New horizons of change are opening in the United States, driven by an Indian-Ugandan Muslim democratic socialist who is positioning himself as the leading favorite to win the mayoralty of none other than the most emblematic city of New York, after winning the Democratic primaries—the city (and state) being effectively a one-party system.
This is a terrible event for all those who cherish what remains in the United States of Western civilization and the European legacy, since this candidate, seemingly on the verge of victory in the coming days, has based his campaign—as Democrats always do (and often Republicans as well)—on attacking everything they perceive as superior, simply out of identification with ugliness and an overwhelming desire to destroy all that is beautiful and synonymous with order.
But the victory of this semi-communist candidate would be much worse in itself, because it would set a precedent that there is another way to do politics, that there exists another Democratic Party—much more radical, anti-white, fanatically red, and far more ambitious in its works of social engineering and reform of traditional American society. Just by looking at the trends, it’s clear the level of resonance he’s having among American citizens, making it evident that there is an alternative—even one decidedly more progressive than the Democratic establishment—capable of decisively shifting the ideological coordinates of American politics to the left in reaction, what is more commonly known as the Overton window.
There’s something even more worrying: he’s giving hope to the masses—offering the vision of a better world with more opportunities and multiple free services, and showing a new path forward through this series of populist policies. This comes precisely at a moment of momentum for the American right and a broad retreat of all “woke” and politically correct policies. Yet this abrupt entry onto the scene of the radical left could turn the entire board upside down, potentially curving, decelerating, or even halting completely the right’s momentum—something undoubtedly terrible.
He has in his favor that his movement is new and thus relatively unknown in American politics, making it easy to attract followers. Even more dangerously, he can restore people’s faith in the system—and it’s clear that the right’s current momentum is largely due to a widespread climate of frustration and despair, which drives people outside the establishment and familiar positions, opening them up to alternative discourses and even normalizing extremist viewpoints.
That’s why it’s vital not to lose this momentum and to extinguish any spark of hope that might arise on the left. In a broken system like America’s, promises of social reform can be very enticing to masses of citizens—especially in an environment of political discredit like the one we live in. Zohran could become the great voice of opposition to conservative policies from the mayor’s office in New York, serving as a platform to establish himself as the people’s voice, someone different and with his own momentum. This could partially paralyze the radicalism and progress of conservative ideas within the American movement, potentially opening a new front on the left that hasn’t yet fallen into disrepute—and which could steal the most precious element of the MAGA movement: the promise of a better future and the ability to keep the flame of hope alive.
And for that, he’ll count on enormous human, financial, and academic capital—so characteristic of American progressive movements. Great care must be taken in the next steps the conservative movement takes from now on in relation to its policies—not redefining them, but affirming and deepening them, while trying to neutralize Zohran without in any way turning him into a political martyr.
We must not forget the large number of votes Trump won among former Sanders voters, and how frustration, the desire for change, illusions, and primal emotions resonate without an echo of rationality in a great number of American voters.
I don’t think this is by any means a decisive event or one that will necessarily have a definitive impact, but we must try to minimize this risk before it spreads—and above all, neutralize it culturally and ideologically among politically healthy average Americans. Under no circumstances should any portion of the citizens’ frustration with a broken system be channeled by radical left-wing movements instead of continuing to fuel the ideological progression and purification of the Right.
I believe that the hope for an era of prosperity and improved social rights could lead to a tremendous and worrying demobilization of the right and a massive shift of apolitical, desperate, or emotionally driven voters (a large and invaluable segment). The image of a candidate “fighting with us against the elites” could transform the priorities of the political debate—shifting them away from issues like immigration, loss of identity, traditional family, and job displacement toward themes related to these emerging social improvements. This would put at serious risk even the victory of the current moderate conservatism in the war of ideas, greatly compromising the cultural battle.
And indeed, the threat of the far left could stop all of this, stripping the conservative movement of its originality and momentum, making moderation and unconditional support for the establishment the only appealing options against the chaos of radicalism. This would generate a moderation and loss of substance in the conservative movement—right at the precise moment when something is finally being done to change, for the better, from within the disappointing and corrupt conservative ideological framework.
Añadir comentario
Comentarios