In The Inheritors, his 1955 follow-up to The Lord the Flies, William Golding masterfully and disturbingly paints a picture of a world on the very eve of its dissolution. The main characters, who it is obliquely implied are the last of their species, are a band of neanderthals who find themselves swept away by the coming of a new dawn – the arrival of homo sapiens. A fresh reality – one that encompasses both a higher culture and greater savagery than they can possibly imagine – is on the cusp of emergence, and nothing will be the same again.
Our times have taken on something of that aspect. The world which most of us grew up in – the world of agreeing to disagree, of reasoned debate, of ‘It’s a free country’, of mutual respect and civility – is disappearing. All manner of disconcerting opportunities seem to be arising in its stead. And the process of replacement threatens to be quite rapid. “How do you lose your civilisation?” as Hemingway might have asked. “Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.”
The threatened cancellation of NatCon 2024 by various mayors in Brussels provides quite a stark illustration of the suddenness with which things are now moving. A decade or so ago (I am tempted even to say even five years ago) it would have been basically inconceivable to imagine that people spouting mainstream, fairly anodyne right-of-centre policy positions (the family is a good thing, marriage is a good thing, immigration should not be a complete free-for-all, religion is worthy of respect) would be being characterised as too dangerous to be allowed to speak in public. Yet now here we are: various public authorities in a European capital – admittedly quite an oddball, sui generis place – trying to shut down what is in the end a fairly humdrum opportunity for traditional conservatives to vent for a day or two together about the world going to the dogs before traipsing home again with a bad hangover. NatCon is many things (I was at the London one last year as an observer), but it is certainly not a forum for plotting by nefarious far-right conspirators bent on the restoration of 1930s style fascism. Yet we appear to have come to a position at which mainstream politicians are not actually able to tell the difference between one thing and the other – or at least have so little respect for the concept of civil discourse that flagrant mischaracterisation of the views of one’s opposition is considered a legitimate tactic for political victory.
There are I think four observations to be made about the whole affair.
The first is the marked insecurity and even frailty of the people that Matt Goodwin has aptly labelled the ‘new elite’. People who have the courage of their convictions, and who are confident that they are in the right, don’t particularly worry about people disagreeing, and don’t feel the need to shut down debate – indeed, they welcome it. For all that our public sphere is characterised by strict adherence to orthodoxy, then, it is obvious that that orthodoxy rests on very shallow foundations.
The second, related observation is that politics is becoming oppositional, and it is not difficult to see why. In a society in which people feel themselves to be bonded together by pre-political loyalty (to the nation, a religion, shared values, etc.) they make the effort to accept differences of opinion and rub along. But people across much of the West no longer live in such societies. Instead, they choose their loyalties precisely on the basis of political ideals which in many senses span borders – ironically, this is true both of what people call the ‘woke’ Left and the NatCon-style dissident Right (which insists on a kind of international nationalism). The result is that people no longer seem to want to rub along, but to crush their political enemies. Belgian mayors, then, don’t want to agree to disagree with anyone. They want to stamp NatCon out.
The third is the irony of the disjuncture between the sheer scale of ambition evident in the claims that our governments typically nowadays make (that they can save us from disease and from climate change, that they can alleviate poverty, that they can make us healthier, that they can decide what is true and what is not, etc.), and the vapidity and incompetence of the actual human beings who are engaged in the practice of government. What on Earth were these Belgian mayors thinking? If they had wanted NatCon 2024 to fail, the best thing to do would have been to politely ignore it, and thereby turn it into a damp squib. Instead, through their hamfisted efforts to cancel it, they have given the event, and the nascent movement surrounding it, a veritable bank vault’s worth of free publicity. Not only that, but it is free publicity which precisely vindicates a significant chapter in the entire narrative told by that movement, which is that ‘woke’ technocrats are trying to crush free speech. How profoundly stupid. (Indeed, one has to wonder whether the decision to host the event in Brussels was not a bit of a masterstroke by NatCon’s organisers in light of what has happened.)
