….Arguing that being part of the European Union is not in the British interest, that NATO has outlived its usefulness, that protectionist policies or anti-immigration policies are desirable is not fascist. These ideas have no connection to fascism whatsoever. They are far more closely linked to traditional liberal democracy. They represent the reassertion of the foundation of liberal democracy, which is the self-governing nation-state. It is the foundation of the United Nations, whose members are nation-states, and where the right to national self-determination is fundamental.
Liberal democracy does not dictate whether a nation should be a member in a multinational organisation, adopt free trade policies or protectionism, or welcome or exclude immigrants. These are decisions to be made by the people – or more precisely, by the representatives they select. The choices may be wise, unwise or even unjust. However, the power to make these choices rests, in a liberal democracy, in the hands of the citizens.
What we are seeing is the rise of the nation-state against the will of multinational organisations and agreements. There are serious questions about membership in the EU, NATO and trade agreements, and equally about the right to control borders. Reasonable people can disagree, and it is the political process of each nation that retains the power to determine shifts in policy. There is no guarantee that the citizenry will be wise, but that cuts both ways and in every direction.
The current rise of nationalism in Europe is the result of European institutions’ failure to function effectively. Eight years after 2008, Europe still has not solved its economic problems. A year after the massive influx of refugees in Europe, there is still no coherent and effective policy to address the issue. Given this, it would be irresponsible for citizens and leaders not to raise questions as to whether they should remain in the EU or follow its dictates. Similarly, there is no reason for Donald Trump not to challenge the idea that free trade is always advantageous, or to question NATO. However obnoxious his style and however confusing his presentation, he is asking questions that must be asked…
Säh sulle. Mina rääkisin Lotmanile, et Trumpi toetuse taga on natsionalism ja tema hakkas norima, et mis rahvus seal Ameerikas on. See võivat olla šovinism tema meelest. Tuleb välja, et väga suure nimega poliitika analüütikud räägivad natsionalismist Ameerikas. Neil on rahvuslik identiteet Ameerikas. Mõnus artikkel iseenesest. See oleks vastutustundetu kodanikelt ja liidritelt mitte esitada selliseid küsimusi. Lõpetage EKRE tampimine, sest te tambite ju seda osa endast, milles te nurjunud olete. Ennustan, et peale järgmisi valimisi on EKRE meie valitsuses.