Why The Liberal Left Is Dismayed By The Recent Surge In Nationalism

Source
-Several recent events across the globe have yielded popular verdicts delivering serious blows to the sanctimonious global Leftist intelligentsia.

-There is a condescension and repudiation with which the global Left has reacted to these unpleasant verdicts and the electorates which delivered them.

-Instead of trying to push a uniform liberal agenda, liberals would do well to allow societies to evolve into their own unique versions of progressiveness.

I suggest you read the entire article from the link before replying...

The left in itself seems very narrow minded in its approach when it comes to accepting different points of view. Maybe it has something to do with the ideology itself. Where ever you go and which ever country the leftist liberals are involved in they seem to be in a rush to tarnish the past history of the respective country, provide a false alternate historical narrative, reduce the Gender gap between Men and Women make men more feminine and females more men and most importantly reduce the self respect of the said country and its historical narrative to probably recreate it anew. But as someone in the comments section in the article said
"Nationalism, which values civilization values and family values, comes back. These values are product of thousand years of striving and cannot be wished away by few centuries of Left Ideology."

a reply to: maddy21

Nationalism or even any "national identity" stands in the way of a One World Government (or governance). This is why you see the insanity in Europe. They must flood a nation with people who do not share the same values as the native (nationalist) population as well as swaying that native population into accepting a socialist dictatorship.

a reply to: maddy21

Can I go off on a little rant?

The people that adhere to the leftist ideology are being fooled.

It's nothing more than communism, globalism, one-world-government control.

And the people are foolishly supporting it.

The very idea of freedom, individualism is abhorrent to the left because they have been fooled into thinking that we actually need a nanny-state big government to function.

Nationalism doesn't work because it incorporates individual ideals.

Thank you for allowing me to rant.

Instead of trying to push a uniform liberal agenda, liberals would do well to allow societies to evolve into their own unique versions of progressiveness.

What they really means is centralize (Nationalize) resources and authority into the hands of the ruling body, whomever they are. They influence people to go along with this by equating nationalistic fervor in the form of patriotism, the worship of bits of colored cloth called flags with salutes, slogans and chants.

If you don't go along, you are un patriotic, un american.

The soviets had the same system, by the way.

Demonstrate your loyalty to the state or suffer the consequences.

No thanks. I''ll remain independent, sovereign and an individual, the gubment and their puppet masters can all go to hell.

originally posted by: intrptr

What they really means is centralize (Nationalize) resources and authority into the hands of the ruling body, whomever they are. They influence people to go along with this by equating nationalistic fervor in the form of patriotism, the worship of bits of colored cloth called flags with salutes, slogans and chants.

Incorrect, Left and communism has been a failure where ever it was implemented. Only the countries with Right Wing policies has been successful. Right Wing is closely associated to nationalism. Right Wing polices in itself include allowing the person full freedom within the economy, in essence reducing the govt. control, not increasing.

originally posted by: intrptr
If you don't go along, you are un patriotic, un american.
The soviets had the same system, by the way.
Demonstrate your loyalty to the state or suffer the consequences.

Soviets got destroyed because of its leftist economic polices, Nationalism did not kill it.

originally posted by: intrptr
No thanks. I''ll remain independent, sovereign and an individual, the gubment and their puppet masters can all go to hell.

"Sovereign Individual" does not exist for leftist liberals. They will trample over your rights, your believes, your country and centuries old civilizational progress if you do not conform to them.

a reply to: maddy21

Soviets got destroyed because of its leftist economic polices, Nationalism did not kill it.

Soviets couldn't match the West's defense budget. Factories for war are much better here. Sheer volume and cost of hi tech weaponry is what cooked their goose.

You can call it right left, this ism or that. Theres no primary difference between how nations feed and control their peoples.

The IMF and World Bank are at the top, control everything. But continue to play us against each other (like you are doing) to maintain control.

Divide and Rule.

a reply to: intrptr

Is the concept of freedom gone then?

a reply to: DBCowboy

What many people seem to think is that all philosophies are created equal and all must be given equal consideration for their validity.

It's just another form of moral relativism. It justifies wrong doing by assuming that no action taken under a "just cause"(i.e. Socialist revolution)can be wrong.

Our entire society suffers from this. That's why we ended up with a population that is ok with a century of failed institutions and unjust prohibitions on our liberties.

There is a right and wrong answer.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: maddy21
Soviets couldn't match the West's defense budget. Factories for war are much better here. Sheer volume and cost of hi tech weaponry is what cooked their goose.

The point is the failure of the leftist ideology and their economic policies which they tend to support everywhere.

originally posted by: intrptr
You can call it right left, this ism or that. Theres no primary difference between how nations feed and control their peoples.

There is, Right wing allows economic independence.. Which essentially means less control over an individual because the said person is economically independent from the govt., which is not in the interest of the leftist liberals.

originally posted by: intrptr
The IMF and World Bank are at the top, control everything. But continue to play us against each other (like you are doing) to maintain control.
Divide and Rule.

IMF and world bank are also political tools to destroy and control countries, the conditions they set in many cases forces cash strapped countries to their bidding. This is exactly the reason there are other Financial entities popping up like BRICS Bank and AIIB. The difference between both banking systems is, IMF and World bank has a major influence in the US while BRICS and AIIB is not dominated by any one country, not even the Chinese. Hence it stops these countries from forcing their economic polices on the smaller, weaker countries. Besides, competition in money lending is a good thing.

a reply to: projectvxn

Sadly, there is a right or wrong answer.

