Despite the best efforts and horrified protests of the left and their media fellow travelers, Donald Trump will shortly ascend to the Presidency atop a wave of voter repugnance and fury at the direction our country has been going for lo these many years.
The voter discontent which drove his victory was no isolated phenomenon; it's appearing all over Europe, perhaps even more strongly. This spreading peasant rebellion horrifies the elites who've run the "respectable" political parties which, much like the Republicans and Democrats in America, have passed control back and forth between them for decades while treading pretty much the same globalist path.
One anonymous European leader who fears for his job warned, "If the political culture forbids respectable politicians from raising certain topics, then the electorate will turn to unrespectable ones." By "unrespectable," he means political parties which are not run by fellow one-worlders, and by "certain topics" he means Mr. Trump's attacks on the norms of political correctness, tolerance, diversity, and open borders which are promoted by the elites.
He is right to be concerned. Globalist writers at The Economist are mourning:
Compared with other Europeans, French voters are strikingly opposed to globalization and international trade, and few think immigrants have had a positive effect on their country.
European elites once assumed that national identities would eventually blend into a continental bouillabaisse. But the momentum is now with parties like the FN, including Hungary’s Fidesz, Poland’s Law and Justice party and Austria’s Freedom Party (one of whose leaders, Norbert Hofer, could win Austria’s largely ceremonial presidency next month) [He didn't but came very close - ed]. Ms Le Pen’s language is typical. She caters to nostalgia, anxiety and antipathy to the liberal international order. (“No to Brussels, yes to France”, goes one slogan.) She laments the decline of a proud people and vows to make France great again. [emphasis added]
Unlike Mr Trump, Ms Le Pen has never called for a ban on Muslims entering the country; rather, she talks about curbing the “gigantic wave” of immigration.
[France's ex-President] Mr Sarkozy said that children who did not want to eat pork at school should “take a second helping of chips”—in other words, that it was up to non-Christians whose religions impose dietary restrictions to make do with the food on offer, not up to schools to accommodate them. [emphasis added]
Mr. Sarkozy's observation that it was up to immigrants to adapt instead of forcing natives to accommodate them could have come from Mr. Trump himself.
The one-worlders assumed that national identities would simply fade away as we all entered the "global village" they live in. From a globalist's perspective, there really is one world: they all stay at the same set of fabulously expensive hotels, hide money in the same tax shelters, fly in their own private jets whose terminals let them bypass customs lines, and have their every whim fulfilled by armies of largely taxpayer-funded menials. Hillary Clinton, who hasn't driven a car herself since 1989 and flew in a private jet the 20 miles from Martha's Vineyard to Nantucket, is typical.
From that exalted viewpoint, national, cultural, and religious differences are unimportant and the sooner they're cast aside, the better. The citizenry, in contrast, yearn for an inspiring national vision that calls their individual countries to greatness. They feel a bond with their countries, and they believe that the obligations implied by these bonds run both ways.
Most citizens - not just Americans, but Europeans, Asians, and even increasing numbers of Africans - believe that if they work hard and play by the rules, their rulers owe them lives of dignity and respect. The people may be required to serve their countries by following the laws, but their governments are required to protect them in return. From this perspective, the epidemic of rape, sexual assault, and other crimes committed by immigrants all across Europe and, to a lesser extent, America, represents a callous betrayal of ordinary citizens by uncaring leaders.
David Cameron, who used to be Prime Minister of England, was a typical elitist. His Conservative party included a number of Euro-skeptic Members of Parliament who gave him continual grief whenever the European Parliament in Brussels passed a law they didn't like.
He promised a national referendum on whether to "Leave" the European Community or "Remain." He fully expected "Remain" to win, which would give him leverage against his rebellious party members.
To his shock, "Leave" won decisively. Tradition demands resignation when a British leader suffers a defeat of that magnitude. Mr. Cameron, who had been a cosmopolitan prime minister, resigned and was replaced by Theresa May, who said:
If you believe you’re a citizen of the world, you’re a citizen of nowhere. You don’t understand what the very word ‘citizenship’ means. [emphasis added]
To this, we heartily say, "Amen!" Our elites not only don't understand what "citizenship" means, they have become so tolerant that they can't even understand why anyone would care.
American elites were as shocked by Mr. Trump's victory as European elites had been upset by "Leave" and its forthcoming result, Brexit. These two events have emboldened anti-EU forces all across Europe.
This doesn't necessarily mean that anti-EU forces will win everywhere because most European countries have carefully crafted ways to get around following the will of the voters if the elites care strongly enough. For example, although Geert Wilders, head of the Dutch anti-EU party, is well ahead in the polls, the vagaries of the Dutch electoral system means that he will probably not become the next prime minister.
In spite of that, ordinary people in the Netherlands have struck a major blow against Europeans running roughshod over their national interests. In 2015, the Euro-skeptics got a law passed which required a referendum on any new law if 300,000 citizens demanded it. Since most European laws have to be passed by the legislatures of all countries, this effectively gives ordinary Dutch citizens a veto power over any European measure that requires a new Dutch law.
Until Brexit, it had appeared that the globalist's smooth march to a one-world government, which President Woodrow Wilson began when he founded the League of Nations after World War I, was coming to pass. Voters, however, seem to be unpersuaded of the glories of the elitists' view and are clinging to their old-fashioned national cultures.
Why does this modern one-world-ism feel like such a profound change? In the next article in this series, we'll delve into history as we consider the issue of the New World Order vs the Westphalian nationalism that emerged out of the Middle Ages.
Over the past five years, the editors have been secretly working on a book that summarizes the fundamental viewpoints of Scragged.