The fourth and final thing to observe is that this is all getting dangerous. The picture that emerges is one of an incipient hegemony, which is increasingly intolerant of opposition, but which is at the same time very brittle, subject to bouts of histrionics, and not very competent or capable of thinking things through. Does that sound to you like a recipe for good, calm, strategically sensible government? It doesn’t to me. Rather, it sounds like all of the ingredients are present for a period of serious and sustained political instability. Buckle your seatbelts, then – it’s going to be an exciting ride.
Dr. David McGrogan is an Associate Professor of Law at Northumbria Law School. You can subscribe to his Substack – News From Uncibal – here.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Yawn.
Is James Delingpole really a young earth creationist? I know he is nuts but surely not so blatantly nuts?
Not that nuts no. He doesn’t believe in the religion of Darwin and shit happens – a sure sign of mental deficiency.
It is one thing not to believe in evolution but young earth? That requires some pretty dramatic denial of basic science.
My opinion is that he is actually pig-shit thick and has only risen to his level of mediocrity through neoptism.
I’ve never seen convincing explanations of why it should matter to the British people which towns they’ve never heard of are ruled from Kiev and which from Moscow, or why the USA and its lackey states are so desperate for a Ukrainian victory.
You could have said much the same about Poland in 1939 except you substitute Warsaw and Berlin.
It could but it would be a grossly unbalanced response.
Exactly. And we went to war to stop Poland being ruled by an evil dictator in a totalitarian regime, and after 5 years of blood, guts, destruction, death, and bankruptcy we won the war so that Poland could be ruled by an evil dictator in a totalitarian regime.
Are you saying we should not have intervened in 1939?
…because it has nothing to do with Ukraine in reality..that’s why they’ll let every Ukrainian die without a second thought…as they are doing…Ukraine is just the ‘fist’ they use to try to punch Russia…
It’s mainly about the economic rise of the actual majority of the world’s population, and the countries they inhabit…China India Brazil..the Global south… and the fact that the, by far, biggest resource rich country, Russia, is the ‘engine’ that will power them…
This article..which personally I think shows just how mis-guided the US is about Russia, does explain your ‘why’…..but as Ukraine cannot defeat Russia without NATO assistance..I suppose it depends on how crazy the USA are, and how far they are willing to go to achieve their aims…I don’t think they care if Europe is wrecked in the process either…
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/russian-federation/treacherous-path-better-russia
“Ukraine cannot defeat Russia without NATO assistance”?? I think you’ll find that Russia is doing a good job of defeating NATO and killing off the EU. All for having to stop NATO naked expansionism. Oh well, the West wasn’t invited to the 130-country St Petersburg Economic Conference this week. It’s about time the oligarchs controlling the West had some opposition from populists.
I’d be interested in watching that debate.
There are many more able debaters than James to represent his viewpoint. James has a hissy fit when the argument isn’t going his way.
Me too
The one that featured (among others) Hitchens and Kisin was interesting
Yes, let’s have a debate. Let’s find out if Ukraine is a money laundering opportunity for the Biden family and a bio weapons manufacturing facility for western interests and whatever has been going on in that country while we’re at it. The MSM isn’t telling us.
Last sentenced should read, ‘….and whatever else has been going on in that country while we’re at it, that the MSM aren’t telling us’.
I can’t find the edit button!
There is a time out for the Edit button to be available. Move your mouse cursor over the bottom right of the post and it will be found. A gear icon icon line with the comment votes. Yes, kludgy.
The ‘Edit’ sometimes refuses to appear.
Thanks
Either sentence works fine because the MSM certainly hadn’t been telling us what has been going on about anything, anywhere.
True
Correct. Well said.
Cripes, this is some ”accounting error”!
”The Pentagon said Tuesday that it overestimated the value of the weapons it has sent to Ukraine by $6.2 billion over the past two years — about double early estimates — resulting in a surplus that will be used for future security packages.
