At this time it is too early to tell who will prevail in the struggle to regenerate America, and what direction the evolution of the European Union will take. Regardless of the Atlantic, both cases are in interrelated.

Just consider the similarity of the forces that vie for internal sway. Keep in mind that the outcome of the conflict to define the substance of each entity will determine the nature of the transatlantic relationship.

In the US, we have a President that is disapproved by the crowd that proclaims to be the “better”, and therefore meant-to-rule, segment of a society. Its ambitions are being hindered by a numerical majority of educationally and morally lesser folks.

Both the US and “Europe” -besides its nation states also their composite, the EU is meant- are in a comparable stage of development. The traditional way by which they were governed by their political class, is not only questioned while its supremacy is increasingly withdrawn. When the ruling class is deprived of the power which is transferred to outsiders mandated to pursue new goals, then the criteria of a revolution is met.

An awakened mass is breaking into the public realm from the earlier cocoon of individual-welfare oriented “reservations”. Once dormant and consenting people who assumed “they will know what they are doing” are alerted. It happens because peoples do not only feel that they are being forgotten but also realize that their interests are sacrificed to serve “higher” ends that elites define. In this process it emerges that the leaders form a clan whose fractions contest power while being in agreement on the goals they pursue. With that, what alleges to be a democratic practice appears to be an arrangement that serves its insiders while it overlooks lesser folks that are unripe to share their leaders enlightened values.

The proper term for that is not “treason”, nor is it “conspiracy,” but “out of touch”. That condition reflects the fact that the leading caste can afford to live lives that only tenuously contacts with those of their clients. One shops different brands, not the same make of car is used, other schools are attended, and one resides in different neighborhood. This means lives that unfold in their own bubbles and exposes one to fellows of the same way of thinking and interests.

Elites can afford to pursue their intellectual abstractions as policies. They know that they will be affected by these in other ways than the mass. An example is the matter that has brought the mass-elite split to the foreground.  According to the ideals of multiculturalism, -a result of uncontrolled migration and immunity from local law- mankind, separated by tribe, religion and race, is to amalgamate into a new, loving and homogeneous whole. Those on whose turf the ideal is to be converted into practice, have another perspective, it is one in which the imposed theory and experience collide.

Who are these people? They are the ones whose housing development slums, who experience unsafe streets, whose children are robbed on the playground, and that are cursed as unbelievers by those invited in their name. They are the ones whose public schools cannot teach because of the protected recalcitrant, the firemen and ambulance drivers attacked as the agents of an oppressive state that harbors assertive guests. Also, they are the tax payers that finance elements that cannot and will not be integrated into a modern economy and its society.

It does not make the facts go away if those that articulate the protest are called “populists”. Used to condemn the threatened and abused majority, the term is losing the connotation with which the official opinion makers have branded it. More and more, “populist” means someone that disagrees with the self-anointed and whose cause is gaining the support of new, hitherto ignored and newly alerted majorities.

As the disenchantment with local elites gains ground, the consequences for the transatlantic alliance -the framework within which America and Europe interact- cannot be ignored. In America, through the new President, a person committed to a new deal is in charge. Can he summon the power and consent needed to overcome the inherited bureaucracy, and the networks that run the government machine? The evidence of sabotage abounds and the ability to cause damage is impressive.

The other side of the coin concerns what is officially “Europe”. Generally the EU is viewed with growing reservations by peoples that demand new politics. The view spreads that the directors the EU’s organs are more interested in centralization and power than in the liberty of the union’s peoples organized as nations.

Effective US-European cooperation demands strong entities. The criterion of a useful ally can be met if the national communities behind the term can rally to the cause. The EU now pursued by its leaders wishes to create a synthetic union to support its center. While the construct has a power elite and the bureaucracy to form a central organ, it lacks a people.

In EU elite’s vision, nations are to implement the directives of the international center and not –as envisioned- an organ that coordinates their cooperation as the executive of the will of its sovereign constituents. Regardless of the resistance, “Brussels” uses every trick it can pull from the magician’s hat, to create an artificial “people” by incantations, and if need be, by pressure. The success to be expected might match that of the defunct Communists to create a “Soviet Man”.

Europe’s ongoing internal renewal has international implications. New politics create compatible national systems. Officially, EU elites show restraint regarding Washington. However, to the extent that they can and dare, they are hostile to all that Trump’s election represents. The process that might bring their weakening opens the door to cooperation on a new level among reconstituted partners.

If Trump prevails in the transatlantic alliance’s key and often left-alone American component, he will need to nudge assertively to further the Alliance’s reconstruction. Furthermore, its European pillar will need to become an effective for the challengers of the order of liberty prove what they tell: they are bullies and not altar boys.

However, in the light of the anti-Trump hysteria propagated by Europe’s leading classes, America needs a “Plan B”. The recommended realignment might be a parallel bilateral security structure that connects “the willing”. The internal process of development will produce candidates to supplement the ones that are already available. The number of these is, in the light of the described re-writing of government programs, likely to grow in numbers and in quality.


Comments are closed.

Recent Comments

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner