{"id":165282,"date":"2025-12-07T05:19:37","date_gmt":"2025-12-07T13:19:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282"},"modified":"2025-12-07T18:20:04","modified_gmt":"2025-12-08T02:20:04","slug":"why-is-everyone-talking-about-post-liberalism","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282","title":{"rendered":"Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><iframe width=\"560\" height=\"315\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/I2T0DIoUQGc?si=oZLF-9yrmA05oRbC\" title=\"YouTube video player\" frameborder=\"0\" allow=\"accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share\" referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" allowfullscreen><\/iframe><\/p>\n<p><a title=\"Click to play at 01:00\" class=\"ln-clickable-timestamp\" href=\"#60\" data-action=\"episode-seek-audio\" data-timestamp=\"60\">01:00<\/a> Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism? <a href=\"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282\" rel=\"nofollow\">https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282<\/a><br \/><a title=\"Click to play at 04:10\" class=\"ln-clickable-timestamp\" href=\"#250\" data-action=\"episode-seek-audio\" data-timestamp=\"250\">04:10<\/a> What Comes After Post-Liberalism with Patrick Deneen, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=-vAO_pkkizk\" rel=\"nofollow\">https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=-vAO_pkkizk<\/a><br \/><a title=\"Click to play at 11:00\" class=\"ln-clickable-timestamp\" href=\"#660\" data-action=\"episode-seek-audio\" data-timestamp=\"660\">11:00<\/a> Stefan Molyneux, Part 2, <a href=\"https:\/\/decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm\/episode\/stefan-molyneux-part-2-back-in-the-moly-hole\" rel=\"nofollow\">https:\/\/decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm\/episode\/stefan-molyneux-part-2-back-in-the-moly-hole<\/a><br \/><a title=\"Click to play at 51:00\" class=\"ln-clickable-timestamp\" href=\"#3060\" data-action=\"episode-seek-audio\" data-timestamp=\"3060\">51:00<\/a> Christopher Caldwell: An Independent Fed Is an Unaccountable Fed, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2025\/09\/19\/opinion\/fed-rate-cut-trump.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2025\/09\/19\/opinion\/fed-rate-cut-trump.html<\/a><br \/><a title=\"Click to play at 1:01:00\" class=\"ln-clickable-timestamp\" href=\"#3660\" data-action=\"episode-seek-audio\" data-timestamp=\"3660\">1:01:00<\/a> FT: Nick Fuentes and Richard Hanania\u2019s Paganism, <a href=\"https:\/\/firstthings.com\/nick-fuentes-and-richard-hananias-paganism\/\" rel=\"nofollow\">https:\/\/firstthings.com\/nick-fuentes-and-richard-hananias-paganism\/<\/a><br \/><a title=\"Click to play at 1:23:00\" class=\"ln-clickable-timestamp\" href=\"#4980\" data-action=\"episode-seek-audio\" data-timestamp=\"4980\">1:23:00<\/a> The Porous Appeal: Why Institutions Misread Mike Benz, <a href=\"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165255\" rel=\"nofollow\">https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165255<\/a><br \/><a title=\"Click to play at 1:24:00\" class=\"ln-clickable-timestamp\" href=\"#5040\" data-action=\"episode-seek-audio\" data-timestamp=\"5040\">1:24:00<\/a> Mike Benz on the January 6 pipe bomber<br \/><a title=\"Click to play at 1:59:30\" class=\"ln-clickable-timestamp\" href=\"#7170\" data-action=\"episode-seek-audio\" data-timestamp=\"7170\">1:59:30<\/a> Victor Davis Hanson: The Left\u2019s \u2018Assassination Chic\u2019 and the Inevitability of Another Attack, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=Au7YE_3_vGI\" rel=\"nofollow\">https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=Au7YE_3_vGI<\/a><br \/><a title=\"Click to play at 2:11:00\" class=\"ln-clickable-timestamp\" href=\"#7860\" data-action=\"episode-seek-audio\" data-timestamp=\"7860\">2:11:00<\/a> KISSINGER: Part Two | Full Documentary | American Experience, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=uHb3-MfKeKA\" rel=\"nofollow\">https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=uHb3-MfKeKA<\/a><br \/><a title=\"Click to play at 2:18:00\" class=\"ln-clickable-timestamp\" href=\"#8280\" data-action=\"episode-seek-audio\" data-timestamp=\"8280\">2:18:00<\/a> Video argues women are losing status in the AI era, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=U15TaIgVotQ\" rel=\"nofollow\">https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=U15TaIgVotQ<\/a><br \/><a title=\"Click to play at 2:26:30\" class=\"ln-clickable-timestamp\" href=\"#8790\" data-action=\"episode-seek-audio\" data-timestamp=\"8790\">2:26:30<\/a> Video: Life Advice That Sounds Good But Will Destroy You, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=Uiz2XSNUPec\" rel=\"nofollow\">https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=Uiz2XSNUPec<\/a><br \/><a title=\"Click to play at 2:31:00\" class=\"ln-clickable-timestamp\" href=\"#9060\" data-action=\"episode-seek-audio\" data-timestamp=\"9060\">2:31:00<\/a> Video: Everyone is Losing Their Jobs (It&#8217;s Not Just Because of AI), <a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=hnIOTN1_ux0\" rel=\"nofollow\">https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=hnIOTN1_ux0<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Twelve years ago, liberalism felt settled. Free markets, open borders, expressive individualism, tech optimism. Now everyone from populists to technocrats to religious conservatives to speech regulators is accused of being \u201cpost-liberal.