Pentagon spokeswoman Sabrina Singh said a detailed review of the accounting error found that the military services used replacement costs rather than the book value of equipment that was pulled from Pentagon stocks and sent to Ukraine. She said final calculations show there was an error of $3.6 billion in the current fiscal year and $2.6 billion in the 2022 fiscal year, which ended last Sept. 30.”
https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2023/06/20/pentagon-error-provides-extra-62-billion-for-ukraine-military-aid/
They have spare debt to spend? It reminds me of the joke about the miser’s kid who was beaten for running home behind the bus to save a shilling, when (his Dad said) he should have run home behind a taxi and saved a fiver.
Well, your own ad hominem debating style will hardly advance the cause of truth. I would invite you to address the issues raised in the Redacted video I posted yesterday: https://youtu.be/myRW5CV6Rck
Ah, the old “thwarted the peace deal” stuff again. I dealt with some of that previously (although I don’t recall where — possibly in the comments to an article).
That’s a telling remark. Because you have somehow ‘dealt with’ the peace deal issue somewhere (but you can’t remember where) you write any further discussion off. Not worthy of The Daily Sceptic. This casual dismissal closely parallels your ad hominem style.
Well, actually, any movement towards peace talks seems to be thwarted. Different sides may not agree on the actual starting place but if peace is to be sought, there must be a start. From there, it is a case of exploring the possibilities. Now it seems that no one wants to listen to anyone else and that everything must be exactly as it was in January 2022. That is not realistic.
https://bnn.network/world/austria/ogb-cancels-controversial-vienna-peace-summit-for-ukraine-amid-outrage-and-concerns/
The Biden family can’t afford peace….
Oh well, that is OK if YOU have dealt with it. I bow to your omniscience.
Bankrolling Ukraine and shipping more and more increasingly sophisticated weaponry holding out the promise that they could win isn’t exactly encouraging negotiation. Deal with that.
The odd thing about James’s contribution to the Ukraine discussion was when, finally stung into a response, he questioned whether Toby would want his sons going to fight in Ukraine…. in the event Toby said he’d like them to go there on humanitarian missions.
Still, the point was, that James had one or two arguments to deploy but it took a lot of jabbing by Toby to bring them out.
Good luck with the debate, as James’s infamous appearance on This Week demonstrated, he doesn’t really do rational debate, but remains hugely entertaining among friends.
L Rons Hubbard is a Uketopian apologist – what is there to debate?
US has been staging coups in the Uketopia since 2004. It murdered 15000 Russians in the east in 2014. It broke the Minsk accords. It has 30 biolabs. It money launders millions via the Uketopia. It has weapons pointed across its Uketopian satellite at Russia. It is using its 51rst state to fight a war against Russia and kill innocents in the process.
Are the Russians blameless? Probably not.
But let’s flip it and have the Russians doing the above in say Mexico. If that happened the criminal US would bomb the shit out of Mexico top to bottom, left to right, all to protect ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’ ie stolen elections, a totalitarian state and scamdemics.
What L Rons and others can’t understand is that the US is a criminal enterprise and a failed tottering diseased empire. The US, not Russia, is the problem.
Well said.
Debate by all means but you will only really get to waggle your ego about as both are fairly intractable positions that I doubt very much anyone will shift from.
I would say that the lack of any move towards a peace deal is highly telling though. In years gone past, pursuing the path of peace was a civilised approach to limiting conflict. Now it seems that a ‘civilised’ approach to dealing with conflict is to do the exact opposite. To ramp it up and send in increasingly heavy weaponry and risk the use of nuclear weapons. I don’t trust Zelensky. He’s a failed comedian and an actor. The way he pops up – always dressed in olive green as if he personally is on the front line – and speaks to big stages and gatherings and sports events and the way that actors and failed politicians make their way to do homage to him speaks of theatre. It feels wrong and false. Also, I’m sick of seeing the Ukrainian flag flying from church steeples and council offices.
I don’t doubt there are many ordinary Ukrainians caught up in the lies and subterfuge of their own government and who are now dying on battlefields in their hundreds and thousands. Just as happens in most wars. Who benefits? The arms industry, private contractors, security consultants, bankers and all the others who feed on such conflicts. I’m no Putin apologist, he is no saint and is guilty of many crimes, but it wasn’t him pushing NATO membership beyond the boundaries of an agreed treaty nor was it him shelling ethnic Russians in the Donbas region or staging a coup against a democratically elected President.
