American and indeed global politics has undergone a transformation in the 21st century. We’ve seen the rise of challenges to the established order from both the left and the right. Increasing segments of the population in the Western world are tired of the same ol’ same politics.
It’s to throw away old terms like “conservative” “liberal” “libertarian” and all the rest. Those terms don’t really have any meaning in our new politics. “Populist” also is a flawed term. Populism at the end of the day is more of a mood than an actual ideology. Any political movement can be a populist movement with the right messaging.
I propose that American and Western politics for that matter is now a battle between four distinct ideologies, which we will see frequently shift alliances and strategies to advance their agenda, particularly outside the United States. Those ideologies are classical liberalism, nationalism, transnational progressivism, and socialism.
Here’s a brief description of those four ideologies with examples of who fits under those descriptions. The references will be to figures in American politics because that is my background.
Classical liberalism: It may also be called “conservatism”, “conservatarianism”, and “libertarianism” in the United States. Fundamentally, they believe that the only role of government is to protect life, liberty, and the “pursuit of happiness” as outlined in the Declaration of Independence.
It is easy to believe they are anarchists at heart but that is an oversimplification. Instead, they are most likely voluntaryists at heart, although most reject it and other forms of anarchy as impractical. An excellent historical summary of their beliefs, especially those who are Christian, is the cry from both English and American Revolutionary history “No King but Jesus.”
They are strong supporters of free-market economics, low taxation, property rights, and a very limited if any safety net. They are also strong opponents of so-called “crony capitalism” or the government favoring one business or industry over another.
On trade policy, they are also strong supporters of free trade and opponents of protectionism.
On social policy, there are strong disagreements on issues such as abortion and gay rights. But they are inclined to support devolving most social issues down to the state and local level. They also tend to strongly support things such as free speech, freedom of association, freedom of religion, and criminal justice reform. Although many are skeptical of civil rights legislation and social justice causes in general. Many are skeptical of Islam, but most also strongly oppose discrimination against Muslims. Many oppose the war on drugs and most support allowing states to decide their own marijuana policies. They are also skeptical of things such as increased government surveillance of electronic communications.
On foreign policy, the spectrum runs anywhere from hawkish realism to non-interventionism. But they do share in common a skepticism of international institutions such as the United Nations and the European Union, which they view as threats to liberty and self-governance. They are also generally supportive of Israel.
On immigration, their views span anywhere from open borders (in extreme cases) to highly restrictionist, although not as restrictionist as nationalists. They generally support both high amounts of legal immigration and strong border security.
Examples: Ben Shapiro, Rand Paul, Justin Amash, the Koch Brothers, and Ronald Reagan
Nationalism: Nationalists can be broken up into two factions, civic nationalists (aka the alt-lite) and ethno nationalists (aka the alt-right). These two factions have significant differences and honestly hate each other, but they do have much in common. Their primary motivation is what is best for their country (civic nationalists) or for their race (ethno nationalists).
On economic policy, both factions pay lip service to capitalism but there are some alt-righters who do call themselves “national socialists.” But both groups believe that the economy must serve the interests of the nation first and foremost. They are also in support of a stronger safety net than classical liberals, but not as strong of one as socialists or transnational progressives. They also support increased infrastructure spending as a way to strengthen the nation.
On trade policy, Both factions generally support a model of economic nationalism modeled after the People’s Republic of China where tariffs protect domestic manufacturers from foreign competition and certain domestic industries and companies are subsidized.
On social policy, they are generally not concerned with issues such as abortion, gay rights, or the war on drugs although most do support marijuana legalization. They are strongly skeptical of civil rights legislation and social justice causes. They are inconsistent supporters of things such as freedom of religion, freedom of association, and free speech. They are also inconsistent when it comes to skepticism of government surveillance. Finally, anti-Islamic views are strongly prevalent in nationalist circles. Both civic nationalists and alt-righters have a strong reactionary side to them.
On foreign policy, they are anywhere from hawkish realists to isolationists. They oppose international institutions such as the United Nations and the European Union viewing them as a threat to national sovereignty. They have mixed opinions on Israel with alt-liters generally supportive of Israel and alt-righters generally opposed to Israel. Both factions, however, support the Trump administration’s travel ban on certain Islamic countries.
On immigration, they are very restrictionist opposing even legal immigration in many cases. If there is going to be legal immigration, they want to switch to a so-called merit-based system of immigration. They also support a wall on the border with Mexico and stricter domestic enforcement of immigration laws.
Civic nationalist examples: Mike Cernovich, Pat Buchanan, Tom Cotton, (policy wise) Donald Trump, Victor Davis Hanson
Ethno nationalist examples: Jason Kessler, Richard Spencer, David Duke, (rhetorically at times) Donald Trump
Transnational progressivism: Also called “neoliberalism”, “centrism”, or “globalism”. Generally, they believe in a post-constitutional and post-national vision for America and the world.
