2024 Election, Nationalist Theory, Political Reform, Politics

YOUR 2024 American Nationalist Voting Index

Americans have experienced a lifetime of political change in the last two months. During this period, we saw

  • the sad display of a president’s debilitation in a public debate, leading to his sudden withdrawal from the race;
  • the attempted assassination of the incumbent president’s opponent,
  • the coronation of a new major presidential candidate with little input from its party’s base,
  • and the withdrawal of a credible independent candidate and his endorsement of the major challenger.

All were sometimes justified under the rubric of preserving democracy, but in the end, were simply political maneuvers. The process of honest debate about the issues facing the average American that is the essence of democracy was lost among this round of political cynicism.

As we approach the election, it is time to re-focus on the issues rather than the horse race the media likes to cover. Thus, I will be reprising the American Nationalist Voting Index applying TR’s philosophy to the issues of this election beginning in September.  As in 2020, it will score the candidates on a spectrum ranging from +3 to -3.  A positive score indicates a nationalist position while a negative score will indicate a globalist position.  As before, it will cover the following categories:

  • Draining the Swamp (political reform)
  • Foreign Policy
  • The Square Deal
  • Conservation and the Environment
  • A Strong America
  • Political Philosophy (a new category)
  • Character
  • Final Score

Each article will begin with a summary of TR’s philosophy on the subject and then rate the candidates on issues within that category.  If you would like to see how the index worked in 2020, please click on the home page at  www.newnationalism.com , then click on the “Politics” header on the top and then the “2020 Election” topic in the drop-down menu.

Here’s where you can be a part of this effort. While this year’s index will (unfortunately) cover most of the same issues covered in 2020, please let me know of any issue you believe should be included in this year’s index.  You can post it in the comments to this article or send an e-mail to editor@newnationalism.com, THEN receive future editions of the index by subscribing to this website (see below). Finally, please share with all of your friends so we can spread the message to like-minded fellow Americans.

 I look to forward to your input. Together, we can defy the doomsayers and build the scope of the rifle necessary to hit the bullseye of a progressive nationalist presidency in this election as close as possible.

2024 Election, Nationalist Theory, Politics

The Realignment Continues

President Biden’s withdrawal from the 2024 election caps a distinguished career in public service sadly marred by the circumstances of its end. Conspiracy theories have swirled around the events of the last month since his disastrous debate with former President Trump. However, Biden’s speech to the nation last week on his decision may hold the key to understanding it and the impact on future American politics.

In his speech, the President claimed that he was physically and mentally capable of campaigning in the upcoming election and serving a full four-year term. He justified his withdrawal on the basis that it was “time to pass the torch to a new generation”. However, he could (and should) have reached the same conclusion last year before the primary season. What changed between then and now? 

The Israel-Hamas war is what changed. It laid bare the fissures in the Democratic Party between the traditional liberal leadership and the growing democratic socialist or “progressive” base. Biden had desperately tried to paper over this divide with federal largesse (see this previous post) but belatedly realized that the debate was about much more than relative budgetary priorities. It was part of a slow realignment of American politics. The post-war Democratic Party went from the progressive nationalism of FDR, to Bill Clinton and Biden’s corporate globalism and now may be in the process of moving into an identity politics form of socialist globalism (more on the history and basis of these ideologies later). It remains to be seen whether presumptive nominee Kamala Harris will complete this transformation. Her ideals and ambitions may cause her to adopt an identity politics form of the party’s previous corporate globalism. Meanwhile, the Republican Party is in the process of rediscovering its nationalist roots, though in the form of a sometimes ugly form of ethnic nationalism.  

In the end, Biden concluded that he was too old not so much physically, but ideologically.  His combination of domestic progressivism and a globalist foreign policy was dying and could not be resurrected in today’s world.  He passed the torch out of frustration and sadness, undoubtedly laced with bewilderment and anger. It was an unfortunate end to a long career in American politics.  As Joe Biden rides off into the sunset, the rest of us will have to chart the nation’s course through the shoals of these new ideologies.  

2024 Election, General, Nationalist Theory, Politics

Globalism vs. Nationalism

In every wise struggle for human betterment, one of the main objects, and often the only object, has been to achieve in large measure equality of opportunity. In the struggle for this great end, nations arise from barbarism to civilization, and through it people press forward from one stage of enlightenment to the next. One of the chief factors in progress is the destruction of special privilege.

Theodore Roosevelt, The New Nationalism

Politics has been most simply described as a contest between the “ins” and the “outs”. Those who are “in” eventually succumb to Lord Acton’s proverb that power corrupts. The “outs” then try to hold them accountable, while the “ins” desperately try to justify and preserve the privileges of their power. Monarchies tried to claim a “divine right” to their power and nineteenth century robber barons adopted the theory of social Darwinism to justify the inequality of the Gilded Age.  This quotation from Theodore Roosevelt’s New Nationalism emphasize the importance, indeed the inevitability, of the defeat of such excuses for power and the outdated assumptions that underlie them. 

Globalism has become the latest ideological excuse used by international elites to preserve their privileges in today’s world.  This philosophy believes economic and foreign policy should be made on a global basis without regard to any particular nation’s needs or interests. Politicians thus have a duty to improve the lives of every person on earth equally regardless of national boundaries. Peace will occur when there is worldwide homogeneity in economic, political and cultural conditions and practices.  

In theory, these goals are laudable and its attraction has deep roots in Western civilization and history (see my series on “Nationalist Foreign Policy – A History” under the Foreign Policy tab above). It becomes particularly attractive during waves of economic globalization.  Here is where we need to clearly distinguish globalism from globalization. Globalization is a socioeconomic phenomenon involving a significant increase in trade and cultural knowledge across national borders. When Marco Polo arrived in Chinese Emperor Kublai Khan’s court in 1275 AD, he was part of such a wave of globalization made possible by stable and safe trade routes through Central Asia from Europe to Asia.  The history of this process has been brilliantly told in Prof.  Peter Frankopan’s book” The Silk Roads”, which describes how periods of global trade and cultural contact changed the world from ancient to modern times. However, these waves would prove to be temporary. Globalization could not survive a nation’s love of its own culture and desire for independence.

This latest wave of globalization began in the 1960’s with the Kennedy Round of tariff reductions, continued during the latter part of the Cold War and then took off after it ended. A new international elite whose disproportionate privileges arose from the benefits of this wave then proclaimed a “New World Order” dedicated to spreading their interpretation of democracy and free enterprise throughout the world. This became the basis of modern globalism and achieved a bipartisan consensus in American politics. 

Meanwhile, American elections continued to be fought over the increasingly vacuous divide between big vs. small government.  The debate over the domestic and international costs of the new order were incorporated into this old debate. Four ideologies, each with their own goal or god, emerged: 

  • Corporate globalism and the god of efficiency 
  • Socialist globalism and the god of equality
  • Ethnic nationalism and the gods of blood and soil 
  • Progressive nationalism and the goal of community

In the perfect world, each of these ideologies would be represented by four different political parties.  The real world of our two-party system requires American voters to research each candidate individually and determine which of these ideologies best matches the candidate’s philosophy and positions.  As we approach the 2024 election, the American people need to become familiar with the basic premises underlying each of these new ideologies, the political philosophy behind them and their current leaders.  My next four posts will undertake that task, starting with a survey of the tenets of corporate globalism.