noncitizens. There’s nothing nationalist about the welfare-aided, imported servants of the top 20%.

  17. WILL the DEMS get the message for 2020 or will they keep digging their own grave with the Russia/Impeachment/open border BS???

  18. @Renoman

    Dare I say it? As a disillusioned Trump voter, I’m ready to say “anybody but Trump.” No matter who wins in 2020, the USA is finished. His unjust and immoral provocation of Iran, which will end in war, was the last straw for me.

    • Replies: @gsjackson
  19. SafeNow says:

    This consensus of comments that the U.S. is finished is very demoralizing to me, because I cannot disagree. If I had to guess, I would predict a gradual unraveling into a blend of Mexico, Brazil, Venezuela, France, Harvard, The NY Times, and Idiotocracy. To stay on the topic of nationalism: a new, seceded nation, or more likely nations, is possible. The Republic of Panhandle, and so on. But that all depends upon which way the loyalty of the military and police would go; probably preservation of jobs and pensions would control, and so no secession would be allowed.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  20. Anon[309] • Disclaimer says:

    I’d like to think the liberals are declining, but the main shift in the parties in the European parliment only changed one seat between right and left. It’s just that the moderate parties on both sides are declining, and the more extreme parties are gaining strength.

    Frankly, I think when the US has its next Civil War, every European country will split in two and duke it out as well. It’s the worse case scenario, but there just are too many boneheaded liberals who won’t learn. The liberals are doubling down on stupid and becoming more crazy.

  21. David says:

    This is the best comment batch under a Buchanan column for a long time, at least up to this comment.

    My remedy for what ails us is to start killing cats, especially for American women to start killing cats. Not all of them, I love cats. But the surplus cats.

    I had a great aunt that lived on the banks of the Ohio river. Every so often, when the number of cats in the tobacco barn had become unsustainable, and the cats were looking sickly from communicable diseases or starvation, she’d gather them into a burlap sack and sink them in the river.

    I can hardly imagine the strength of will, the commitment to what’s practical, needed to be able to do that. But I’m sure any women that could kill a litter of kittens could vote to preserve her nation.

    • Replies: @meistergedanken
  22. @David

    By the logic of your inane argument a woman who got an abortion and killed her child would be even BETTER at preserving her nation. Imagine the “strength of will”, the “commitment to practicality” needed to be able to terminate your own pregnancy!
    And yet, we know that is not true. What a tool you are, smh.

    • Replies: @David
  23. gsjackson says:
    @follyofwar

    And if it doesn’t end in war (and he has said it won’t)? I find Trump’s kosher rhetoric as appalling as anyone, but it is somewhat mind-boggling to jump between Unz and the pollyannas of the Q movement. They think Iran is all about taking out a “black site” in the country established by the Deep State, and to make the Iranian government deal with Trump rather than DS reps such as Obama and Kerry. The cartoonish Bolton and Pompeo are there just for optics to make the DS (read Israel) believe it’s business as usual.

    I guess time will tell. I’d be surprised if the U.S. started a war with Iran, strictly from a military standpoint. For years the stories of looming disaster have come out; e.g., U.S. war games show defeating Iraq not possible, a Russian general says the same, etc. Trump must know that at a minimum gas prices would rise dramatically and cost him any chance at reelection.

  24. David says:
    @meistergedanken

    That’s an interesting comment. To me they seem very dissimilar situations. But to some, it may be the life of a kitten is the same as the life of a child. Since I don’t see it that way, your take never occurred to me.

    A person using the means at her disposal to prevent or end suffering among cats seems to me a person of rather typical moral standing. But I imagine that snuffing them with her own hands, vs taking them to the vet, would develop a certain flintiness that I guess you find revolting.

    If you live on a farm, sometimes guiltless but useless life forms need to be disposed of. And having the strength to do it makes one a more complete moral being. The refusal to recognize trade-offs and priorities among competing moral sentiments is a conspicuous moral failing of our time.

    But ancient Greeks really did kill babies they thought would not make productive citizens, and if they really believed that is what it took maintain a strong polity, I hesitate to say I know more about it than they.

    It’s a luxury to care about cats. It may soon be a luxury to care about kids. Let’s prevent that by keeping our priorities straight.

