The Theatrics of Liberalism
At the heart of the modern liberal order lies the Proceduralist–Globalist Axis: two factions that appear, on the surface, to be locked in political opposition. Proceduralists champion the institutions of domestic governance; Globalists promote international integration and expansion. But their opposition is mostly performative. In truth, they operate as two wings of the same metaphysical bird.
Together, they comprise the Axis of Consensus that emerged from the ashes of World War II and came to dominate the late modern world. While they appear to offer voters a choice, that choice is mostly about method, not meaning.
In 20th‑century Western democracies, these two factions often informed party lines, although they frequently spilled over those lines.
A Hollowed Whig–Tory Legacy
This Axis is a hollow parody of the older Whig–Tory dialectic. In the 18th and 19th centuries, even the fiercest parliamentary debates occurred within a shared moral universe: Christianity as bedrock, the nation‑state as frame, and virtue as a legitimate category of political discussion. Whigs promoted reform and liberty within that order; Tories defended hierarchy and tradition—but both understood politics as subordinate to truth, order, and God.
The Proceduralist–Globalist Axis retains the outward form of that old rivalry (parties, debates, newspapers, elections) but strips it of its moral foundation. In place of the Christian order stands a secularised metaphysics built on three shared assumptions:
- Moral Relativism: There is no objective good, only competing preferences. The role of politics is to mediate interests, not to promote virtue.
- Inevitable Progress: History is moving in one direction—toward liberal democracy, technological mastery, and global integration—and this arc cannot be reversed.
- Technocratic Neutrality: Truth is determined by data, not philosophy; governance is the science of process, not the art of statesmanship.
These assumptions are never debated. They are presupposed by both sides of the Axis.
Two Faces of the Same Machine
- Proceduralists (e.g., civil rights lawyers, bureaucrats, academic reformers) believe that legitimacy arises from process: elections, institutions, rules‑based systems, expert panels. They are preoccupied with “threats to democracy,” meaning disruptions to procedural legitimacy—not to truth or justice. To them, a regime is moral if it follows the rules.
- Globalists (e.g., multinational CEOs, military planners, NGO operatives) pursue open systems: open markets, open borders, open societies. They speak in the language of “freedom,” “human rights,” and “the international community,” but their real allegiance is to the smooth operation of transnational capital and geopolitical hegemony.
The two factions sometimes clash—over wars, tax policy, or immigration quotas—but never over first principles. Their disagreements are like project managers fighting over a workflow, not priests arguing about salvation.
The Theatre of Conflict
Much of late‑modern political life consisted of staged combat between Proceduralists and Globalists, each casting the other as the enemy of progress:
- Proceduralists accuse Globalists of greed, deregulation, and warmongering.
- Globalists accuse Proceduralists of bureaucratic sclerosis and populist appeasement.
But this opposition was ritualistic. The theatre sustained the illusion of meaningful pluralism while keeping debate safely within the shared frame of liberal modernity. It let citizens feel they had a choice without ever threatening the regime’s metaphysical foundations. Hence the oscillation between “centre‑left” and “centre‑right” governments that change little in substance: the game was not rigged by fake votes, but by a fixed worldview.
A Failing Paradigm
Together, the Axis constructed the post‑WWII global order: the United Nations, NATO, the IMF, the EU, the World Bank, and countless regional bureaucracies and trade pacts—built on the assumption that history had reached a final form: a rational, rules‑based, post‑ideological global civilisation.
But the cracks are now visible:
- The 2008 financial crisis shattered faith in global capitalism.
- The populist wave of the 2010s exposed the sterility of procedural rule.
- The COVID‑19 pandemic revealed the fragility of global interdependence.
- The war in Gaza and the collapse of Western moral authority exposed the emptiness of “rules‑based” appeals to justice.
The Axis of Consensus remains in power, but it no longer inspires belief. Its rituals continue, but the myth has died. Increasingly, its defenders are seen not as moral leaders, but as managers of decay. What comes next will not be decided within the Axis. It will come from the outside: from three factions that reject the Enlightenment metaphysical premises of Proceduralist-Globalist rule entirely.