Christ, what a disgrace this puppet PM is!
‘I’m proud that today we’re announcing a multi year commitment to support Ukraine’s economy – over 3 years we will provide loan guarantees worth $3 billion.’
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak speaks at the Ukraine Recovery Conference as he pledges £2.35 billion in loan guarantees.”
https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1671437495417049089
He seems to have missed the fact that Russia is already rebuilding the bits of Ukraine that are now Russian. They appear to be doing a great job in Mariupol.
Why is Britain still in NATO? Debate.
Because vassal states do not secede without bloodshed.
It’s no longer possible to have a useful debate simply about the rights and wrongs of the Ukraine conflict, which has brought into focus far wider questions … the recent history of NATO and the West in the Middle East, Libya, et al … EU empire-building … the role of the Military Industrial Complex … American decay and the corruption of Western democracy … and many more. It’s difficult to imagine Mr. Rons’ abrasive style would add much to our collective understanding.
…I agree…the expansion of NATO, and the encircling of both Russia and China with the bases of their self-proclaimed enemy..the USA…cannot be ignored in a reasoned debate..but is always ignored….
James’s intolerance and lack of civility is concerning. He seems to leap to a conclusion just for the hell of it then lazily doubles down on it when questioned. This came up for me in connection with his claimed Christianity where he seems to want to redefine even basic Christian doctrine to suit his own whims. When I politely pointed this out on his Telegram channel he simply told me to eff off then got angry when I congratulated him on his charm! I’ve since heard of others having similar responses on different topics.
Think you should get the boys from UK Column involved together with Vanessa Beeley and David Clues. Should make for an interesting conversation. Might even make you think again Mr Rons.
Oh and Peter Ford now there’s a man that knows exactly what’s happening.
Give it a rest Ian.
It would be pointless debating with James Dellingpole as he is far too eccentric and a religious fanatic to have any cogent views on an important subject like Ukraine.
James Delingpole, like many Conspiracy Theorists, is far too thin skinned.
I started following him on Telegram and I made one polite comment about agreeing with him that Covid was a scam BUT showing that viruses exist and he blocked me.
I love a good conspiracy.
I supported David Icke for 20 years, bought most of his books, paid a monthly subscription to him, watched him live at Wembley for 10 hours and donated money to his TV project The Peoples Voice.
For about 6 months, I politely debated with people on his forum about Covid being a scam and that the extreme view that viruses do not exist was harming the sceptics fight against the scam.
And one of his administrators, Grumpy Owl, blocked me.
Years ago having been “moderated” by The Guardian for my “below the line” sceptical comments I was one of the first to follow OffGuardian. Two years ago I politely agreed with them that Covid was a scam but SARS-CoV-2, like other viruses, does indeed exist.
One of their administrators, Sophie2, blocked me.
It seems that if you do not agree 100% with these “Conspiracy Theorists” on every subject then they ban you from any sort of debate.
If they were so convinced of their positions you would have thought they would welcome a healthy debate.
It seems they don’t believe in “free speech”.
There are many other people to debate without resorting to those with extreme views just because they have a large following of like minded people who also hold fringe views.
James refuses to debate the Ukraine war because his point is that truth does not work against a narrative. Climate change. Covid. The creators of the narrative are activists who are not interested in the truth, while public opinion simply assumes that all those people can’t be wrong.
And if ever there was a narrative, it is the Ukraine. Look who’s back. Yes it’s the whole gang who brought you the Iraq war and the Beeb annd the Brexit blockers too. The crisis came from nowhere and overnight factories started churning out Ukrainian flags and the name Kiev was declared incorrect. The Blob is at work, and there is no point debating the Blob.
“Never argue with a fool in public lest the public not know which is which.” Unattributed.
I’ll stick to the professional opinions of Major Scott Ritter and Colonel Douglas MacArthur thank you. Both American patriots through and through, but with a deep knowledge of history and a critical appraisal of a wide range of news sources.
*Macgregor