Here’s a summary of their ideology:
1) The ascribed group over the individual. 2) A dichotomy of groups: Oppressor versus victim groups, with immigrant groups designated as victims. 3) Group proportionalism as the goal of “fairness.” 4) The values of all dominant institutions to be changed to reflect the perspective of the victim groups. 5) The Demographic Imperative. (By this [John Fonte, who coined the phrase] means the view that, because of domestic demographic changes and global population flows, “the traditional paradigm of American nationhood [is] obsolete” and “must be changed into a system that promotes ‘diversity,’ defined, in the end, as group proportionalism”). 6) The redefinition of democracy and “democratic ideals.” 7) Deconstruction of national narratives and national symbols. 8) Promotion of the concept of postnational citizenship. 9) The idea of transnationalism as a major conceptual tool.
This ideological framework they largely share with socialists. But there are significant differences between the two.
On economic policy, they are generally “third-way” types who try to mix free market economics and socialism into a corporatist, mixed economy. Social democracy is also an accurate descriptor. They believe in progressive taxation and a relatively mild redistributionist fiscal policy. They also strongly support public-private partnerships, state investment and support of certain domestic industries, and strong state oversight and control over corporations. They also support infrastructure spending as a way to generate economic growth. Finally, they generally embrace government regulations as a way to shape behavior.
On trade policy, they support “managed trade pacts” such as NAFTA and the TPP. Indeed the TPP showed the way forward for transnational progressives on trade. It combined the lowering of some trade barriers and tariffs with provisions on things such as environmental protection and workers rights.
On social policy, they are strongly supportive of abortion rights and gay rights. They are skeptical of “negative liberties” and embrace “positive liberties“. They champion civil rights legislation and social justice causes, even above civil liberties such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of association. They’re also less skeptical of government surveillance of electronic communications than classical liberals and socialists, but they’re more skeptical of it than nationalists.
On foreign policy, they believe in using American power to champion globalism in the guise of international institutions such as the United Nations. They strongly support the European Union and see it as a model. They have mixed opinions on Israel with some supporting the Jewish state as a model of democracy and liberalism while others oppose it as an example of racism, settler colonialism, and nationalism.
On immigration policy, they generally support more open immigration policies with many embracing open borders. They tend to view most opposition and skepticism of open immigration as racist.
Examples: Barack Obama, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Mike Bloomberg, Max Boot, Jennifer Rubin, most of corporate America, Elizabeth Warren
Socialism: Also known as “democratic socialism.” Their ideology can be summed up by this plank adopted by the Denver Democratic Party on behest of the local chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America in March 2018:
We believe the economy should be democratically owned and controlled in order to serve the needs of the many, not to make profits for the few.
On economic policy, they believe in as much state control of the economy as possible. They believe in nationalizing things such as health care, education, and other industries. They believe in confiscatory taxation, high redistributive policies, and limited protections for property rights. They believe in a large and expansive safety net and strict controls and limits on corporations, if not outright nationalization. Many socialists reject private profit, which is in the current constitution of the Democratic Socialists of America.
On trade policy, they are strongly opposed to free trade instead believing in something called “fair trade.” They want trade deals that increase labor standards, environmental standards, and address human rights. They also oppose deals that limit or reduce spending on social programs among the partners.
On social policy, they generally agree with transnational progressives. However, they’re more skeptical of government power on things such as surveillance of electronic communications.
On foreign policy, they generally are skeptical of war and American military power. They often support deep cuts to American defense spending and unilateral disarmament. They support and want to empower the United Nations but are skeptical of the European Union which they view as neoliberal.
On immigration policy, they generally support more immigration, particularly of low-skilled workers and refugees. But they are skeptical of guest worker programs, which they view as exploitative. They have been outspoken about calling for the abolition of ICE and the Border Patrol. Finally, like transnational progressives, they see opposition to and skepticism of immigration as racist.
Examples: Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Keith Ellison, Ben Jealous, most of the Justice Democrats
Right now, the Republican Party can be seen as a coalition of classical liberals and civic nationalists with alt-righters playing an increasingly marginal role. The Democratic Party is a coalition of transnational progressives and socialists.
There is also a lot of overlap between the various factions. For example, Cassandra Fairbanks, the former Bernie Sanders supporter turned Gateway Pundit Washington D.C. correspondent, has feet in both the civic nationalist and classical liberal camp.
All four factions have benefitted from the destruction of the political ancien regime. For example, neoconservatives, who were the dominant force on the American right in the last decade, can be found on both the classical liberal and civic nationalist camps with some of the intellectuals becoming transnational progressives. On the left, socialists were not a thing until the Bernie Sanders insurgency in 2015 and 2016 against Hillary Clinton. With a majority of Democrats viewing socialism more favorably than capitalism now, the battle for the heart of the left is far from over.
Politics has changed a lot in the past decade. It will change again inevitably. This post hopefully will serve as a guide until that happens.
Also published on my Medium page.
One Response »
Kevin Boyd 