Yesterday’s Liberals and the Rise of the Successor Ideology
A big part of my journey to understand Canada better is to find the people I call yesterday’s liberals. These were my people for most of my life. They’re the ones who identified with the left side of the political project but now find themselves in firm opposition to the new progressive, successor ideology currently holding centre stage. This new ideology is often referred to by its critics as “woke”, but in this context I much prefer essayist Wesley Yang’s term, “the successor ideology”, as it more accurately describes what we are dealing with.
To cover the history and ideas of the successor ideology is beyond the scope of this article. If you are unfamiliar with the claim a new ideology is vying for control over the societies we traditionally call “the West”, there are numerous well researched books written by respected authors across the political spectrum. It’s hard to make sense of the present moment without appreciating the effect this ideology is having on the larger discourse and cultural landscape.
Interestingly, whether it’s moderate socialist Susan Neiman in her book, “Left is Not Woke”, or conservative activist Christopher Rufo’s, “America’s Cultural Revolution”, or the left leaning Johns Hopkins professor Yascha Mounk’s wonderful, “The Identity Trap”, there is consensus around the key points:
It is an incredibly robust ideology based largely on collectivist and post modern ideas.
It currently has centre stage in progressive intellectual spaces.
It relies on emotional thinking over logic and reason.
It does not have a properly agreed upon name yet.
It is antithetical to the enlightenment values of justice, reason, progress and universalism.
It is a creation entirely born from left wing ideas and the left are the ones best positioned to address it.
Yesterday’s liberals were amongst the first to encounter the successor ideology, as these new ideas percolated up from within their own thought circles. A substantial portion of the victims of what came to be called “cancel culture” are old school progressives who refused to surrender their principles to an ideology antithetical to liberal values. Those voices have been severely punished and silenced over the last many years. The conservative movement is currently running a big tent where many opposing viewpoints are welcome, but the left has closed the doors, or at least the doors that matter, not only to their traditional political opponents but also to the critics who come from their own side of the aisle.
The successor ideology openly states its disdain for disagreement and the slogan “No Debate” has become a staple on the left over the last ten years. Instead of rigorous discussion, critics of the successor ideology are labeled one of a string of derogatory names, their arguments declared hate speech, and they are placed out of sight and out of mind.
Yesterday’s liberals, I’m looking for you. I’d like to hear your stories and platform your ideas. You deserve deep respect for standing your ground despite the consequences you faced. Many a person was turned into a social pariah. Too many lost their careers and life’s work. In one famous Canadian case an educator was treated so poorly by anti racist re-educators, he tragically took his own life (see the story of Richard Bilkszto).
Fringe ideas have always been on the left, but never in my lifetime have they been the dominant viewpoint. Declarations supporting the successor ideology hang in government offices across the country, grants are given to promote the ideas, and the dogma proliferates throughout our public school systems. It’s been well documented the successor ideology is the ONLY allowable viewpoint on elite university campuses, and those ideas trickle down into the rest of society from there.
These ideas cannot be considered fringe anymore.
We need to talk about it.
The single best solution moving forward is for the left to start arguing with itself again.
We need to bring back the spirit of debate. Part of being a responsible citizen and belonging to a larger community is making the effort to understand your fellow travellers. Approaching people with goodwill and charity goes a long way, and is surely better than the dehumanizing sting of being treated unworthy of being heard. Engaging with viewpoints you disagree with is often uncomfortable, but as they say, you don’t grow staying inside your comfort zone.
It’s time for the ideas of the successor ideology to stand on their own merit and prove they deserve to be the new guiding lights of the progressive movement.
