Pessimism is the Preserve of the Rich

JD Vance, The New Right - Dissident Voices

Summary

This Liberation Letter explores the rise of JD Vance within the "New Right" movement, examining key figures, core ideas, and critiques of this emerging conservative intellectual group. It examines the movement's scepticism towards modern liberalism, its emphasis on cultural traditionalism, and its vision for a "post-liberal" order. The Letter suggests that Vance's prominence signals a potential realignment in American politics, bridging populist MAGA rhetoric with more intellectually grounded conservative thought. This development could significantly impact the Republican Party's future direction and policy formation.

Introduction

The recent announcement of JD Vance as Donald Trump's vice-presidential running mate for the upcoming US elections has sparked considerable interest. As Politico (18.7.2024) aptly noted, "JD Vance represents something genuinely unusual for the MAGA movement." Indeed, Vance stands out as a Republican deeply enmeshed with the elite world of the conservative intellectual movement in the USA, often referred to as "the New Right" or "the dissident right." This loosely connected group of conservative thinkers and writers often challenges mainstream conservative orthodoxy. They tend to be more sceptical of free-market capitalism, interventionist foreign policy, and classical liberal principles than traditional conservatives. Vance's intellectual background, including his education at Yale Law School and his connections to figures like Peter Thiel, sets him apart from many MAGA politicians.

1.       Key Figures in Vance's Intellectual Circle

Vance's journey from an Anybody But Trump conservative to a MAGA firebrand was influenced by his relationships with a handful of niche conservative writers and thinkers. Among these influential figures are those who advocate for post-liberal regime change, some who admire the cultural conservatism of Viktor Orbán's Hungary, and even one outright monarchist. Key figures in Vance's intellectual circle include Patrick Deneen, a political theorist and professor at Notre Dame known for critiquing liberalism. Deneen has been a major intellectual influence on Vance, with both men critiquing liberal progressivism and advocating for communitarian approaches. However, Deneen's academic approach may be more theoretical than Vance's practical political stance. Peter Thiel, founder of PayPal, a tech entrepreneur, venture capitalist, and political donor, is another significant figure in Vance's orbit. As Vance's former employer, close friend, and major funder of his Senate campaign, Thiel shares Vance's critique of technological stagnation and elite complacency. However, Thiel's libertarian leanings may diverge from Vance's more populist conservatism. Curtis Yarvin, a blogger and computer programmer known for his "neo-reactionary" philosophy, is considered a friend by Vance, who has cited Yarvin's writings. While both criticise the current state of American democracy, Yarvin's monarchist ideas are more extreme than Vance's public positions. The ideas of René Girard, a French philosopher and literary critic known for mimetic theory, have influenced Vance via Peter Thiel. Girard's concepts played a role in Vance's conversion to Catholicism and shaped his social views, although Girard's work is largely theoretical while Vance applies these ideas to practical politics. Sohrab Ahmari, an Iranian American writer and editor advocating for "common good" conservatism, is a close associate and supporter of Vance. Both promote a populist, working-class focused conservatism, although Ahmari's Catholic social democracy might lean more left on economic issues than Vance's positions. The Claremont Institute, a conservative think tank promoting "West Coast Straussianism" and Trumpism, has close ties with Vance, who frequently speaks at their events. While both support Trump and critique the administrative state, Claremont's focus on returning to founding principles may differ from Vance's more populist approach.

Vance's unique position within the conservative movement represents a bridge between populist MAGA rhetoric and more intellectually grounded conservative thought. This could potentially bring new ideas and perspectives into the MAGA movement. As a vice-presidential candidate, Vance's connections to these intellectual circles could significantly impact policy formation and the direction of the Republican Party if the Trump-Vance ticket were to win.

Vance's prominence represents the ongoing evolution of American conservatism, particularly the tension between populist and intellectual strains within the movement. This development is noteworthy in the context of American politics, as it potentially signals a shift in the intellectual underpinnings of the MAGA movement. It will be interesting to observe how Vance's background and connections influence the campaign and potentially the future direction of the Republican Party.

2.       What unites the dissident voices?

The dissident voices associated with J.D. Vance and the New Right are bound together by a shared critique of contemporary political and social orthodoxies. At the heart of their unity lies a fundamental scepticism towards modern liberalism, both in its progressive and classical forms. These thinkers argue that liberalism has failed to deliver on its promises and has instead led to societal decay. This critique extends to mainstream conservatism as well, which they view as inadequate for addressing current societal challenges, particularly in its emphasis on free-market economics and interventionist foreign policy.

