We are here to save the West. We see that politics and the political systems have failed or reached a dead end. But how does one save a moribund system from the grasp of an elite, of institutions and to be frank - a significant part of the electorate that benefits from it?

Since 2016 the very word for change is the dread and promise that is Populism. In its promise is a belief that our democracy is not just a finely tuned system and a machine that can, and should be managed, but the ultimate expression of a sovereign people.

The challenge is both national and supra-national. For today institutions not only span across countries but engulf entire continents. The whole of Europe and the whole of the West is intertwined in a myriad of ways – through academia, through the media and through law.

Populism is often decried by its detractors as mere demagoguery – the dark art of fanning popular unrest or the great unwashed ashes to seize power for the sake of power alone. But if we are to use Populism, what is it that we wish to conjure up? The election of Donald Trump as People’s Tribune in 2016 along with Brexit started the trend of vast numbers of voters breaking away from traditional voting patterns to support radical change. Before any of this, however, ‘populism’ referred mostly to left-wing movements – SYRIZA in Greece and Hugo Chavez in Venezuela come to mind. Are we here coming up against the limitations of this word? Is populism a guiding principle or a political method?

The idea of popular uprisings has always been a double-edged sword - the promise of liberation, symbolized in the 1989 great German slogan “Wir sind das Volk!”, but also seen in the violent passions of mob rule, and the corruption historically following in its wake.

Are we to condemn Caesar for crossing the Rubicon? Or condemn that arch-populist Pompey for forcing Caesar to do so, while backing a corrupt system? This is a timeless question, and one that shakes the very foundations of the Western world as we speak. There has never been a more apt time to answer them.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Patrick Deneen is a professor of political science at the University of Notre Dame. Professor Deneen rose to prominence with his 2018 book Why Liberalism Failed. It drew a readership from the entire spectrum of American politics; from Cornel West, Jacobin Magazine and President Obama to the likes of Jonah Goldberg and George Will. The book drew praise and criticism alike as well as throwing a wrench in the smooth workings of the left-right divide of American intellectual life. He is a noted student of American democracy and shares many perspectives with one of its most noted observers and commenters, Alexis de Tocqueville.

He visits our podcast to talk about his latest book, Regime Change - Towards a Postliberal future.

A conservative who rejects both the dogma of Republican Party “freemarket” corporatism as well as libertarian atomism he instead advances the argument for a common good conservatism. Being branded simultaneously dangerous radical and nefarious reactionary Professor Deneen traces the common good doctrine back to the very foundations of America and ties it to a wider European tradition.

If our post-liberal future is to have a chance it is time to slaughter sacred cows and do battle against all both the current political regime and the nihilism of those who say that nothing can be done.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Why is modern architecture so ugly? Since at least 1950 the world has gotten immensely less attractive. Under the banner of poverty alleviating and social housing beauty in urban spaces became an outdated concept. Progress demanded that the bourgeoisie notion of function be discarded which is why your local library and Opera house now looks something designed by a wicked totalitarian regime totally obsessed with off putting shapes in steel and glass.

Surprisingly not everyone thinks Modernist Architecture, the official name of the movement - think Stalinst but without the sense of grandeur, is great. Carl tends to agree. So we interviewed one of the leading lights of a popular rebellion against Modernism to ask if we are condemned to a future where architecture is still making us depressed. He was suitably optimistic but warned us that this view might be a sign of political extremism, and as he'd been told by his opponents in the architectural establishment, you guessed it, racism.

Colour us surprised. We needed to know more.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.