John Fonte has written an excellent article called “End Nationalism, End America.” For many on the left, that’s the point. They may dislike nationalism, but what they really can’t stand is America. Their target isn’t the nation state; it’s our nation state. That’s why they want to cede as much of our sovereignty as they can get away with to international bodies.
If progressive liberal esteem for the democratic nation-state is low, the mainstream Left’s depiction of the American nation’s particular culture, people, institutions, and mores is even more negative. . . .
For more than 50 years, Americans have been educated by liberals who have told them that they are too racist, sexist, xenophobic, individualistic; too attached to their guns, religion, violence, and a glorified version of their history. Last year, progressivism’s discontent with American society exploded. The steady promotion of multiculturalism, diversity, inclusion, and intersectionality has now morphed into a militant denunciation of the entire American project as “systemically racist,” calling for revolutionary “anti-racist” action.
The flagship of American liberalism is the New York Times. Its 1619 Project is the spearhead of an “anti-racist” ideology which seeks to reshape the American regime. Leading educational institutions, from Princeton University to the American Association of School Administrators, the National Association of Secondary School Principals, the National Council of Teachers of English, and myriad others, have joined the “anti-racist” crusade.
Left-liberals don’t just dislike American culture, people, institutions, and mores. They dislike our Constitution. Fonte points to a survey finding that 79 percent of Americans who describe themselves as “very liberal” (which comprised 40 percent of all liberals) and 70 percent of the just plain liberals favored replacing our Constitution.
Ceding sovereignty to international bodies is a way to negate the Constitution.
Fonte notes that political thinkers from Plato and Aristotle to Montesquieu and the American Founders have explained that an emotional attachment to one’s political community is necessary for its survival. But that presents no problem to those on the left who don’t want our political community to survive.
And that’s the sentiment of a great many American leftists. We can infer this from the same survey mentioned above. It found that 41 percent of very liberals and 33 percent of plain liberals would like to see our country renamed.
Ditch our nation’s Constitution and its name, and in a very real sense, you have ended America.
The internationalism of left-liberals is therefore a means to an end — the end of America. Fonte concludes:
Since leftists see Americans as too racist, sexist, and war-like, they naturally conclude that subordinating American power to global authority would help mitigate this problem. Fortuitously for the Left, this means power would reside with people like themselves: international lawyers, NGO advocates, and deracinated “global citizens.” At home, as Christopher Caldwell described in The Age of Entitlement, power would shift from elected officials to administrators and judges, because these experts are necessary to enforce equal outcomes for “oppressed” racial and gender groups.
This utopian dream of “substantive” equality for groups, of course, will never be achieved in a free society. Instead the Left’s agenda, if successfully implemented, would mean less freedom and less self-government—it would mean an overall move from republicanism (i.e., American constitutional democracy) towards administrative-judicial oligarchy. That is to say, if given free reign, this new leftism will ironically produce less true liberalism, and less democracy.
And that’s the goal of the new leftism.