Unlike mainstream liberals and conservatives, these dissidents question the notion of inevitable societal progress. They often advocate for a return to older social and political arrangements, emphasising cultural conservatism rooted in traditional social values, frequently grounded in religious (particularly Christian) worldviews. This perspective is coupled with a strong critique of globalism, favouring more nationalist or localist approaches to governance and economy.

A deep distrust of elites unites these thinkers, who believe that current elite institutions—academia, media, and bureaucracy—have become corrupted and are failing society. This scepticism extends to the realm of technology. While not anti-technology per se, many are critical of how modern technology has developed and its effects on society.

In response to these perceived failures, many advocate for a "post-liberal" order that moves beyond the framework of classical liberalism and individual rights towards a more communitarian approach. They emphasise the importance of strong communities and social bonds, contrasting sharply with the individualism that characterises much of modern political thought.

These dissident voices share a willingness to challenge orthodoxy, readily questioning established political and social norms, even if it means embracing controversial or unpopular ideas. This iconoclastic tendency is particularly evident in their critique of the managerial state, with many expressing a profound distrust of expansive administrative structures and technocratic governance.

However, it's important to note that while these unifying themes create a cohesive intellectual movement, there remains significant diversity of thought within this group. Individual thinkers often disagree on specific policy prescriptions or the exact nature of their ideal society. What binds them is not a uniform vision of the future, but a shared dissatisfaction with the present and a willingness to explore alternatives outside the mainstream of contemporary political discourse.

This coalescence of ideas represents a significant challenge to established political paradigms, offering a perspective that is at once deeply conservative in its social outlook and radically innovative in its willingness to reimagine political and social structures. As exemplified by Vance's rise to prominence, these ideas are increasingly finding their way into mainstream political discourse, potentially reshaping the landscape of American conservatism and beyond.

This cohort espouses a variety of sometimes competing viewpoints, but they are bound together by the belief that the liberal project of “progress” — especially in the form of economic liberalisation, technological advancement and the levelling of social hierarchies — has in fact been a mistake.

3.       Core ideas of the New Right

The intellectual and ideological core of the New Right is characterised by a complex set of ideas that often challenge both mainstream conservatism and liberalism. Below I briefly outline the key concepts that I could identify across these various thinkers:

1. Post-liberalism: A fundamental critique of liberal democracy and its underlying assumptions. This includes scepticism towards individual rights as the basis of social order and a rejection of the liberal notion of progress.

2. Cultural traditionalism: Emphasis on traditional social values, often rooted in religious (particularly Christian) worldviews. This includes support for traditional family structures and gender roles.

3. Communitarianism: Prioritising community bonds and social cohesion over individual autonomy. This often involves a critique of excessive individualism in modern society.

4. Nationalism: Advocacy for national sovereignty and cultural identity, often in opposition to globalisation and multiculturalism.

5. Critique of managerialism: Deep scepticism towards technocratic governance and the administrative state, often characterised as rule by unelected bureaucrats.

6. Anti-elitism: Distrust of established elite institutions, including academia, mainstream media, and large corporations.

7. Economic nationalism: Rejection of free-market orthodoxy in favour of protectionist policies aimed at preserving national industries and working-class jobs.

8. Technological scepticism: While not anti-technology per se, there's often a critical view of how modern technology, particularly social media, has impacted society and culture.

9. Rejection of liberal universalism: Scepticism towards universal human rights and global governance structures, favouring particularism and national sovereignty.

10. Critique of mass democracy: Some thinkers argue for limitations on democratic processes, suggesting that unfettered democracy leads to societal decay.

11. Emphasis on hierarchy and order: Many advocate for stronger social hierarchies and clearer societal roles as a means of creating stability.

12. Cultural pessimism: A general sense that Western civilisation is in decline, often coupled with calls for cultural renewal or restoration.

13. Rejection of libertarianism: Despite sharing some critiques of big government, many New Right thinkers reject libertarianism as atomising and destructive to social fabric.

14. Anti-progressivism: Strong opposition to progressive social movements, particularly those related to gender and sexuality.

15. Intellectual eclecticism: Drawing on a wide range of thinkers, from classical conservatives to leftist critics of liberalism, to form a syncretic ideology.