People just ignore the right answer.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

The people that adhere to the leftist ideology are being fooled.

Quite the contrary, I believe. They know exactly what they're doing, and allowing you to believe they're simply misguided, and that their hearts are really in the right place, is part of the ruse.

They want global totalitarian socialism. They can't say they want it, but they don't have to: the vast majority will continue to assume that there is no way these people truly want to destroy the country(ies). They operate under a presumption of innocence afforded them by a gullible (and "designedly" stupid) populace, allowing them to implement incremental socialist policies over the past several decades.

They're either playing us for fools or they're bats# crazy.

I'd say one scenario is about as likely as the other.

We need a healthy mix of right and left in society.
I would not wish to live in either a far left or far right wing country.

a reply to: NthOther

The rulers yes.. they pretend to be misguided. But the people? They really are misguided.

This presumption of innocence really is at the core of the problem. People continually give these globalists and politicians the benefit of the doubt, even when their history is a history of undeniable corruption.

originally posted by: TheLaughingGod

The rulers yes.. they pretend to be misguided. But the people? They really are misguided.

This presumption of innocence really is at the core of the problem. People continually give these globalists and politicians the benefit of the doubt, even when their history is a history of undeniable corruption.

I think many of the "followers" are engaged in their activism with their eyes wide open as well, thinking their loyalty may be rewarded in some way, somewhere down the line. They think it would never be them who get stabbed in the back and thrown to the wolves when they are no longer useful.

I think continuing to let them feign ignorance regarding the true goals of their adopted social philosophy is a mistake.

a reply to: NthOther

May be... in that case they're treacherous opportunists and will be dealt with accordingly.

Better fealty than the wrath of the warriors in thunder armour.

a reply to: maddy21

I think Nationalism is only a word used in a bad way because its really seen by the public as about one's culture.

I don't think one world government is possible unless backed up by tanks and a huge world army to keep individuals and groups in line. Half the world's resources would go into maintaining control and how would you elect members of a world government and its parliament? Its impractical.

The crux though I think is this, I heard a Columbian politicians once turn to the camera and say "I don't want my culture to be turned into some kind of soup".

I have to agree with him because in Britain we were told by the 'agendared' liberals (government and importantly our education system) that we don't have an English culture because we are purely a mixture of all sorts. DNA compared with ancient skeletons pried that wrong., however, the effort to force English people to accept they had no claim to a culture of their own was a sly, political mistake quietly noted and some took great offence at it.

There is an important point though that culture, regardless of whether you have held that culture for generations or recently adopted it, is the ruling point on this. I think its culture that people are trying to protect in their political arena but the focus is on racism which is just a liberal smoke screen for many, simply because although my ancestors were English, I have friends from Iran, Africa and elsewhere who I can honestly say are more English than I am when it comes to culture. Its something politicians and especially also those with liberalistic ambitions they want to inflict on everyone don't appreciate, because they can't separate their political principles from the people they think should follow them.

a reply to: maddy21

Your cite is to a right-wing Indian magazine with some - fascinating - views on history. Thanks for the laugh. No.

Ask the Jews how great nationalism was for them in WW2.

I am not convinced that this is a left / right issue. Extremists on both sides of the political spectrum seek to control. They mandate rules and regulations that kill personal freedoms and persecute certain types of people. What we're seeing now around the world is extreme left politics, including social engineering by force (laws) and coercion (political correctness). If they are allowed to continue then more and more of the areas of coercion will become law.

Whenever either extreme rears it's ugly head, it eventually fails. Human beings by nature are free and eventually the threat to that freedom brings a response. When this happens it's sometimes bloody and sometimes not. I only hope this time around the extreme left will go quietly into the night.

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: maddy21

I think Nationalism is only a word used in a bad way because its really seen by the public as about one's culture.

I don't think one world government is possible unless backed up by tanks and a huge world army to keep individuals and groups in line. Half the world's resources would go into maintaining control and how would you elect members of a world government and its parliament? Its impractical.

The crux though I think is this, I heard a Columbian politicians once turn to the camera and say "I don't want my culture to be turned into some kind of soup".

I have to agree with him because in Britain we were told by the 'agendared' liberals (government and importantly our education system) that we don't have an English culture because we are purely a mixture of all sorts. DNA compared with ancient skeletons pried that wrong., however, the effort to force English people to accept they had no claim to a culture of their own was a sly, political mistake quietly noted and some took great offence at it.

There is an important point though that culture, regardless of whether you have held that culture for generations or recently adopted it, is the ruling point on this. I think its culture that people are trying to protect in their political arena but the focus is on racism which is just a liberal smoke screen for many, simply because although my ancestors were English, I have friends from Iran, Africa and elsewhere who I can honestly say are more English than I am when it comes to culture. Its something politicians and especially also those with liberalistic ambitions they want to inflict on everyone don't appreciate, because they can't separate their political principles from the people they think should follow them.

I agree with you in a manner of speaking. World govt can be formed, but Cultures and societies need to be given their own times to adapt. The process must be slow, but certainly possible in a world which is more and more interconnected. There are bound to be a few hiccups along the way.

But the problem with what the left does is their process is crude, Brutish and down right insulting. You can never force multiculturalism down a persons throat, nor can you force certain societies which are intolerant to change into a completely alien environment.

Western culture is reaching the east, Eastern concepts of Karma, Reincarnation , meditation, Spirituality without a god figure and Yoga are being accepted into the west.There is every reason to believe one unified world is possible, but these concepts and ideas were spread naturally and organically, this was not forced down the throats of people.