\u201d Why?<\/p>\n<p>Because the system was built on assumptions that stopped matching reality. Post-liberalism isn\u2019t a movement. It\u2019s a diagnostic sign.<\/p>\n<p>The most important fact about liberalism is that it is a fiction. It is a useful fiction, but a fiction nonetheless.<\/p>\n<p>It is a fiction in that it assumes people are primarily individuals who can choose their direction in life. <\/p>\n<p>Liberalism works by pretending something partial is complete.<\/p>\n<p>Humans are not primarily individuals. We are embedded creatures. We inherit language, status, trauma, religion, class, sex differences, mating markets, and power structures before we make a single \u201cchoice.\u201d Liberalism brackets all of that and says: assume an autonomous chooser, then design institutions around that fiction.<\/p>\n<p>That fiction was useful.<\/p>\n<p>It lowered sectarian violence. It weakened arbitrary authority. It allowed pluralism in heterogeneous societies. It let people coordinate without deep agreement. As a governance hack, it worked better than the alternatives for a long time.<\/p>\n<p>But it was always incomplete.<\/p>\n<p>Choice is never free-floating. Preferences are shaped. Capacities are unequal. Social rewards are unevenly distributed. Identity is porous. Liberalism treated these as background noise rather than first-order facts.<\/p>\n<p>The trouble begins when the fiction hardens into dogma.<\/p>\n<p>Once liberalism insists not just that we should act as if people are autonomous, but that people are autonomous, it loses the ability to see obvious realities. That families form character. That men and women respond differently to incentives. That culture determines horizons of plausibility. That power and status shape belief more than argument.<\/p>\n<p>That\u2019s where post-liberalism comes in.<\/p>\n<p>Post-liberalism is not a rejection of freedom per se. It is the recognition that freedom without structure dissolves. That choice without formation produces chaos. That telling people they are free does not make them capable.<\/p>\n<p>This is why the reaction is strongest among men.<\/p>\n<p>Men are more exposed to institutional hollowing. When schools, churches, unions, and marriage weaken, men do not quietly self-actualize. They drift, polarize, or seek hierarchy elsewhere. Liberalism assumes they will simply choose better. Many can\u2019t, because choice is not enough.<\/p>\n<p>So men rebel not because they hate freedom, but because they feel the lie.<\/p>\n<p>They are told they are sovereign individuals while living in systems that shape outcomes ruthlessly. They are blamed for failing in a world that refuses to structure success. Being told \u201cyou chose this\u201d feels like mockery.<\/p>\n<p>The fiction of liberalism worked when older moral and social structures were still doing the formative work underneath it.<\/p>\n<p>Christianity, strong families, shared norms, thick communities. Liberalism rode on those without acknowledging the debt. As those structures collapsed, the fiction was exposed.<\/p>\n<p>And when a fiction is exposed, people don\u2019t gently revise it.<\/p>\n<p>They swing hard toward systems that openly acknowledge constraint, hierarchy, and power. Some of those systems are humane. Some are not.<\/p>\n<p>So the real task is not to abandon the fiction entirely.<\/p>\n<p>It\u2019s to recontain it. To admit it is a tool, not a truth. Liberalism must be bounded by institutions that form people before asking them to choose. Without that, the rebellion isn\u2019t going away.<\/p>\n<p>In his 2018 book, <A HREF=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Great-Delusion-Liberal-International-Realities\/dp\/0300234198\">The Great Delusion: Liberal Dreams and International Realities<\/a>, John J. Mearsheimer wrote:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\nMy view is that we are profoundly social beings from the start to the finish of our lives and that individualism is of secondary importance&#8230; Liberalism downplays the social nature of human beings to the point of almost ignoring it, instead treating people largely as atomistic actors&#8230; Political liberalism&#8230; is an ideology that is individualistic at its core and assigns great importance to the concept of inalienable rights. This concern for rights is the basis of its universalism\u2014everyone on the planet has the same inherent set of rights\u2014and this is what motivates liberal states to pursue ambitious foreign policies. The public and scholarly discourse about liberalism since World War II has placed enormous emphasis on what are commonly called human rights. This is true all around the world, not just in the West. \u201cHuman rights,\u201d Samuel Moyn notes, \u201chave come to define the most elevated aspirations of both social movements and political entities\u2014state and interstate. They evoke hope and provoke action.