It's important to note that the core ideas of the New Right, despite some unifying themes, encompasses a diverse range of ideas that sometimes appear contradictory. A prime example is provided by Peter Thiel's involvement with the movement. Thiel has cited "The Sovereign Individual" as a major influence on his thinking. This book advocates for strong free-market principles, celebrates the potential decline of nation-states, and promotes a form of technologically enabled individualism. These ideas seem at odds with the New Right's scepticism towards free-market capitalism and its emphasis on nationalism and communitarianism. This apparent contradiction highlights the ideological diversity within the New Right. It suggests that the movement is not a monolithic entity, but rather a coalition of various strands of right-wing thought, some of which may be in tension with each other. Thiel's presence in this milieu demonstrates how the New Right can accommodate both nationalist, communitarian impulses and more libertarian, globally oriented perspectives. This ideological breadth allows figures like Vance to draw from a wide range of influences, potentially bridging different factions within conservative thought. However, it also presents challenges in defining a coherent political philosophy and may lead to internal conflicts as the movement evolves.

4.       Critiques of the New Right - Slobodian's "Crack-Up Capitalism"

Quinn Slobodian's "Crack-Up Capitalism" offers a penetrating critique of the ideas associated with the New Right, particularly focusing on their economic and political implications. At the heart of Slobodian's analysis is a critical examination of what he terms "zone thinking" - the New Right's advocacy for special economic zones or autonomous regions that operate outside normal state regulations. Slobodian argues that this approach, far from bolstering national sovereignty as its proponents claim, actually represents a dangerous fragmentation of sovereignty and poses a significant threat to democratic governance.

While the New Right often positions itself as a champion of economic nationalism, Slobodian exposes how their vision of autonomous zones fundamentally undermines national cohesion and sovereignty. He challenges the movement's anti-elitist rhetoric, suggesting that their policies, in practice, benefit a new elite of tech entrepreneurs and financial speculators rather than the broader population they claim to represent.

Slobodian's critique extends to the New Right's "post-liberal" vision, which he characterises as a smokescreen for dismantling social protections and democratic accountability. Despite the movement's ostensible opposition to globalisation, Slobodian argues that their ideas actually promote a different, more insidious form of globalisation that favours capital over people.

The author also takes aim at the technological utopianism found in the Sovereign Individual. He criticises the deterministic aspects of this ideology, demonstrating how they can lead to increased inequality and social fragmentation. This critique dovetails with his analysis of the contradictions inherent in the New Right's emphasis on communitarianism. While they claim to prioritise community bonds, Slobodian argues that their economic policies actually serve to undermine communal ties and social cohesion.

In defending aspects of liberal democracy against New Right critiques, Slobodian contends that the alternatives proposed by the movement are less accountable and more prone to abuse. He draws historical parallels between New Right ideas and earlier forms of economic fragmentation, illustrating how such approaches can lead to instability and conflict.

Slobodian's work also shines a light on the potential consequences of the deregulation championed by the New Right. He argues that their push for deregulated zones and weakened state power can result in environmental degradation, labour exploitation, and financial instability.

In essence, "Crack-Up Capitalism" serves as a comprehensive rebuttal to New Right thinking, exposing the contradictions between its stated goals of nationalism, community, and anti-elitism, and the likely outcomes of its policy prescriptions. Slobodian's central thesis is that rather than offering solutions to the problems of globalisation and liberalism, many New Right ideas actually exacerbate these issues, potentially leading to a more fragmented, unequal, and unstable world. Through this critique, Slobodian challenges readers to critically examine the assumptions and implications of New Right ideology, offering a robust defence of regulated capitalism and democratic governance in the face of calls for radical economic fragmentation

.

5.      Make America Great Again (MAGA)

The rise of J.D. Vance and the rightward shift in American politics can be understood as a reaction to four decades of neoliberal policies and the perceived alignment of the Democratic Party with elite interests. Since the 1980s, both major parties in the United States have, to varying degrees, embraced neoliberal economic principles, including deregulation, privatisation, and free trade agreements. While these policies may have spurred economic growth, they have also contributed to widening income inequality and job insecurity, particularly among working-class Americans.

Over this period, the Democratic Party gradually shifted towards a more technocratic, expert-driven approach to governance. This transformation, while aimed at addressing complex policy challenges, inadvertently created a perception that the party increasingly favoured educated elites and urban professionals over traditional working-class constituencies. The party's growing association with coastal, urban elites and progressive social values further exacerbated a cultural divide, leaving many rural and working-class voters feeling alienated and unrepresented.

Simultaneously, the forces of globalisation, championed by both parties, led to the offshoring of numerous manufacturing jobs, disproportionately affecting working-class communities, especially in the Rust Belt states. Despite rhetoric supporting working-class interests, many Democrats maintained close ties with Wall Street and big tech companies, fuelling a perception that the party had become more aligned with corporate elites than ordinary workers.

