Something’s happening here, and you don’t know what it is, do you? Mr. Jones

The issue many people are wondering about is this: how big is the change that is going on? Is it merely – and I use that word ironically – the election of Trump, the vote for Brexit, and associated political changes that will likely follow in Europe? Or is it bigger? And if bigger, of what does it consist?

Caol Islay held forth at lunch yesterday that what we were witnessing was akin to the would-be revolutions of 1968, which did not succeed, but which marked the breakup of the consensus of post-World War 2 societies. Are we witnessing the beginnings of a vast mood change? And what would  happen if we were having one?

Take Obama’s recent meditations with David Remnick of the New Yorker, as  quoted in Breitbart:

What frustrated Obama and his staff [in the 2016 campaign] was the knowledge that, in large measure, they were reaching their own people but no further. They spoke to the networks and the major cable outlets, the major papers and the mainstream Web sites, and, in an attempt to find people “where they are,” forums such as Bill Maher’s and Samantha Bee’s late-night cable shows, and Marc Maron’s podcast. But they would never reach the collective readerships of Breitbart News, the Drudge Report, WND, Newsmax, InfoWars, and lesser-knowns like Western Journalism—not to mention the closed loop of peer-to-peer right-wing rumor-mongering.

… That marked a decisive change from previous political eras, [Obama] maintained. “Ideally, in a democracy, everybody would agree that , because that’s what ninety-nine per cent of scientists tell us,” he said. “And then we would have a debate about how to fix it. That’s how, in the seventies, eighties, and nineties, you had Republicans supporting the Clean Air Act and you had a market-based fix for acid rain rather than a command-and-control approach. So you’d argue about means, but there was a baseline of facts that we could all work off of. And now we just don’t have that” …

“I have complete confidence in the American people—that if I can have a conversation with them they’ll choose what’s right. At an emotional level, they want to do the right thing if they have the information.” And yet in an age of filter bubbles and social-media silos, he knew, the “information” that reached people was increasingly shaped by what they wanted to be true. And that was no longer in his hands or anyone else’s.

  1.  The liberal media could not reach those who were not already persuaded.
  2. Obama remains convinced that “climate change is the consequence of man-made behavior.” No discussion no debate, it is a fact.
  3. If he could only speak to the American people they would see the wisdom of his positions: “if I can have a conversation with them they’ll choose what’s right”.

Let us start with that hideous word “conversation”. It is not a conversation with one person holding the megaphone and when the listener is hounded, defunded, reviled and attacked for disagreeing – see global warming as the archetypal liberal “conversation”.

Hence it is only to be expected that, when the issue is a matter of fact, and one side holds it out to be a question of religious belief, there can be no error, there can only be heresy.

The Left has been treating dissent as heresy for decades. The number of undiscussable items is only added to with every passing  year. You name it: ecology, crime, race, IQ differentials, heritability of traits, and the adequacy of Darwin to explain everything, the nature of Islam, the benefits of multiculturalism. You could think of four or five additional major areas of life where the Left treats disagreement about facts as worthy of social shunning and job loss. Of being labeled a racist, exist, fascist, homophobe etc.

They have been shouting through megaphones for decades, and the noise level only got more intense under Obama. But Trump elicited yet further disparagement from the bien-pensants. The surprize for me was the extent to which apparently well educated people, not usually associated with politically correct persecutions,  have completely lost their minds about both Trump, his supporters, and nationalist economics.

To the constantly growing chorus of PC was added the upper-middle class howls about free trade. Personally I support free trade. I think it makes us richer, but while it makes us some of us richer it clearly has negative effects on our domestic working class. It was perfectly within Trump’s right to speak for the displaced and the disadvantaged in this titanic economic transformation. There was an element in the financial press that continues to shriek “How dare he?!” “Who are these peasants and how dare they revolt?”

So in answer to my question, I see that something is going on larger than the immediate policy changes consequent to nationalist electoral victories. I see a vast mood change. Once you lift the lid of political correctness in one place, it will be lifted everywhere. That is my belief. We can only hope.

 

Bookmark and Share
Nicola Timmerman

But the schools and universities must change or this will be but a temporary revolt. If young people are brainwashed and also don’t learn about the values of Western civilization, we will soon be outvoted as older people die off.

Dalwhinnie

Nicola:
Possibly you are right. There is much evidence for your view. I see the younger generation of 25-35 year-olds as prime exponents of politically correct attitudes and global warming hysteria. Yet, somehow, reality keeps breaking through. Eventually they grow up, leave home and start to pay electricity bills. And consider how we got to be so conservative. The accumulation of years seems to engender a growth of political realism in most people.

Bill Elder

I think there is a wide awakening in the western nations by the burdened middleclass, on 2 levels. How deep this is is another issue for discussion.

On one level are those who who see the corporate media (through excessive bias and naked advocacy) no longer functions as a 4th estate watchdog but a 5th column lap dog – the advocacy media has lost control of manufacturing public consensus. Media trust/credibility is forever broken. The rule of thumb of these sleep walker who have just been jarred awake by the tsunami of fallacious political propaganda is that if the government and media are pimping something it’s generally bad for them.

On a second and deeper level there are those who have long abandoned the MSM for alternate media and done their own research who are informed and now see what has been causing the bulk of controversy and public polarization is essentially repackaged sovietism. They now understand that when the Berlin wall fell it released the political infrastructure that was contained behind it into international bureaucracies and international political pressure orgs. They see western educational, political and governing institutions falling to this sovietization and its impacts on their freedoms and prosperity.

How deep and sustained this new river of awakening is will be determined by the resolve in the leadership the new populism elects to reform government, academia and the media and return functionality to these western institutions infected with communistic totality. It is up to the organic grass roots populist movement to make nationalism and social cohesion popular as well.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *