The article argues that certain progressive ideas, particularly those stemming from a Eurocentric worldview, are no longer suitable for addressing contemporary global challenges. It criticizes the tendency to defend the European model through a nationalistic lens, emphasizing the need for anti-nationalism and global solidarity instead.
The author contrasts US and non-US progressive approaches to global order. They contend that US progressives view global rules as a means to maintain US hegemony, unlike their counterparts who see them as a tool for horizontal global order. This difference hinders genuine alliance and cooperation.
The piece examines China's strategy, referencing Rush Doshi's "The Long Game," and challenges the notion of China's non-imperial ambitions. While acknowledging the contrast between China's strategic patience and Trump's aggressive style, the article highlights the potential danger of choosing between competing empires.
A critique of the belief that cognitive work is inherently superior to manual labor is presented. The author challenges the progressive acceptance of a social hierarchy where manual labor is relegated to the disadvantaged, arguing for a reduction in wage disparities between cognitive and manual work. This, they suggest, would have countered the negative consequences of outsourcing and exploitation.
Finally, the article proposes a shift in political strategy. Instead of focusing on opponents' weaknesses, which tend to reveal themselves, it suggests attacking their strengths proactively. The example used is confronting the nationalist resentment stemming from the “fetish of the declassed” ideology rather than merely criticizing Trump's tariffs.