The Post-Liberal Order is Ethno-Nationalism


The most thoughtful Christian leaders have just now begun to realize (2017) that liberalism will fall, and that Christians must create an alternative social order to replace it.

Peter J. Leithart, writing at First Things, is among the confused and torn souls of the Christian intelligentsia who are finally understanding that their beloved post-WWII consensus is crashing down, and that something must fill the space:
"Liberal order is under siege. Populist and nationalist movements in the U.S. and across Europe challenge the entrenched mainstream. Polish philosopher Ryszard Legutko performs a meticulous exorcism of the 'demon in democracy,' and the Radically Orthodox articulate a 'postliberal' vision for Britain. R. R. Reno and others associated with First Things expose the inequities of globalization, and the biases that lurk under the cover of liberal neutrality. Like Richard Neuhaus before him, Reno has gestured at an alternative by invoking the theopolitical term 'covenant.' A 'renewed national covenant' is a promising starting point for pondering political order after liberalism."
The term "covenant" is what these thinkers are now pushing as a possible alternative to our current failing socio-political worldview. Leithart, however, cannot stomach the more direct historical implications of this idea, and he condemns the possibility that covenant could come to include any kind of reawakening of ethnic identity: "Covenant isn’t anything like a cure-all. It’s been badly abused. At times, it has taken a racial or tribal turn." After criticizing any attempt to use covenant in racial turns, however, he talks about Old Testament Israel's covenant with God:
"The biblical references above expose another difficulty. Western politics borrowed its notion of covenant from the Hebrew Bible. Once we start talking about 'renewing the national covenant,' we may have to turn to Israel, as many of the Reformers and their children did, as a model polity. "
Are Leithart and his peers too naive or shortsighted to see where their covenantal language will inevitably lead? The covenant nation Christians are familiar with from scripture is the ethno-national state of ancient Israel. It remains to be seen how ethno-nationalism will not reassert itself as the inevitable logical end of a covenant socio-political order.

It's worth repeating: ethno-nationalism is the only form of government specifically endorsed and designed by God. Ancient Israel was built by God from it's founding to be a covenantal racially based polity of people descended from the patriarch Abraham. Where is the Christian alternative to this? Will these men decide that a tyrannical empire, like an authoritarian America, is superior to ethno-nationalism? It doesn't seem likely, but they might go there before finally accepting the politically unpopular truth.

Comments