
The Hypocrisy of Progressive Europe
For progressives, ‘liberalism’ now means ‘the compelled acceptance and legal implementation of LGBT ideology.’ To oppose it, conversely, is thus ‘illiberalism.’

For progressives, ‘liberalism’ now means ‘the compelled acceptance and legal implementation of LGBT ideology.’ To oppose it, conversely, is thus ‘illiberalism.’

The underlying grievance of Western critics is not a lack of democracy, but rather our refusal to simply nod in agreement with the Brussels consensus.

So, what happens when the ‘liberal’ undermines the ‘democracy’?

I would go so far as to argue that unadulterated liberalism corrodes democracy, and true democracy is opposed to liberalism. Illiberal democracy is capable of integrating what is valuable in liberalism without allowing the liberal framework to take over.

Must liberalism be leveled completely by the New Right, so that a new conservative edifice may emerge from its ruins? Or must the meaning of liberalism be reclaimed for the Right and from the historiographical distortions of the progressive Left? Haivry and Hazony, Deneen, and Legutko appear to answer in the affirmative. However, a compelling alternate view is offered by Spanish philosophy professor and politician Francisco José Contreras.

After years of chasing Islamic extremists, however, Western governments and their intelligence services, as well as the mainstream media, today seem to have broadened the scope of what they mean by “extremism” to encompass all ideologies, philosophies, and political movements that are somehow deemed “too dangerous” to exist. And these, according to them, are increasingly found on the Right.