Are Politics and Metapolitics No Longer Mainly About Conservatism Versus Liberalism?

Some thinkers say yes. I say, in one sense, yes. In another sense, no.

Starting around 1970, the New Left, having failed in their 1960’s attempt to seize open power through Revolution, shifted to the strategy of completing the takeover of institutions by leftist thinking through the use of legal and incremental means. This takeover had started in the Nineteenth Century, but it kicked into high gear when the Left began their modern campaign.

Like the proverb of the frog whose water temperature jumps suddenly, this move of the left inaugurated the era of open political battle between leftists seeking to conquer society by instituting leftist laws / rules and installing leftist officials, and conservatives seeking (often halfheartedly) to block leftism. The dominant paradigm of political warfare consisted of rival candidates seeking elected office, rival legislative factions seeking to pass or block laws, and citizens opposing or supporting laws (at the governmental level) or regulations (at the private sector level), all of which involved masses of voters or constituents exerting force by collective action.

In short, it was political war using the traditional means of American politics. It was left versus right in the sense that the revolutionaries were fighting for leftist causes, and their strongest opponents were conservative idealists who rejected basic leftist doctrines.

(Many conservatives were, and are, opportunists who only opposed the left when it was advantageous to do so.)

But that era is over. The left won. They gained total control of the most important means of governance and social control. Leftist thought totally dominates the legitimate and mainstream means of controlling society, and those who reject leftist doctrines at the root are officially outlaws.

Therefore in one sense politics is no longer about conservatism versus liberalism. The political (and metapolitical) battles that matter most now are paganism versus Christianity, globalism versus nationalism, Big Brother versus organic society, Big Tech versus freedom, Alphabet People versus normal people, and so on. The old liberalism-vs-conservatism paradigm of political conflict is dead.

But in another sense, politics and metapolitics (concerning the deep human forces and conditions which are the ultimate source of the political structure of society) continue to be about left versus right, for liberalism is still the worldview of the enemies of traditional Western society.

Like the pagans, the left rejects Christianity. Like the globalists, liberalism opposes nationalism and wants world government. Like Big Tech, liberalism wants to control people in order to assure the right outcomes. Like the Alphabet People, liberalism opposes traditional sexual doctrine. Like Big Brother (the modern administrative apparatus of control), liberalism does not trust normal people to live their lives properly. Liberalism is the worldview of our enemies.

So political conflict still involves liberal versus conservative. But it’s harder to distinguish between the two because liberalism has spread out from its ancestral homelands in the colleges, unions and fringe political parties, and colonized most of the social world. When Monopoly Man, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Sportsball and even most Republican bigshots are woke, we’re a long way from Kansas.

4 thoughts on “Are Politics and Metapolitics No Longer Mainly About Conservatism Versus Liberalism?

  1. “Many who before regarded legislation on the subject as chimerical, will now fancy that it is only dangerous, or perhaps not more than difficult. And so in time it will come to be looked on as among the things possible, then among the things probable;—and so at last it will be ranged in the list of those few measures which the country requires as being absolutely needed. That is the way in which public opinion is made.”

    “It is no loss of time,” said Phineas, “to have taken the first great step in making it.”

    “The first great step was taken long ago,” said Mr. Monk,—”taken by men who were looked upon as revolutionary demagogues, almost as traitors, because they took it. But it is a great thing to take any step that leads us onwards.” (Phineas Finn, Anthony Trollope (1868))

  2. I expected E. Michael Jones to be mentioned somewhere in the OP due to the use of the term “Logos”.

    He’s an old-timer Traditionalist Catholic who always uses that term, every single chance he gets.

    I’m sure Orthosphere readers would enjoy his Red Ice Radio interviews.


Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.