In a somewhat hysterical leading article today (14 November
2016), The Times claims that “a surge in support for populist and nativist
movements threatens the prosperity, values and collective security of the West.” It is argued that the common ground of these
movements is a revolt against openness and integration. Quite so, and what the article shows is that
the introverted pursuit of “liberal values” by the governing classes in
Washington and Brussels is precisely what is fuelling the revolt but they, for
they are surely all in it together, just don’t get it!
Only the economically illiterate would dispute the benefits
to global prosperity brought about by free trade. But globalised trade requires globalised
labour mobility. In the human hierarchy
of needs liberal values and being nice to other people only feature at the top
of the pyramid, long after the fundamentals of safety and security have been
satisfied. The trouble is, our
technocratic ruling elite are comfortable in their general security needs and,
apparently, blind to that deficiency in others.
Worse, their empirical world of evidence-based argument is always ready
with a supporting answer which usually boils down to a patronising “we know
best.” We all know, from a succession of
expert forecasting blunders, that “they” seldom know best. Indeed, expert predictions are not,
necessarily, inevitabilities. Who would
have given the British Empire a chance in 1940 – only those with a faith in
human spirit to overcome and shape our own destiny? The same argument should be
deployed against the seemingly endless stream of data designed to undermine our
exit from the EU and foment mischief about our commitment to collective defence.
To say, patronisingly, that “there is much that democratic
governments need to do to alleviate the inequalities that have given plausibility
to nationalism and nativism,” is to state the blindingly obvious but to
recommend that “democratic movements have an obligation to face down what is
happening to Western societies,” is Orwellian indeed.
The Times and others wringing their hands over the rebuff to
their cosy authority should recognise the human needs for family, security and,
yes, nationhood otherwise that, indeed, will be a mistake of grievous
consequences.
No comments:
Post a Comment