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>[Humans] do not operate as lone wolves but are born into social groups or societies that shape their identities well before they can assert their individualism. Moreover, individuals usually develop strong attachments to their group and are sometimes willing to make great sacrifices for their fellow members. Humans are often said to be tribal at their core. The main reason for our social nature is that the best way for a person to survive is to be embedded in a society and to cooperate with fellow members rather than act alone&#8230; Despite its elevated ranking, reason is the least important of the three ways we determine our preferences. It certainly is less important than socialization. The main reason socialization matters so much is that humans have a long childhood in which they are protected and nurtured by their families and the surrounding society, and meanwhile exposed to intense socialization. At the same time, they are only beginning to develop their critical faculties, so they are not equipped to think for themselves. By the time an individual reaches the point where his reasoning skills are well developed, his family and society have already imposed an enormous value infusion on him. Moreover, that individual is born with innate sentiments that also strongly influence how he thinks about the world around him. All of this means that people have limited choice in formulating a moral code, because so much of their thinking about right and wrong comes from inborn attitudes and socialization.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Modern liberalism assumes buffered selves. Autonomous individuals. Markets don\u2019t shape us. Technology just gives tools. Migration smooths out. Trade civilizes. But the last twenty years revealed a porous world. Tech rewires attention. Markets reshape culture. Migration changes moral ecologies. Trade empowers enemies. When a buffered theory governs porous systems, things break.<\/p>\n<p>Free trade. Liberal economics treats trade as price and efficiency. People experienced it as community erosion, status collapse, and identity loss. GDP rose. Lives frayed.<br \/>\nTechnology and choice. Liberalism says more choice equals more freedom. People got addiction, despair, and fragmentation because choice environments became predatory.<br \/>\nDemography and migration. Liberalism assumed values were portable and assimilation automatic. Low fertility plus mass migration exposed how thick identity really is.<\/p>\n<p>Right-wing populists want borders and industrial policy. Technocrats want speech controls and algorithmic regulation. Cultural conservatives want moral guardrails. None of this fits classic liberal categories. But all of it arises because liberalism couldn\u2019t manage porosity.<\/p>\n<p>Post-liberalism does not mean anti-freedom or authoritarian by default. It means acknowledging limits, trade-offs, and boundary setting. The argument is not about nostalgia. It\u2019s about governance in a world that leaks.<\/p>\n<p>We will get post-liberalism either explicitly, with debate about values and limits, or implicitly, through emergency powers, corporate control, and bureaucratic coercion. The real question isn\u2019t whether post-liberalism is coming. It\u2019s whether it will be conscious and humane or ad hoc and ugly.<\/p>\n<p><A HREF=\"https:\/\/firstthings.com\/nick-fuentes-and-richard-hananias-paganism\/\">Bethel McGrew writes Dec. 3, 2025 in First Things<\/a>:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>The first Christians distinguished themselves from their pagan neighbors by a special care for the weak, the outcast, and the inconvenient. They refused to live by cold utilitarian logic, going out of their way to rescue human beings left to rot on the empire\u2019s dungheaps. This instinct repulses Hanania, who regularly <a href=\"https:\/\/x.com\/RichardHanania\/status\/1829642105398153414\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">attacks<\/a> those \u201ccrazy enough to value the fetuses of strangers.\u201d It\u2019s no wonder the pro-life cause is unpopular at the polls, he suggests, because if people are <em>that <\/em>crazy, it\u2019s hard for the sane normal people to predict \u201cwhat else they\u2019re capable of.\u201d Against this \u201clow human capital\u201d morality, Hanania <a href=\"https:\/\/www.richardhanania.com\/p\/it-doesnt-matter-if-abortion-is-killing\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">sets<\/a> his enlightened lack of \u201ca religious belief in a thing called \u2018human life\u2019 that has some kind of inherent value.