The world culture war – Washington Examiner

Posted: December 5, 2021 at 11:41 am

The United States is fighting a worldwide war over freedom, and we are losing. This is not a struggle against a specific foe, like the war America just lost to the Taliban in Afghanistan or our victory over communism in the 1990s. Rather, it is a struggle in many countries over the very idea of a free society. America represents that ideal, and nearly all countries today pay lip service to it. But in fact, support for it is surprisingly weak.

According to Freedom House, the share of all nations that are democratic rose steadily from the 1970s, and especially after the defeat of communism, to almost half. But since the early 2000s, it has fallen. Freedom also requires a market economy in which interventions by the government are limited. But according to the Heritage Foundation and the Wall Street Journal, even limited economic freedom is now found in barely 60% of countries, and far more in the West than in the non-West.

Obviously, despite its recent victories, freedom is not sweeping all before it. The fundamental reason is the insecurity involved. When a society opens up, some individuals or groups may lose income or influence, even if others gain.

Most think democracy and capitalism have made us free and rich, so they arouse no general opposition. In Western Europe, support for free institutions also runs deep. Western governments do provide some social benefits to cushion citizens against economic losses, but politics and economics remain fundamentally open and competitive.

But in most non-Western countries, democracy exists more in form than substance. Autocrats have found ways to limit rights so that they stay in power even while holding elections. And fear of the market is often intense. Well-connected firms are often shielded from competitors by corruption or monopoly, while rules or subsidies protect the public against scarcities at great cost to overall wealth.

U.S. policymakers typically treat freedom as a universal value, so they oppose these curbs. But they ignore vast differences in the background. In the West, history has confirmed the value of freedom. Revolutions in Britain, France, and America created far freer and more democratic societies than before. Communist or fascist countries failed to compete. Even anti-racists who criticize America admit that there has been progress. The pressure for change has largely been bottom-up, with less-favored groups typically forcing regimes to expand access to influence and opportunity.

The non-West, however, has mostly had a different history. Long-standing elites have seldom been challenged. There hasnt been the same up-from-the-bottom pressure for change. Revolutions from below have been rare. Governments are less responsive to the people, even if they hold elections. Attempts to liberate markets have often proven divisive. The masses primarily seek stability rather than opportunity. If change occurs, elites have typically led it, and often in response to Western pressure.

Different histories ultimately reflect different cultures. Western countries take to freedom relatively easily because they have individualist societies in which people value the opportunities that freedom brings and tolerate its insecurities. Most people also support meritocracy, the idea that getting ahead should favor individuals who have the most ability, rather than just social connections. In the non-West, however, cultures have been much more cautious and passive. People react mostly to outside pressures rather than seeking personal goals. Competition is often unpopular. Freedom is seen less as an opportunity than a threat. The dominant goal is not progress but security.

Some non-Western countries have an individualist elite that seeks freedom and has often studied in the West. But most leaders and the bulk of the society remain attached to a much less free, more traditional way of life, and they typically prevail. In no poor country has the confident, individualist way of life penetrated nearly as deeply as it has in Europe or its offshoots, above all America.

Whereas Western commentators generally applaud freedom, some recent thinkers question it. Pankaj Mishra says that with freedom, only an elite gets rich while everyone else is insecure. Sebastian Junger defends the appeal of the tribes that existed in Native America before Europeans took over. These authors would return to a traditional society that gave everyone a secure place even if, to Western eyes, it is oppressive and unjust. The appeal of radical Islam in many poorer countries is precisely that it imposes order and resists any generalized liberation.

Historians say that the Wests bold and assertive culture is the main reason it has dominated the world in recent centuries, even though it comprises only about 15% of humanity. After World War II, Western statesmen set up new institutions to promote freer world trade. As tariffs and other restrictions fell, trade boomed and produced higher wealth worldwide. Trade has been a great victory for market economics.

But the globalized economy has not, as many imagine, meant any overall triumph for freedom. Even if poorer countries have accepted more open trade, many still resist any general opening up of their domestic politics or economies. Even when the U.S. or outside agencies offer aid for development, local elites seek to control it lest it threaten their positions. Western economists who advise these agencies are baffled by this resistance. They assume that an urge for wealth is universal, but the risks involved are simply too much for most societies.

It will be easier for the U.S. to defeat radical Islam than to challenge this deeper, broader resistance to freedom. To force greater opening on unwilling countries would likely cause internal turmoil and further waves of immigration to the West. The West must respect cultural difference while applying only modest pressure for change. Hard experience teaches that the will to build democracy or the market must be homegrown or it will fail.

Lawrence M.Meadis professor of politics at New York University and the author ofBurdens of Freedom: Cultural Difference and American Power. He hosts the Poverty and Culture podcast.

Read the rest here:

The world culture war - Washington Examiner

Related Posts