Wednesday, October 12, 2016

Where the Globalist Agenda Really by Violet Wister

where globalism leads
The greatest, or most commonly raised, objection to the “Flight 93 Election” piece by the inimitable Decius seems to be that he is too pessimistic. In fact, they said precisely what he said they would: things aren’t so bad! No need to panic, or even to question the way we think about politics! So it would seem to be unwise to out-pessimize Decius, who has penned the best political essay of the election cycle. And yet, here I am. In one respect, I think the situation is more dire than he allows.
In his original essay, Decius said that if Trump loses, we face a set of options:
The possibilities would seem to be: Caesarism, secession/crack-up, collapse, or managerial Davoisie liberalism as far as the eye can see … which, since nothing human lasts forever, at some point will give way to one of the other three. Oh, and, I suppose, for those who like to pour a tall one and dream big, a second American Revolution that restores Constitutionalism, limited government, and a 28% top marginal rate.”

And again, in his response to his critics, he wrote of the managerial Davoisie liberalism option:
Keep in mind, this is the best case scenario. Which leaves open the larger questions raised in the prior essay that gave so many the vapors: how long could that possibly last? And what follows when it ends? The #NeverTrumpers don’t even attempt to answer the second because their implicit answer to the first is: forever. Who knew they were all closet Hegelians? Yet I’m called nuts for raising doubts.”

I don’t think history has ended, and it’s true that, most likely, nothing lasts forever. (In some ways, history seems to have restarted in this election cycle.) Eventually, I assume, the world will end. But I fear that the consequences of a permanent global managerial oligarchy are more fearsome than Decius allows. He is trying to make the best case: allow me to, briefly, make the worst.
Read More:

No comments:

Post a Comment