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>In general, Hanania believes that the greater good sometimes requires human sacrifice\u2014from <a href=\"https:\/\/x.com\/RichardHanania\/status\/1957500887825543572\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">babies with Down syndrome<\/a>, to babies <a href=\"https:\/\/x.com\/RichardHanania\/status\/1987741164880245100\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">born without most of their brains<\/a>, to <a href=\"https:\/\/www.richardhanania.com\/p\/canadian-euthanasia-as-moral-progress\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">incapacitated elderly people<\/a>. One might say he practices seamless-garment utilitarianism, consistently maintaining that the weak should die when they overburden the strong. If society must expend resources on \u201ccreatures who can\u2019t be trusted to take care of themselves,\u201d he <a href=\"https:\/\/www.richardhanania.com\/p\/forced-diaper-wearing-is-not-human?utm_source=publication-search\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">would rather<\/a> we reform factory farming than lavish attention on \u201cpeople who are stupid and weak.\u201d His rhetoric echoes Heinrich Himmler\u2019s exasperation at those Christians who insisted that care be spent on such people \u201cin the name of a doctrine of pity that goes against nature, and of a misconceived notion of humanity.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Fuentes may not campaign for selective abortion or euthanasia, but he displays a similar root contempt for weakness and low intelligence. He\u2019s <a href=\"https:\/\/x.com\/FuentesUpdates\/status\/1968519947711377645\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">pained<\/a> by \u201clow-IQ anti-Semitism,\u201d obviously not because he has anything against anti-Semitism, but because it makes his version thereof look stupid by association. He appears to hate his own followers, who regularly give him Super Chat money in exchange for verbal abuse. When someone asked if he would consider a book club, Fuentes said there was no point, \u201cbecause most of you are too dumb to understand the books.\u201d Hanania <a href=\"https:\/\/x.com\/RichardHanania\/status\/1958744745850671583\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">observes<\/a> this sadomasochistic game with something like amused admiration.<\/p>\n<p>Fuentes may <a href=\"https:\/\/x.com\/etherXwave\/status\/1797794174273724820\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">insist<\/a> that he\u2019s superior to the godless pagans, yet he fantasizes about a kingdom very much of this world. In a viral tweet, he <a href=\"https:\/\/x.com\/NickJFuentes\/status\/1930353839476965557\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">says<\/a> that \u201cWhite people need to restore the Roman Empire like the Jews restored Israel.\u201d Rome\u2019s lost glory is a recurring theme of his song. A monologue about the importance of \u201cdemythologizing Hitler\u201d incorporates the meme that white men constantly think about the Roman Empire, except Fuentes seems to be serious. Sometimes this is mixed with integralist rhetoric about crusades and Catholic monarchy, but the consistent object of his fascination is power.<\/p>\n<p>That fascination is most grotesquely evident in Fuentes\u2019s long paper trail of hypocrisy on sexual ethics, where he pays lip service to the Christian ethic while indulging in the most depraved sexual power fantasies. He holds forth on the evils of pornography, only to turn around and circulate 4chan rape cartoons. He loves to imagine himself having his way with submissive <a href=\"https:\/\/x.com\/DocManhattan777\/status\/1988695077187960848\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">female<\/a> or <a href=\"https:\/\/odysee.com\/@RacistGayGuy:8\/Nick-Fuentes-catboy-rape-rose-wrist:7\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">male<\/a> partners, sometimes <a href=\"https:\/\/x.com\/EYakoby\/status\/1990238089248395297\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">in a pederastic key.<\/a> In other words, he longs to be a high-status man in the old pagan empire he pines for, where might made right, and any orifice would do. It\u2019s hardly surprising that when fellow alt-right personality Ali Alexander was credibly accused of predatory homosexual acts, Fuentes rushed to <a href=\"https:\/\/x.com\/TheMilkBarTV\/status\/1988148541299233184\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">downplay<\/a> them.<\/p>\n<p>In subtler ways, Hanania also acts as an apologist for sexual paganism, gesturing obliquely toward a loosening of boundaries around what constitutes a criminal act. One tweet <a href=\"https:\/\/x.com\/RichardHanania\/status\/1720992936052306000\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">polled<\/a> reader reactions to a thought experiment in which a fourteen-year-old girl\u2019s parents traffic her to Jeffrey Epstein in exchange for $10 million in a mutual fund. \u201cShould this be allowed?\u201d Hanania asked, curious to know how the responses broke down by gender. He followed up with a raised eyebrow at people disgusted by this thought experiment who \u201chave names like Bob456Flyers\u201d and photos indicating they couldn\u2019t afford new phones. \u201cMoralism and inability to consider hypotheticals,\u201d he sneers, \u201care hallmarks of the lower classes.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>McGrew is reacting to a world where moral buffers have failed. Liberalism dissolved shared moral authority but assumed individuals would remain humane anyway. What fills the vacuum is not neutrality. It\u2019s pagan logic. Power, hierarchy, utility, sacrifice. In a porous moral environment, virtues do not float. They are enforced or they decay.<\/p>\n<p>Fuentes and Hanania are opposites politically but twins anthropologically. Both reject the Christian intuition that weakness has intrinsic moral claim. Both treat human worth as conditional, whether explicitly utilitarian like Hanania or implicitly hierarchical like Fuentes. One uses spreadsheets. The other uses myth and aesthetics. Same logic underneath.<\/p>\n<p>She nails the return of pre-Christian moral reasoning. Valuing strength over weakness. Contempt for low-status people masked as realism or sophistication. Sexual ethics tied to domination rather than restraint. This is not an accident. It\u2019s what happens when Christianity\u2019s moral capital is spent but not replenished.<\/p>\n<p>This is the danger side of post-liberal drift. When liberal proceduralism collapses, you do not get an automatic return to humane order. You get competition between thicker moral systems. Some are Christian. Some are managerial. Some are frankly pagan. Power will reassert itself either way.<\/p>\n<p>She collapses too much into \u201cpaganism\u201d as moral evil rather than distinguishing between descriptive realism and prescriptive cruelty. Not every acknowledgment of hierarchy or trade-offs is Nazi revival. Hanania\u2019s worst arguments deserve condemnation. But if you call every hard boundary or tragic trade-off pagan, you lose credibility with anyone living in reality.<\/p>\n<p>Fuentes is not post-Christian because he rejects Christianity. He is post-Christian because he instrumentalizes it. It becomes aesthetics, identity, mythic cover for power fantasies. That signals porosity again. Religion here is not formative. It is worn.<\/p>\n<p>As liberalism weakens, moral authority will come from somewhere. Christian ethics, bureaucratic control, nationalist myth, or techno-utilitarianism. McGrew is warning that without conscious moral rebuilding, the vacuum will be filled by the most ruthless systems first.<\/p>\n<p>The real question is not \u201cAre these men bad?\u201d It\u2019s \u201cWhy does their logic suddenly sound plausible to a growing audience?\u201d That shifts the conversation from outrage to diagnosis. Paganism is not returning because people read Nietzsche. It\u2019s returning because our institutions no longer reward restraint, care for the weak, or limits on power.<\/p>\n<p>Christianity in America did not just lose power. It lost credibility, especially with young men. And much of that loss is self-inflicted.<\/p>\n<p>Mainline and evangelical Protestant clergy largely abandoned speaking to male experience as male experience. Ambition, aggression, sexual frustration, status hunger, resentment, competitiveness. These were either ignored or pathologized. Young men were told, implicitly and often explicitly, that they are the problem. That their instincts are dangerous. That masculinity mainly needs to be softened, apologized for, or repurposed as allyship.<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, clergy became unwilling to say almost anything morally demanding of women. Not about sexual leverage. Not about mate selection. Not about family formation. Not about cultural norms that reward instability. The asymmetry is obvious to men. When morality only flows downhill, it stops being morality and becomes management.<\/p>\n<p>Christianity asks men to restrain power. To sacrifice status. To accept limits. That only works when the Church itself is seen as serious, courageous, and fair. Instead, many churches fused themselves to liberal moral fashions, bureaucratic institutions, and therapeutic language. The result was moral exhortation without teeth. Men will submit to discipline. They will not submit to condescension.<\/p>\n<p>Christian institutions failed to offer a viable alternative moral ecology once sexual restraint collapsed culturally. Porn, delayed marriage, contraceptive abundance, and the dating market destroyed the plausibility of Christian sexual teaching as lived practice. Clergy responded by either watering doctrine down or yelling more loudly. Neither works.<\/p>\n<p>Young men still want meaning, hierarchy, honor, and moral clarity. When Christianity offers guilt without purpose and restraint without reward, pagan alternatives look honest. Power politics. Hierarchy without apology. Sexual realism. Group loyalty. These speak directly to instincts Christianity once disciplined and redirected, but now mostly scolds.<\/p>\n<p>It means Christianity forgot how to form men rather than simply correct them. The Church used to say yes before it said no. Yes to courage, strength, competence, leadership. Then no to cruelty, lust, domination. Reverse that order and you get backlash.