Ralph Peters has an illuminating article in the NY Post on why the postmodern European elite hate George W. Bush with a passion. In short, it’s because Bush represents the antithesis of their values – and because he highlights their failures.
Indeed Peters is onto something here. John Fonte described the European socialist experiment as being part of a larger ideology he termed "Transnational Progressivism", which is a half right. The European experiment is about forever destroying the concept of nationalism in Europe and replacing it with a transnational consciousness. However, the means to that end are anything but "progressive" – they are based on the idea that the only way in which political change can be achieved is from the top down, a system in which the policy elites of Europe control the political direction of the EU without much input from the people. As former EU minister Sir Christopher Patten noted in the Chatham Lecture in 2000:
[The EU] has to accept that there is no European "demos" in the sense of a population which feels itself to be one. The problem of legitimacy and democracy is therefore especially difficult. And it is especially acute, because the European Union is so powerful.
Unfortunately, the EU has not needed Patten’s warning. The EU continues to be a profoundly anti-democratic body in which most of the decision-making capacity is vested in the European Commission which is not directly elected. In fact, almost none of the EU’s power is held in check by popular elections, and given the unpopularity of the EU among many of the European people it would be unlikely that the EU’s current plans would pass muster if it were put to a vote.
Yet the European elites hate Bush and accuse him of being undemocratic, as if the Florida fiasco were the equivalent of some kind of military junta. European reporting of US affairs is unbelievably biased – approaching the level of anti-American propaganda. Outside of the Economist and a few British newspapers there is almost no source of news in Europe that does not toe an inaccurate and biased anti-Americanism. From Le Monde to Die Zeit, the European people have been told lie after lie about the American people. The concept of editorial balance or even so much as simply reporting the truth seems not to exist in Europe, a concept that European intellectuals like Jean-Francois Revel have decried as being contrary to the values of a free society.
Bush represents the negation of the postmodern values of Europe. He believes in such “archaic” concepts as good and evil. He is not afraid to stand for his beliefs. He is not afraid to challenge evil where he finds it. He believes that the nation-state is still the primary actor in international affairs. He isn’t postmodern, he doesn’t ascribe to the amoral narcissism that is the cornerstone of the EU, he’s religious. In short, he’s an American in the Jacksonian tradition.
What really makes the EUrocrats mad is that he’s winning. Afghanistan wasn’t the quagmire that the EUrocrats said it would be. The “Arab Street” didn’t rise up against the United States. He’s told Arafat to allez au diable while the EU kept throwing more money his way to buy even more suicide bomb belts. He vanquished Saddam Hussein, and despite all the cries of “quagmire” from the European press he has no intention of surrendering to the Ba’athists and leaving the Iraqi people to rot. The US economy is running rings around the stale and ossified EU. Where Europe is weak, America is strong, and it only highlights the fact that the Europeans have embraced a worldview of ever encroaching statism that has never and will never work. It’s classic cognitive dissonance.
Despite all the meaningless and futile protests, it is clear that the increasingly shrill and radical left have failed. Their stance for more appeasement, more nihilism, and the fundamentally flawed values of postmodernism are as much of an anachronism as the Japanese soldiers left on an island who vowed to fight for the Emperor years after the war had been lost. The leaders of Old Europe may scorn and seethe, but it cannot change the fact that a Texas “cowboy” has beaten them.