Neo Totalitarianism (4): Transnational Progressivism

Fjordman in his refutation "A Great Conversation" of what must have been devastating criticism from Helsinki University to his article "Communism for the 21st Century", brought us up to speed with the chilling 2001 article written by Hudson Institute Fellow John Fonte, "The Ideological War Within the West" in which Fonte foresees the emergence in a few decades hence, of an ideology described as Transnational Progressivism: "post-liberal democratic, and - in the American context, post-Constitutional and post-American ... a universal and modern world view that challenges both the liberal democratic nation-state in general and the American regime in particular."

He describes what I have termed till this day, a borderless, multi-ethnic and multicultural Empire without an Emperor, but ruled by a democratically unaccountable meritocracy. Hence I will take the liberty of adopting Fonte's term as an apt definition and description. Transnational progressivism involves the following:

- Instead of negative individual rights, the emphasis is on mostly, positive rights of unequal groups (racial, ethnic, gender), proportionate to their perceived inequality (see the Easter Egg series);

- The Marxist dichotomy of oppressor (the state, the majority) versus the oppressed (groups, immigrants) has lost nothing of its validity and is supreme;

- Group's proportionalism and representation across the board; no underrepresentation in institutions;

- Democracy means proportional power-sharing among groups (examples are today's trouble spots like Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Kosovo, and Iraq, and their political and democratic constructs). These are to take the place of traditional voting systems, as one man, one vote, majority rule, and plurality voting systems like first past the post or winner-takes-all;

- The values of important institutions (governmental and NGOs) must reflect the world perspectives of the minority groups, as opposed to the Western, white, male ethnocentric narrative that is currently taken as universally valid;

- Gradual deconstruction of national narratives: re-writing of history (a recent affair of the re-writing of a Greek history school book to conform with E.U. politically correct non-offensive requirements, comes to mind), abolishing of national symbols, and in time dismantling of national borders, sovereignty, and the national state;

- The promotion of world citizenship, as opposed to national citizenship: severance of the relation between place of birth and the national identity, between blood and soil, or in bogey Third Reich lingo "Blut und Boden" by postmodern messages about "people having boots, not roots!"; dual passports and analogous national loyalties are not perceived as a problem, the crime of treason being already somewhat of an anachronism.

- For the time being the concept of Transnationalism can be used as a tool: providing elites with both an empirical tool (a plausible analysis of what is) and an ideological framework (a vision of what should be).

Transnational Progressivism is basically the next step in global multiculturalism gone berserk, with radical subjectivism as its political ideology (read: the politically correct).

A characteristic of Progressivism is, that it is realized at a snail's pace (about E.U. speed), so that implementation is hardly noticed so as not to be too disturbing. It is a very long-term and gradual project. The dichotomy is steered away from globalism versus anti-globalism, to transnational versus international. For an example of this discourse, see this article on Eurozine.

According to Fonte, "Transnationalism is the next stage of the multicultural ideology. The argument to watch out for, is "that 'globalization requires some form of 'global governance' as the national state and the idea of national citizenship are are unable to deal with the global problems of the future.' The same scholars who touted multiculturalism now herald the coming transnational age."

Add to that the social, economical and monetary implications we will come to speak of in a later part of this series, and voila, Neo-totalitarianism! It's what you get if you allow the Left to lodge itself in all the strategic positions, decade after decade: all levels of teaching and education, liberal arts, humanities, journalism (which is seen as an extension of teaching), advisory boards, all levels of governmental institutions and non-governmental organizations, including the lumpen intelligentsia.

A good example of what transnationals see as wrong with the world are those straight lines in the sand that can be found in any place where history took place, but Africa is a case in point. Those straight borders are perceived as unnatural remnants of a colonial and imperialistic past, blamed for everything from drought and poverty, to tribal warfare and genocide. An example of how the map should look in the transnational view - how all continents ought to be, is shown in the second picture. As it happens this idea of geological order coincides very happily with the Islamist view of the Caliphate. In any case, the lines in the sand, or clay, are set to go into history's dustbin.

One last word about a matter which pops up regularly: the perceived hand of the corporate Right (which by the way is nowadays frequently the corporate Left) in the promotion of globalization and multiculturalism. It is argued that capitalism views people solely as a combination of a labour resource and a consumer market. Western culture is seen as imposed from the top down by global businesses on innocent nations around the globe. What is less often brought up, is that it is frequently Leftist government policies that force corporations to take their employment opportunities off-shore, where the optimum combination of best resources versus lowest overhead is available. Thank heaven that the raison d'être of businesses isn't global social engineering by way of the pay-roll, but the infamous bottom line, which is still the single source of economic wealth, that is so abhorred by nice Leftist people who wallow in materialism.

It seems suitable to wrap up this part of the series with remarks from John Fonte's article that "... in the twentieth century the Bolshevik Revolution, the National Socialist revolution, the New Deal, the Reagan Revolution, the Gaullist national reconstruction in France, and the creation of the E.U. were not inevitable, but were the result of the exercise of political will by elites."

In the same vein are the Musings by Maddocks on "Le Québécois Libre" on this same subject: "Just like 'diversity' and 'multiculturalism', transnationalism and global governance aren't the forces of history, but simply ideological tools advocated by the activist elites."

To the conceptual framework of international politics can be added a fourth dimension, as follows:

1. competition and conflict between nation-states (and the E.U. entity);
2. competition between civilizations;
3. democratic versus undemocratic;
4. conflict between liberal democracies and transnational progressivism.

A typical building bloc of transnational progressivism would be the proposed - for the time being semi autonomous - independent state of Kosovo in the European Balkan heartland, of which more in a separate post in this series.

Further reading on Transnational Progressivism by Ralph Maddocks on Le Québécois Libre: Part I and Part II.

~ To be continued ~