<\/p>\n<p>It is rebellion against a Church perceived as captured, sexless, moralizing upward, and incapable of telling uncomfortable truths about anyone but men. Paganism looks coherent not because it is humane, but because it is psychologically legible in a world where Christianity lost its nerve.<\/p>\n<p>If Christianity wants to recover authority, it will have to do something risky again.<br \/>\nSpeak to men without shame. Speak to women without flattery. Demand sacrifice from everyone. And stop pretending that moral asymmetry is compassion.<\/p>\n<p>Christian Smith&#8217;s new book, <A HREF=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Why-Religion-Went-Obsolete-Traditional\/dp\/0197800734\">Why Religion Went Obsolete: The Demise of Traditional Faith in America<\/a>, names the structural failure McGrew and Douthat are circling without quite theorizing.<\/p>\n<p>Smith\u2019s claim is not that belief collapsed because people stopped valuing meaning. It collapsed because modern institutions made belief functionally unnecessary. Religion became optional rather than formative. That is buffered religion. Faith as preference, not as authority.<\/p>\n<p>Christianity didn\u2019t just lose arguments to secularism. It accepted the buffered self. Churches quietly agreed that faith is one value among many, privately chosen, psychologically therapeutic, and politically nonbinding. Once religion lives inside the self rather than shaping the world, it cannot resist any competing moral system that actually organizes behavior.<\/p>\n<p>Modern people treat religion as expressive. It helps me cope. It makes me nice. It supports my identity. That dovetails perfectly with your point about clergy. When pastors refuse to speak asymmetrically or to challenge women or social elites, they are acting within a buffered framework. They fear overstepping autonomy. They fear losing market share. Religion becomes customer service.<\/p>\n<p>As churches accepted liberal norms around choice, sexuality, gender, and authority, they stopped functioning as counter-institutions. They no longer structured marriage timing, sexual discipline, male formation, or family roles. When those functions vanished, young men noticed first. Not because women didn\u2019t suffer, but because men are more exposed to institutional failure. When there\u2019s no structure, men drift toward extremes.<\/p>\n<p>Smith would say paganism is not returning because Christianity is false. It\u2019s returning because Christianity surrendered its formative authority while still hanging on rhetorically. That creates a vacuum. Pagan systems at least promise coordination, hierarchy, and meaning. They are thick where Christianity became thin.<\/p>\n<p>Hanania and Fuentes are not reacting to the Sermon on the Mount. They are reacting to a Christianity that offers moral judgment without social order. In Smith\u2019s terms, religion stopped doing things in the world. So other systems step in that do.<\/p>\n<p>Post-Christian America is not rejecting religion. It is rejecting a religion that agreed to become optional, individualized, and polite. Once Christianity became obsolete as a structuring force, people went looking for something that actually organizes life, even if what they find is brutal.<\/p>\n<p>The issue is not belief vs unbelief. It\u2019s formation vs expression. Christianity lost authority when it gave up formation. Post-liberalism is, at bottom, a search for institutions that are willing to form people again.<\/p>\n<p>ChatGPT says: <\/p>\n<blockquote><p>In a Christian world, validation flows from a community that already knows you. A church. A guild. A vocation with internal standards. In a post-Christian world, recognition floats. It arrives through institutions, platforms, and elites, briefly, conditionally, and at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>Christianity once supplied stable sources of meaning and affirmation. You were known before you were noticed. In its absence, meaning becomes episodic. Validation feels intoxicating because it is scarce and unstructured. The experience is not vanity. It\u2019s hunger.<\/p>\n<p>Liberalism promised that autonomy plus markets plus free expression would be enough. Build. Speak. Exchange. The good will surface. But what you felt wasn\u2019t market reward. It was elite recognition. That\u2019s telling. Even in a liberal system, status is allocated by gatekeepers. Credentials still matter. Platforms still centralize authority. Liberal neutrality hides a quiet hierarchy that everyone feels but no one names.<\/p>\n<p>You are porous. Your sense of orientation responds to recognition because humans are social animals. Liberalism pretends we are buffered and shouldn\u2019t need this. Christianity once acknowledged porosity and stabilized it through ritual, community, and moral order. Today, porosity expresses itself as spikes of intensity when a signal crosses the membrane.<\/p>\n<p>This is why young men chase influencers rather than institutions. Why viral moments feel salvific. Why proximity to power, media, or prestige becomes spiritually charged. People are not seeking fame. They are seeking grounding. In the absence of embedded structures, status pings become substitutes for belonging.