This combination of economic insecurity, cultural alienation, and distrust of elites has fuelled populist sentiment on both the left and right. Figures like J.D. Vance have skilfully tapped into this sentiment, offering a critique of the establishment that resonates with many disaffected voters. Vance's personal narrative, as recounted in his memoir "Hillbilly Elegy", lends him credibility in speaking about the struggles of working-class communities. His critique of both parties' failure to address these issues aligns with the frustrations of many voters who feel left behind by the economic and cultural changes of recent decades.

The New Right, of which Vance is a prominent figure, presents a comprehensive critique of neoliberalism, globalisation, and what they perceive as the failures of both mainstream conservatism and liberalism. This critique resonates strongly with those who feel marginalised by the economic and cultural shifts of the past forty years. The movement's emphasis on economic nationalism, including advocacy for protectionist policies and a focus on domestic manufacturing, appeals to those who have lost jobs to globalisation. Additionally, their emphasis on traditional values and national identity attracts those who feel threatened by rapid social change and globalisation.

By framing their message as a critique of the neoliberal consensus and positioning themselves as champions of the forgotten working class, Vance and the New Right have capitalised on the perceived failures of both parties to address the concerns of many Americans. This approach has allowed them to gain significant traction, particularly among voters who feel alienated by what they see as an elite-driven political and economic system.

The rise of this movement represents a significant challenge to the established political order. It highlights the deep-seated dissatisfaction with the outcomes of neoliberal policies and the perceived disconnect between political elites and large swathes of the American populace. As Vance's prominence grows, exemplified by his selection as a vice-presidential candidate, it signals a potential realignment in American politics, one that could have far-reaching implications for both major parties and the future direction of the country.

6.       Conclusion:  Pessimism is the preserve of the rich:

The ascendancy of JD Vance and the New Right movement in the United States offers valuable insights for the political landscapes of the UK and Western Europe. Whilst the specific contexts differ, many of the underlying issues resonate across the Atlantic, challenging leaders to reconsider their approach to governance and societal cohesion.

The success of New Right rhetoric underscores the urgent need for mainstream parties to address economic inequalities and the negative impacts of globalisation on working-class communities. UK and European leaders must resist the temptation to dismiss populist sentiments, instead focusing on developing policies that tangibly improve the lives of those feeling marginalised. This challenge is particularly acute given that pessimism often appears to be the preserve of the rich.

Indeed, the notion that "pessimism is the preserve of the rich" bears closer examination in this context. The wealthy, secure in their economic standing, can afford to be pessimistic about societal changes without immediate personal consequences. They may lament the perceived decline of traditional values or the erosion of cultural norms, viewing these shifts through a lens of loss rather than evolution. Conversely, for many in the working class, optimism is a necessity—a belief that positive change is possible becomes a crucial motivator in the face of economic hardship.

This dichotomy is evident in the growing rift between urban, educated elites and rural, working-class populations—a divide not unique to the US. European nations must find ways to bridge this cultural chasm, fostering dialogue and understanding between different segments of society. The challenge lies in addressing the concerns of those who feel left behind by globalisation and rapid social change, without succumbing to divisive, exclusionary politics.

The New Right's critique of liberalism, both in its progressive and classical forms, challenges European nations to reassess their commitment to liberal democracy. While not abandoning liberal principles, there may be a need to address its shortcomings and adapt to changing societal needs. This reassessment must balance the appeal of economic nationalism with the benefits of global cooperation, protecting national interests and identities while maintaining crucial international alliances. Furthermore, the New Right's cautious approach to technological advancement could prompt a more nuanced discussion in Europe about the societal impacts of rapid technological change. This scepticism, often rooted in concerns about job displacement and cultural shifts, must be balanced against the potential for innovation to address pressing societal challenges.

The emergence of the New Right intellectual movement suggests that European political parties might benefit from engaging with a wider range of thinkers, even those outside the mainstream. However, this intellectual diversity must be tempered with a critical eye towards potentially harmful ideologies. Quinn Slobodian's critique of "zone thinking" serves as a stark warning to European nations about the dangers of economic and political fragmentation within their borders.

In navigating these complex issues, European leaders must recognise that while the wealthy may indulge in pessimism, it is the working class who often bear the brunt of economic and social upheavals. Addressing the root causes of discontent whilst safeguarding the core values of democracy, inclusivity, and social cohesion is paramount. The true challenge lies in finding a balance—acknowledging and addressing legitimate concerns raised by movements like the New Right, while steadfastly resisting the allure of divisive populism.