SCARCELY a day goes by where my disdain for the mainstream media does not grow.
Most recently this has been occasioned by the election of Javier Milei in Argentina.
Having taken over one of the world’s most convincing basket cases (descending from a leading global economy to failed state in a few swift decades), our mad-haired President Milei has been tarred with the inevitable brush. Despite dressing up as his superhero alter-ego on occasion – General AnCap (aka anarcho-capitalist, which might give a hint as to his political sympathies) – and being a free-love, tantric-sex type who is absolutely okay with open borders, he is widely described as being ‘far-right’.
Looking at his policy platform, it difficult to discern why. He describes himself as a traditional liberal: against the state, for personal liberty. He wants to reduce and declaw the fat, bulging, sclerotic mess that is the modern state in Argentina (and, indeed, in most of the modern West). He comes to power in a country where inflation tops 140 per cent but which reserves a specific proportion of public-sector jobs for transgenders.
Instead of being ‘far-right’, his crime is to oppose the giant apparatus of the Establishment, which has weaselled its way into each corridor of power. He challenges the civilisation-ending dogmas head-on and unapologetically. His rhetoric fundamentally threatens the existence of a vast, worldwide elite who are firmly ensconced in their lavish, decadent existences, instead promoting the wellbeing of the little man.
And thus, he must be ‘far-right’. He is the product of so many failed generations of Argentinian politics and comes after the various political surprises of the last decade which have unsettled the Davos types and who, should ‘free and fair’ elections continue to be permitted, will continue to define the next political era.
If the blob don’t like his ilk, they must realise that he is their creation.
For another example of a politician who has dared to stray outside the prescribed confines of our atrophied political discourse look to the Telegraph. In this Tory mouthpiece we read of Sahra Wagenknecht, formerly prominent in Germany’s Die Linke (The Left) party. The headline to the article noting her rise uses the telling phrase ‘socialist nationalism’, and warns ominously that she ‘is hardly the first German leader to combine nationalism, socialism and populism’.
Perhaps they should just stop beating around the bush and just come out with what they’re trying to say: SHE IS JUST LIKE HITLER.
But, of course, she isn’t. In the piece, we learn that she is an anti-globalist, against mass immigration and multiculturalism, declined to be vaccinated during Covid-mania, is sceptical of green excess and against wokeism. Moreover, she is against sending arms to Ukraine and for the dismantling of Nato.
Sign me up!
For daring to go against the orthodoxies of our time – for having the temerity to suggest that not all vaccines are wonder drugs and that pumping endless weapons into the meatgrinder of eastern Ukraine is absurd – she is naturally compared to a man who had little problem with enforced medical procedures and whose career came a cropper amid the twisted steel and bloodied remains left strewn across the Eurasian plain.
Not that such trifles matter. We are in the post-truth age with an elite firmly in power who will not budge without the almightiest of fights. Strange bedfellows are made in such times, crossing traditional political boundaries. What divides us now is not left and right, but globalist versus anti-globalist, advocates for personal autonomy versus corporatist busybodies, realists versus utopian fantasists.
I know which side I’m on. Bring on the Mileis and the Wagenknechts, as far as I’m concerned. They can’t make more of a hash of things than the philosophically inert and relentlessly self-indulgent global technocratic class has made in the last few decades, anyway.