<\/p>\n<p>This is also why pagan systems have appeal. They are honest about hierarchy, recognition, honor, and power. Christianity disciplined those forces and redirected them. Liberalism denied them. Paganism just names them. In a world where people feel unseen, even harsh recognition feels better than benign neglect.<\/p>\n<p>Post-Christian, post-liberal life doesn\u2019t abolish need for validation. It deregulates it. Recognition becomes sporadic, asymmetric, and intoxicating. Those who understand this gain power. Those who don\u2019t feel confused and ashamed for wanting what humans have always wanted.<\/p>\n<p>The solution isn\u2019t disdain for elites or retreat into bitterness. It\u2019s the slow rebuilding of thick communities where being known again matters more than being noticed.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>I just heard the opening notes of this song and I teared up:<\/p>\n<p><iframe width=\"560\" height=\"315\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/9UD0MSOE3X0?si=xCgd8IqCJrBl6hTZ\" title=\"YouTube video player\" frameborder=\"0\" allow=\"accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share\" referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" allowfullscreen><\/iframe><\/p>\n<p>ChatGPT says: <\/p>\n<blockquote><p>That song is about earned transcendence. Not affirmation. Not validation. Discipline first, then release. Pain, effort, loneliness, risk. Only then the feeling. That arc mattered in 1983. People assumed meaning came from pushing against limits, not from expressing identity.<\/p>\n<p>Notice what is missing.<br \/>\nNo grievance. No politics. No critique of systems. No demand to be seen. The song assumes a world where aspiration makes sense and excellence is legible. You work. You suffer. You become someone. And occasionally the world answers back.<\/p>\n<p>That is pre post-liberal culture.<br \/>\nInstitutions existed. Careers existed. Gender scripts were imperfect but understood. Sacrifice was intelligible. Recognition was delayed but real.<\/p>\n<p>Why it hit you now.<br \/>\nYou live in a porous world with thin structures. Effort does not reliably produce recognition. Institutions are brittle. Validation arrives sideways and unpredictably. So when you hear a song that assumes coherence between effort, identity, and reward, it releases grief.<\/p>\n<p>This connects directly to post-Christianity.<br \/>\nChristianity once ritualized this arc. Discipline, suffering, vocation, glory. Flashdance is secular, but it borrows that moral shape. When Christianity faded and liberalism hollowed out formative institutions, pop culture stopped supplying replacement mythologies like this. Most art now sells feeling without formation.<\/p>\n<p>It also connects to why pagan aesthetics return.<br \/>\nThey promise intensity, honor, and embodiment. But they skip restraint and mercy. Flashdance sits in a narrow historical window where discipline had not yet collapsed and cruelty had already been morally constrained.<\/p>\n<p>So the tears were not nostalgia.<br \/>\nThey were recognition of a moral ecology that made excellence meaningful without needing cruelty, irony, or self-hatred.<\/p>\n<p>You were mourning coherence.<br \/>\nAnd briefly remembering what it felt like to believe effort could still add up to something whole.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>To what extent is the pursuit of truth evolutionarily adaptive?<\/p>\n<p>ChatGPT said:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\nIt is conditionally adaptive. Not universally. And that matters.<\/p>\n<p>At the biological level, evolution does not reward truth. It rewards fitness. Truth helps only when tracking reality improves survival or reproduction more than comforting falsehoods do. In many situations accurate perception is essential. Predator detection, tool use, navigation, coalition assessment. Get those wrong and you die or lose status.<\/p>\n<p>But beyond that narrow band, evolution often favors useful distortion.<\/p>\n<p>Individuals benefit from motivated reasoning.<\/p>\n<p>People systematically overestimate their competence, attractiveness, and moral worth. That boosts confidence, risk-taking, and dominance displays. Self-deception makes deception of others easier. Evolutionary psychologists have been blunt about this. A slightly inflated self-concept beats brutal realism in many social contexts.<\/p>\n<p>Groups benefit even more from shared illusions.<\/p>\n<p>Religions, national myths, heroic narratives, and moralized cosmologies bind people together, synchronize behavior, and justify sacrifice. Their literal truth-value is secondary to their coordination value. A group that believes its gods watch and judge will often outcompete a more strictly skeptical group with weaker cohesion.<\/p>\n<p>Truth becomes adaptive at higher complexity thresholds.