17 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
Ray Prisament's avatar

I think the argument that "global elites have no intention of doing unthinkable thing xyz to you" would be a lot more compelling if the years 2020-2023 hadn't happened. But alas they did, and, the global elites showed zero restraint at embracing the most extreme forms of authoritarism (how many times did we hear that China's approach to covid was the right one, except for our pesky Western freedoms and constitutions), and they were constrained ONLY by our more populist leaders like De Santis. So yeah I am little paranoid now, and while I don't want an "equal but opposite" policy in the other direction, I do support some countervailing forces to land us in the middle.

Expand full comment
George Talbot's avatar

You are literally demonstrating the point of this article, down to the histrionics about global elites, China and authoritarianism.

Expand full comment
Unset's avatar

Another thing I've learned reading Persuasion is that on the rare occasions that democratic elections produce results that Davos doesn't like, it isn't actually democracy at all. It's called "populism" and it is Very Very Bad.

Expand full comment
Vladan Lausevic's avatar

Western and constrained? Can you develop your argument here?

Expand full comment
Travis's avatar

Does the fact that the grip of power between 2020-2023 (but really it was over by 2021) instantly disappeared have any weight here?

If the globalist elites were so much in power and they got their guy Biden to x, y or z, why is the US govt authority at the same level in 2024 as say 2018?

(If it's more authoritative in your view, please state how as specifically as possible.)

Isn't it key to the 'slippery slope of authority' argument for it not to retreat?

Expand full comment