Why the Establishment (and the Left) is Failing So Hard Now

Why is the Establishment failing so hard at this moment of history, when it has been so successful for over seven decades?

In a nutshell, it is because in order to sustain itself thus far, deep into its run, it has needed to embrace and embody two basic propositions which are completely incompatible with each other, both logically and in practice.

The first notion, one that is at the philosophic core of all conservative Establishment-like systems over history, is that order is good, and that the larger the scale of the order, the better.  In a political sense, this is reflected in the love that liberals have not only for larger government, but for bigger scales of it. For example, the federal government is better than state government (which is dubious altogether in the case of ex-CSA states). But international government is better than national  government.

Higher virtue is considered to be found in scales of political organization that are trans-national and global in scope. Those within such organizations are considered to embody and act on higher values than those on lower rungs. The further up you go up in scale of internationalism, the greater the virtue of the participants.

This is because such participants are held to be more cosmopolitan in general (which is how liberals see themselves too---the intellectual, sophisticated ones that have transitioned beyond parochial limitations). They can see beyond the petty concerns of nation and ethnic group, etc, and thus they can act with empowered wisdom to make the world fair and just, if given the chance and opportunity.

Most liberals would have little problem with a plan that would transfer the sovereignty of all nations over to the United Nations, which is held in the highest esteem by them, in the way that Catholics once held the Pope. Many would no doubt welcome a U.N. invasion of America if it meant confiscation of guns and the end to antiquated "redneck rights."

The second notion, that is completely at odds with this, is the concept of constant social revolution driven by grassroots democracy. The traditional means by which the upper class has garnered the consent of the lower classes, since the middle of the 19th century, has been by some form of democratic socialism. "Let us run things, and we will give you part of the spoils, in a far that you will find fair. Just come to polls every so often and register your consent. We will arrange the rest."

This has worked well in many cases over the last century, and help keep much of Western Europe in a peasant-like mentality of society even in the midst of post-modern interconnected global village. The same families still run Europe as in ages past, so it has been undeniably successful.

But at this point, the rhetoric of constant social revolution is in overdrive. Under Obama, it has reached its apotheosis. The velocity cannot be increased to any higher rate, it seems, and moreover the entire concept of constant social revolution is itself a disruptive and destructive force which is now working against the Establishment, even by people who would seem to embrace it. It was fine when confined to certain segments of society (e.g. complete destruction of the black communities in America since 1965), but now it is eating into the very core of the Establishment itself. Hillary Clinton's ongoing campaign to win over the hearts and minds of Bernie Sanders supporters is the latest obvious example of this. The sheepdogging process doesn't work as well as it used to. Many Bernie supporters, especially the younger ones who are not "Party Democrats," don't like the taste of the Establishment bit in their mouth. They rebel at feeling the lash of Hillary's whip on their hide to pull her sleigh to victory, in the same old way as before. They believed she was to be fought against, not for. The Establishment (and Left) is reduced to inflating Donald Trump into cartoon proportions of evil in order to force them in line. But the enthusiasm is not there, and it simply won't be, now matter how hard they harangue.

Liberals of my generation and older have no problem adjusting to this slog, because we are "Party Democrats" and like Order. We were told to distrust revolution as being something that hippies do. We are flower children at heart, but not hippies in practice. Folks just a bit younger than Generation X, however, won't go along so easily.  They weren't raised on Family Ties. Even Bush is a dim memory for them. For a lot of them, the Democratic Party is the Establishment, just as it was in the days of Hubert Humphrey and Lyndon Johnson, who conned the country into a bloody war that cost millions of people their lives in Southeast Asia. Older Democrats can forgive all that, but the younger ones see it all differently.

As for the E.U., a year ago, Angela Merkel was leading a cadre of international bankers that were all but wiping out the sovereignty of Greece and turning it into a debt colony, where the future generations of the country will have their wealth harvested to satisfy the demands of the German Central Bank which is unwilling to take a haircut on the ruinous, speculative debt that they pushed on the Greek Parliament. Watching the negotiations over this was like watching tanks roll up to the edge Athens. It was disgusting. How anyone who believes in social justice could walk away thinking Merkel was anything but a apparatchik thug is beyond me.

Now the Euro-liberals are fainting over the end of the E.U. like it is the disbanding of their Church, with the racist barbarians sacking the Order they love.

"Workers of the world, and oppressed peoples of the world, unite to support the existing Order and international system which is bringing you social justice and the reasonable rate at which you should  expect, within the stable confines of the existing global system! Build the revolution by solidifying what already is!"

Whether it was good or bad or both, the Establishment as we know it is cooked. It was bound to fail. The miracle was that it lasted as long as it did. As I've said before, personally I think the Establishment was a highly successful project, as far as historical systems go, whether it was good or evil, etc. It was so successful that no one thought it could end, and yet it is. So folks are losing their minds, because they can't see what could be beyond it, other than horrible chaos.

Nevertheless fans of Order can be assured: something new will come along. It always does.