Status Updates From The Collapse of Global Libe...

Liberal military doctrine, as we have seen earlier in the book, is a mess. It conceives of warfare as some sort of march of progress rather than what it actually is: a clash of blood and steel. In their desire to impose their progress heuristic onto everything in existence, liberals have even tried to rationalize the mass killing of human beings.

Religion is, on a sociological level at least, a system of social hierarchy;
religions are sets of ideas that impose hierarchies — moral, social, even political — on societies. Religions order societies. In this sense, liberalism
must be opposed to religion at the most fundamental level

There is no final mythical telos we eventually
arrive at where the world is in, as Kant put it, ‘perpetual peace’. In fact, trying to achieve such an ideological perpetual peace will likely only
result in increased violence as men try to force this unnatural state of affairs on the world

It is all well and good to deploy liberal nostrums when they suit the goals of a given state, but at a certain point the believing liberals who take the
ideology seriously start to push the ideology itself as their main goal and try to subordinate the interests of the state to it. Liberal ideology,
when deployed in foreign affairs, is dangerous medicine; drink too much and you might become intoxicated.

Sixty three percent of homeless people have
substance abuse problems, which largely overlap with the major psychiatric disorders as severely mentally ill people who stop taking their
medication often self-medicate with drugs and alcohol. This should be obvious to anyone who has visited a major city. But we politely ignore it. Why?
Arguably because of how shameful this product of late liberal ideology is.

Because their ideology is based on total equality, liberals think of human beings as interchangeable. For this reason, they cannot see why importing large numbers of people from other
cultures might be politically and socially destabilizing. But just because liberals were ideologically blind to political and social challenges to mass migration did not mean that these challenges failed to make themselves
felt

recognize liberalism for what it is: not just a highly dysfunctional social system that leads to population collapse, but also a levelling ideology that reduces moral scruples and transports humanity back to barbarism back to a state of
nature. There is no progress in liberalism. This is merely a conceit on the part of the liberal ideologues

Liberalism rests on the idea of equality. Replacing normal interpersonal relationships with contracts is premised on the idea that people can compete for these contracts on the basis that they are equal. But the reality is that equality does not exist in most spheres, and in the sphere of interpersonal
sexual relationships the inequality is extremely obvious: some people are just more attractive than others

Liberalism is forming broken, atomized people who are unable to pass on their genes to a future generation — arguably the most basic function of any biological entity. It is obvious to anyone living in liberal societies what is causing this: the liberal
lifestyle being offered to young people. Late liberal society actively encourages young people to focus on themselves, their careers and their consumption

High-cost, high-tech, low-quantity military equipment is not an asset on the post-liberal
battlefield; it is a liability.

this sort of idea betrays implicit liberal assumptions about markets and their functioning;
after all, if a product is more expensive than its competitor it must be of higher quality. Yet since military equipment is so rarely tested against
a peer competitor on the battlefield, there is no reason to think that this is the case — which is another way of saying that the market for
military equipment is not ...

Liberalism is an ideology with a perpetually Whiggish outlook. ‘Progress’ is the liberal watchword par excellence. Progress, progress, progress — always progress. Liberalism lives
progress, it breathes progress. From progress in social mores to progress in economic growth to progress in technology. Progress for the liberal
is always and everywhere a good thing

liberal Westerners: the rest of the world is simply backward and needs to be shown the path to late liberalism by those who are more enlightened than they. It is remarkable to note that, in the dying days of late liberal culture, when most civilized people could see that it was utterly dilapidated and degenerate, the final liberal imperialist move was to chastise the rest of the world

The ultimate irony of the coming decades may
be that the Western liberals of the 1990s got it wholly backwards: rather than Western-led globalization spreading liberalism all over the world, it may well have paved the way for a new illiberal model of global governance emerging on the world stage out of the Asia-Pacific region. This is the strange dialectic of liberalism and illiberalism that we see playing out

liberalism is its own worst enemy because at a very basic level it is not rational. Like all revolutionary ideologies liberalism has an inherent
blindness: in its zeal to spread itself, it tends to overextend itself. Those who govern in a non-ideological way — which is another way of saying that they govern in line with the natural law tend to link actions to outcomes.

While liberalism is not a doctrine
that evolves linearly, it certainly is one that, given sufficient leeway, will revert to its ‘hard’ form wherever it is allowed. The story of the second half of the twentieth century is the story of the transition from a society that rested on an ill-defined soft liberalism to one that is, at the time of writing, almost totally colonized by hard liberalism

two core ideas into the liberal universe: atomized self-interest and competition

the question is how far these sorts of relationship should be allowed to encompass all social
relations. Reading Smith’s The Wealth of Nations one does not get the sense that the author is what we would today call a ‘radical libertarian’.

The only real continuity we find throughout
this history of liberalism is that similar language is used to justify whatever is in fashion at any given time. Liberalism is, at the end of the day, whatever liberalism says it is at any given moment in time — and the only thing it is certain of is that whatever liberalism is at that moment in time is morally correct and representative of Progress.

liberals will try to pretend that they do in fact have standards for moral values or judgements. For example, they might say that it is ‘good’ to maximize individual autonomy or to
structure relationships based on their conception of ‘consent’. But these are not actually moral judgements — that is, judgements of the right or
wrong of any given action but procedural judgements, and in that sense they are vacuous

But in recent years it has started to dawn on liberals that their project might not be accepted in the rest of the world. Their response to this has been a collapse into inward-looking paranoia and, increasingly, a desire to inflict violence on others (both foreign and domestic) who look like they will not accept the global liberal programme. This is a sign of the impending collapse of that programme

Fascism is the result of a society that has
rapidly lost its natural hierarchies through liberal erosion; it reasserts these hierarchies in a truly arbitrary way, typically appealing to an entirely
artificial constructed mythology and ideology

These attacks encompassed everything from the
loosening of divorce law and the normalization of divorce to the debates around state childcare children being an awkward problem for liberals
who want to reduce all human relationships to contractual ones.

The 1848 revolutions started as attempts to overturn monarchies and replace them with nation states, but they quickly developed into demands for freedom of the press and economic rights for workers. It was directly out of this essentially
liberal series of revolutions that communism developed. This was a logical development
because liberalism is effectively an attack on hierarchical structures

hypothesis of the book is that, much like communist regimes, liberal regimes are unnatural
and will lead a country into severe dysfunction. The fact that Russia. for instance, had far more success as a state when it stopped imposing liberal ideology is a testament to this, as is the
fact that China’s mixed economy is proving to be one of the most impressive in world history