Today’s liberals/left-liberals of the western world are following in the footsteps of their radical predecessors when advocating for policies which aim to “change the world”. As such, it is wise to remember that like all utopian idealists, today’s liberals/left-liberals would have to steamroll over the real world in order to build their ideal world. What’s more is that it is a great deal more difficult to steamroll over human nature than many radical idealists expect. Many modern idealists from Mussolini to Ceaușescu have found that out the hard way.
During the Cold War, the dividing line between democracy and dictatorship was so clear that at least in a superficial way it could be physically demarcated by the Berlin Wall. As a result, democratic countries grew tolerant even of parties whose ideologies implied a lack of respect for genuine democracy.
But since the end of the Cold War, the neat and tidy, however simplistic dividing line between the democratic and anti-democratic world has disappeared. Consequently, the very principles on which modern western democracy is based have been challenged in ways even more staggering than that which occurred during the second half of the Cold War. At its core, modern western democracy can only function if winners refrain from extracting vengeance against the electorally vanquished, whilst the losers must with grace (however tinged with disappointment it may be) accept the fact that their side lost and will remain on the losing side, at least until the next election.
Today however, these seemingly simple concepts are being both wilfully and unconsciously challenged and these challenges are almost always coming from self-described liberals/left-liberals. First it was Hillary Clinton who made up a wild conspiracy theory of the lesser James Bond variety in order to try and “prove” that she rather than Donald Trump won the US election of 2016. Then came Brexit where now every mainstream leftest and liberal party in Britain is openly stating that their goal is to thwart the implementation of the 2016 referendum in which a clear majority of people in the UK voted to withdraw from the European Union.
Perhaps though, the un-conscious or in some cases semi-conscious incompatibility with democracy displayed by the liberal/left-liberal side of western politics is all the more disturbing than its overt manoeuvres. Like their extremist predecessors, today’s liberals/left-liberals believe that somehow mankind can be made perfect and that all it will take to achieve this perfection is a surrendering of all traditions, cultural characteristics and religious faith to a government run by…them.
The attempt to forge a government as God on earth, promoting a new perfect human order was tried in China during the Cultural Revolution. This proved to be such a failure that after the Cultural Revolution, China swung the opposite way towards a wholly pragmatic style of government under Deng Xiaoping whose renowned expression, “I do not care if a cat is black or white, so long as it catches mice”, was a savage indictment of the idealistic/utopian notion of government as godhead.
As a result, whilst the idealism of the Cultural Revolution left 88% of all Chinese in poverty, the pragmatism of Deng Xiaoping and his successors has elevated more people out of poverty in a shorter amount of time than anything that had been previously witnessed in world history.
Unlike Deng who (perhaps ironically to some) led the world’s largest Communist party, today’s liberals/left-liberals of western countries do not seem interested in real life solutions to real life problems. Instead, they lust wildly for power and in the process they invent solutions to non-existent problems whilst savaging not only their opponents but even ordinary people who do not agree with them. Whilst more extreme than the western left of recent decades, today’s liberals/left-liberals are clearly following in the footsteps of non-western totalitarians.
The drive towards government as godhead and the tendency to steamroll over tradition, religion, cultural characteristics and human freedom have all historically been associated with totalitarianism. Under such systems, not only is opposition not tolerated but most frighteningly of all – even neutrality is not tolerated. So cursed are the mindsets of the totalitarian liberal/left-liberal that their lust for power cannot even refrain from molesting those who want no part in voicing a political opinion – let alone voicing it publicly.
Whether in Stalin’s USSR or in similar dictatorships, neutrality was never an option. For such dictators, neutrality, silence or apathy was viewed as an outright offence. By contrast, in free countries, one has every bit as much a right to withdraw from the political system and simply lead an apolitical life as one had the right to engage in politics.
And yet, today’s western liberals/left-liberals have reverted to the path of the dictators in chastising those who simply wish to live a life informed by traditional habits and personal choice, rather than one obsessively controlled by ideology and party politics.
Thus, one is labelled an enemy if one does not want to become excited and panicked as Greta Thunberg thinks one should be, one is labelled an enemy if one prefers to keep sexual activities under wraps rather than on full display (even if in front of children), one is labelled the enemy if one is in broad terms, socially conservative (even in an apolitical sense) and one is labelled an enemy for merely casually conversing with those of different political opinions.
This is not civilised behaviour and this is not civilised politics. When one is attacked for what they do not do in addition to what they do and think, this goes far beyond even the most extreme partisanship of radical western political parties during the Cold War period. This is an attempt to construct a Stalinist or even Pol Pot style dictatorship in the heart of the free world.
It is rather sad that just as China converted from ideological extremism to pragmatism and just as Europe freed itself of communism, the radicals western world should adopt rush to adopt the worst qualities of the systems that eastern Europe, China, Vietnam and Cambodia rejected.
The idea that one cannot be spoken to or even be given a chance to speak is straight out of the communist playbook. The idea that somehow big government in the hands of the “right people” is good whilst big government in the hands of the “wrong people” is bad is straight out of the fool’s playbook.
A rational person realises that there is not now as there can never be, a universally agreed conception of who is the “right or wrong” group of people to run an all mighty government. Thus, wisdom and logic dictate that a government with limited powers formed after pluralistic elections is a far better option than one in which one group of people get to play God for a few years whilst a rival group of people get to play god a few years later (almost always after a violent transition period).
Finally, the idea that one should be made to feel bad for being happy with a life that is apolitical is perhaps the worst of all symptoms of the increasingly tyrannical tendencies among the modern liberal/left-liberal movement. In many ways, the freest man is he who does not concern himself with the curse of politics. To molest such angels is to act as devils incarnate but that is just the model that today’s liberals/left-liberal extremists tend to hold in high esteem.