  25. notanon says:

    Why is liberalism fading away, and nationalism ascendant?

    liberalism was supposed to be founded on science and reason but became corrupted by cultural Marxism (blank slate etc) and as a result no longer describes or predicts reality.

    although the old school centrist parties lost ground in the EU elections true believer “liberal” parties advanced. these people are fanatic globalists and they won’t fade away without a fight – expect them to become more authoritarian as the foundation of their belief system continues to crumble.

  26. 1776 gave us
    LGBTQXYZ.
    Who would have guessed it but Dr. Suess–
    Striped-hat cat jumped the Tappan Zee.

    • Replies: @SeekerofthePresence
  27. But in India the Hindu hour is at hand.

    All four of them. Or even twenty:

    And those ridiculous (in English) new city names are here to stay.

  28. dfordoom says: • Website
    @James N. Kennett

    Nobody who voted for “liberal” politics 60 years ago would have guessed that liberalism would now be defined by mass immigration from the Third World, disrespect for law enforcement, and the participation of Western countries in foreign wars that do not serve their interests.

    I don’t think liberalism has changed much. It’s not disrespect for law enforcement, merely a desire to use law enforcement for political ends. That’s something liberals always wanted. What we have now is pretty much the utopia that liberals dreamt about 60 years ago.

    As for foreign wars, liberals always liked the idea of using war to advance their ideology.

    Liberalism was evil right from the start. Even back in the 19th century it was evil. It’s not that liberalism has mysteriously gone wrong. Liberals have remained true to their nature.

  29. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Curmudgeon

    In reality, mass immigration, regardless of source, and 3rd world immigration in particular is an environmental issue. The Greens haven’t figured that out yet.

    They’re well aware of it. It doesn’t bother them. They know climate change is a scam anyway. But it’s a very profitable scam – good for Big Business (which funds the environmental movement) and good for Big Government (which serves the ideological goals of the Greens).

    They’re evil, not stupid.

  30. dfordoom says: • Website
    @SafeNow

    This consensus of comments that the U.S. is finished is very demoralizing to me, because I cannot disagree. If I had to guess, I would predict a gradual unraveling into a blend of Mexico, Brazil, Venezuela, France, Harvard, The NY Times, and Idiotocracy.

    Collapse seems unlikely, except in the very long term. More probably the U.S. will just go on growing steadily more corrupt and steadily more totalitarian, and steadily more degenerate, and will increasingly resort to military force to prop up its global economic and political dominance.

    Comparisons to Rome may be apt. Roman civilisation was a vicious, degenerate, corrupt, decadent hyper-aggressive and thoroughly evil empire but it took centuries to collapse.

    But that all depends upon which way the loyalty of the military and police would go; probably preservation of jobs and pensions would control, and so no secession would be allowed.

    There’s not going to be any secession. There’s no way it could happen. Like other western nations the U.S. is not divided along geographical or ethnic lines. It’s divided along class and ideological lines.

  31. @SeekerofthePresence

    As a nation of freemen,
    We must live through all time,
    Or die by suicide.

    Abraham Lincoln 1838

  32. “Liberalism” was always on shakier ground in Europe than in the United States. It was only in America that a a significant number of people were convinced that “freedom” entails driving your SUV to an ex-urban strip mall to buy more cheap (thanks to no tariffs!) Chinese rubbish from a big box store.

    • Replies: @Miro23
  33. Miro23 says:
    @Senor Moose

    It was only in America that a a significant number of people were convinced that “freedom” entails driving your SUV to an ex-urban strip mall to buy more cheap (thanks to no tariffs!) Chinese rubbish from a big box store.

    This is the teenage concept of freedom without responsibility. The Baby Boomer generation are the lifelong teenagers.

  34. Anon[144] • Disclaimer says:

    Identity politics is exactly who we are and it’s exactly how we won,” says Stacy Abrams, the African American Democrat who almost won the Georgia governor’s race.

    On the ostensible Right, those who admonish us against identity politics are the most zealous practitioners of them. See any Neocon anti-Trumper publication.

    This bald hypocrisy also has served as accelerant for modern nationalism.

    In fact, observing it moved me from the Left to the Nationalist Right with more efficiency than any other information. Observation of the before-hidden existence of a self-interested and hostile team within the walls will do that.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Pat Buchanan Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?