To the average person uninterested in politics and especially geopolitics, rising nationalism represents a stark contradiction. On one hand, we live in an acutely progressive and tolerant era. On the other, aggressive rhetoric from previously out-of-fashion conservatives have garnered surprising support.

Of course, the 2016 U.S. presidential elections fired the first shot across the bow. Later, conservative movements in other nations, particularly European ones, took heart. Some succeeded, as in the case of Brexit. Others, not so much. Still, the fight to end the globalist agenda persisted.

We all know that persistence pays off. Over this past weekend, voting for Europe’s Parliament indicated that populist groups received significant boosts from concerned European citizens. Though their victory was not quite decisive, the turnout did send a clear message: the globalist agenda toward forced unification and demographic transitions won’t go down easily.

And it’s not just Europe that is experiencing rising nationalism. According to The New York Times:

Recent elections in India, Australia and the Philippines have shown public support for tough leaders, and Mr. Salvini and other European populists are trying to push some of the same buttons. They oppose immigration, promote nationalism, blame globalization and promise a return to better, bygone eras.

What’s going on here? As it turns out, President Trump’s shock victory in 2016 was just one cog in the gear. The most critical win was that it opened the door for conservative mainstream dissent.


Rising Nationalism an Indefinite Fixture

To answer my earlier question, most people only want to associate with whom they elect. This has less to do with race and ethnicity, and more to do with shared principles and mores.

Looking around, I can appreciate intellectually why rising nationalism is occurring. Over the years, society has turned coarser. Invariably, mass immigration contributes to this problem: first as a natural byproduct of multiple cultures and differing expectations, and second as competition for dominance.

But the issue takes on heightened meaning when you force people to assimilate. You see, in America we talk about diversity but we’re anything but. Given the resources, most of us would choose to live far away from people hailing from Third World countries.

This harsh reality is especially true for Democrats. Hollywood is notoriously liberal, pushing all kinds of progressive agendas. But where do these ideologues live? In uber-rich, secluded gated communities, typically armed to the teeth.

Which is to say, if the Democrats don’t want assimilation, why should conservatives anywhere want it?