The
unflinching support for the EU and its institutions is not about
preventing European countries from becoming “Afghanistan.” Not
about preventing collapse. Not about the inconvenience of long lines
at passport control. It is about promoting an ideology, a specific
worldview, a vision for the way the world should work.
by
Michael Nevradakis
Part
6 - Discrediting the EU’s opponents
As I
conclude this piece, I find myself at a fascinating conference on
journalism and digital media taking place on the divided island of
Cyprus. Notably, Cyprus, just like the United Kingdom, is not yet
part of the Schengen Zone, which allows for passport- and visa-free
travel. This means long lines at passport control—the horror!
Interestingly enough, despite the U.K.’s having been exempted from
participation in the Schengen Zone, “freedom to travel” was one
of the arguments put forth to oppose “Brexit.”
But back to
the conference: I’ve attended fascinating panel discussions and
talks by brilliant academic colleagues from all across the world. But
there is one problem: the prevailing viewpoint seems openly in favor
of all of the institutions and beliefs that are shared by those who
could be described as proponents of neoliberalism: pro-EU,
anti-Brexit, vilification of the type of so-called “fake news”
(i.e., news that does not fit a globalist agenda) allegedly practiced
by outlets such as MintPress News, as well as heaps of shock and
horror at the election of Donald Trump in the United States. All of
this reflects prevailing viewpoints in the media, in the business
world, and in academia.
So, Trump
and Brexit. These electoral results have been blamed, sometimes in
their entirety, on racism and xenophobia and “nationalism” and
the ever-evil “populism.” But academia, and particularly the
liberal arts and humanities, for all of their lofty talk of
“interrogating hegemony,” do not question why populism is
successful, and whether there are factors other than poorly-informed
and racist voters taking advantage of democratic processes to,
believe it or not, vote for their preferred candidate!
Earlier, the
example of voters in Missouri counties that had previously voted
solidly in favor of Barack Obama but who supported Trump in last
year’s election, was used to question the idea that all voters who
perhaps supported “populism” or who wished to “make America
great again” were racists and xenophobes. Similarly, while the mass
media has heaped attention on the racist and xenophobic element of
the Brexit referendum result, left-wing campaigns for Brexit, such as
“Lexit” and “Left Leave” and prominent left-wing and
decidedly non-racist, non-xenophobic figures such as Tariq Ali, are
habitually ignored—by journalists, by the media, by academia. In
turn, any political development that contradicts the long march
towards further neoliberalism and globalism is conflated with the
likes of Donald Trump, Steve Bannon, Nigel Farage, and Marine Le Pen
among others.
What seems
increasingly apparent is that these aforementioned populist political
figures are being used—though not entirely incorrectly—as weapons
to discredit any policies that are not favorable to the neoliberal
status quo. What isn’t clear is whether this was the plan all along
— for the likes of Trump to be anointed for this purpose as a
real-life “manchurian candidate” and for the Brexit referendum to
take place smack in the midst of Europe’s refugee and migrant
crisis — or if it simply represents a strategic response by the
establishment to an inconvenient situation. But the disgust that has
accompanied some of the few actual positive developments of the Trump
presidency — such as the elimination of TPP and TTIP (also opposed
by Bernie Sanders amidst censorship), the types of “free trade”
agreements once vigorously opposed by progressive forces — perhaps
elucidates the true nature of opposition to “populism.”
One of the
end results of such a divisive and often extreme political climate is
the occurrence of horrible, unfortunate, and tragic events that
directly reflect this emerging polarization. The recent occurrence in
Charlottesville is a case in point. Once they have taken place, such
incidents — driven by extremists and pent-up anger on either side —
are further used as weapons to discredit any argument against the
prevailing political and economic order.
Source,
links:
Comments
Post a Comment