Trump’s victory, eh? Six months ago I wrote a book.
It was aimed at the Brexiteers who blamed Europe for just about everything wrong with the modern world. A German plot to conquer Europe after having failed with the Nazis is a not uncommon theme. They talked about “taking back control” from Brussels which was just taken as a proxy for Berlin…or more rarely Paris.
So I posed this question. You talked about “taking back control” from Brussels, but what about the control that Washington exerts over Europe, politically, economically and culturally? Why don’t you take back control there? I mean, how else is Britain going to be free, independent and have its own identity, one that isn’t globalist or American, otherwise? The threat to the British identity from Europe is minimal. Most British people don’t speak enough foreign languages to be influenced. Meanwhile the British swim in American and globalist influences that are so ubiquitous that most British people don’t notice any more, say, than a fish thinks about the fact it is swimming in water.
Take the immigration issue that so bothers brexiteers: it is true that Schengen does make it easier to enter Europe and for third world citizens to travel around and claim benefits in a country not their own. But Britain is not part of Schengen; and there is so much more to the immigration issue than physical open borders. You also have the wars for people’s minds to make them more accepting of immigration, and here the European left in alliance with the European business right has adopted a philosophy of multiculturalism developed and refined in the United States. America is a genuinely multiracial society; so the whole culture of compulsory acceptance of difference has arisen in a society with a very different demographic mix than Europe.
You could say that Europeans are being forced into an American cultural-legal state of affairs vis-a-vis immigration when Europe is not America yet – however, if the enforced tolerance towards immigration continues, Europe will soon attain a demographic mix that will approximate to America’s.
A multiracial society combined with an identity politics that the likes of Clinton favoured (which she intermixed with support from Wall Street) weakens opposition to forces that promote solidarity and opposition to globalisation like the unions.
Elites have personal resources to draw upon when they need to get ahead, as well as their own international personal networks. But the white majority draws on – needs to draw on – collectivities such as the trade union or the nation state to prosper
In contrast, global companies like identity politics, in other words, because of its divide-and-conquer tendencies and because identity politics promotes consumerism. When a consumer has an identity it gives companies something to aim for when selling and promoting products. Conversely, when you assert your racial or sexual identity solely by buying things, it is of course unthreatening to power.
The losers in such a world of hyperindividualism – which is also a kind of fake individualism – are those who belonged to organised labour, the central figures in the old Social Democratic Welfare State, the white working class male, who used to be formidable opponent, when teamed up with fellows like him, against corporate power, but who has been marginalised in the new Europe that celebrates “difference” – as long as this “difference” is a pasted-on cultural identity that doesn’t threaten power.
Of course the globalists were doing this to the American people as well. I couldn’t predict Trump’s victory six months ago. His victory is a good thing for the Americans and for all of us.