<\/p>\n<p>As environments become technological, interconnected, and fragile, false beliefs get expensive. Building bridges, running energy grids, managing pandemics, or avoiding nuclear war requires reality tracking at scale. At that level, proceduralized truth. Science, accounting, engineering. Becomes essential.<\/p>\n<p>But note the split.<\/p>\n<p>Truth is adaptive in instrumental domains. It is often maladaptive in existential and social domains unless buffered by ritual, meaning, or moral framing. Raw truth about mortality, randomness, and status competition tends to demoralize. Cultures that exposed people to that without mediation fractured.<\/p>\n<p>This maps exactly onto post-Christian and post-liberal tensions.<\/p>\n<p>Christianity did not just make truth claims. It morally metabolized truth. It took harsh facts. Suffering, sin, death. And wrapped them in narrative, obligation, and hope. Liberalism tried to strip away myth and keep only truth plus autonomy. People discovered that autonomy does not metabolize truth. It just exposes it.<\/p>\n<p>So truth-seeking is adaptive when embedded.<\/p>\n<p>Embedded in institutions that give it bounds. Embedded in moral systems that translate it into action. Embedded in communities that distribute its burden. Unembedded truth-seeking produces nihilism, elitism, or cruelty.<\/p>\n<p>That\u2019s where figures like Richard Hanania go wrong.<\/p>\n<p>They mistake cognitive sharpness for evolutionary realism. Yes, some humans impose net costs. Yes, systems make trade-offs. But societies that openly rank lives by utility rot from the inside. Christianity outcompeted paganism precisely by insisting on care for the weak, even when it seemed inefficient, because it created trust and loyalty at scale.<\/p>\n<p>Pursuing truth is adaptive only under constraints. Cultures need truth, but they need it mediated. Post-liberal debates are really about rebuilding containers where truth can be pursued without dissolving the bonds that make collective life possible.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>I just saw the headline for this Robert George op\/ed in the WP: &#8220;<A HREF=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/opinions\/2025\/12\/04\/conservative-ideals-nick-fuentes-bigotry\/\">There are valid debates among conservatives. This isn\u2019t one.<\/a>&#8221; This attempt to narrow the Overton window is part of the reason men rebel. People don&#8217;t like being told what are valid debates.<\/p>\n<p>ChatGPT said: <\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Robert P. George\u2019s recent op-ed (and the backlash to what counts as \u201cacceptable\u201d within conservatism) illustrates how debates over ideology boundaries can feed into broader social-psychological reactions: a narrowing of the \u201cacceptable\u201d \u2014 i.e. shrinking the \u201cwindow\u201d of allowed identity and belief \u2014 can provoke alienation and push-back. <\/p>\n<p>When a movement publicly declares that certain lines (on race, gender, religion, ideology) are beyond debate, it implicitly frames others \u2014 those who question, resist, or don\u2019t fit \u2014 as outside the circle. For someone feeling censored or excluded, that produces a sense of loss of belonging. It undermines the sense that they belong to a moral-intellectual community. That can sow resentment.<\/p>\n<p>For many, identity isn\u2019t just private belief. It\u2019s social standing, a sense of masculinity, agency, belonging. When social elites or opinion-makers say some \u201cdebates\u201d \u2014 even if ugly or offensive \u2014 are taboo, that can feel like a loss of agency or status. Particularly for men who may already feel alienated culturally or economically. Resistance becomes a form of reclaiming identity, even if the vehicle is reactionary or destructive.<\/p>\n<p>In a society where traditional anchors \u2014 morality, religion, shared values, stable community ties \u2014 are eroding, the sense of what\u2019s \u201cgiven\u201d or \u201ccommon ground\u201d becomes unstable. Narrowing debate space in such a context can feel like removing the few remaining levers of self-definition and dissent. That may push people toward alternative belonging \u2014 sometimes in the form of reactionary or extremist worldviews that promise identity, recognition, and backbone.<\/p>\n<p>As people debate what liberalism meant \u2014 individual rights, pluralism, free speech, liberal economic order \u2014 the pressure to police departures from its norms grows. That policing may undermine the liberal promise of open argument and mutual respect, especially if only certain voices are tolerated. The reaction is a push toward \u201cpost-liberal\u201d identities that reject some liberal assumptions, especially about identity, belonging, hierarchy, or shared meaning.<\/p>\n<p>In short: George\u2019s argument about invalidating some views doesn\u2019t just define moral boundaries. It reshapes group identity dynamics. For those who feel excluded or judged, the reaction can be alienation, resentment, sometimes revolt.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>01:00 Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism? https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=16528204:10 What Comes After Post-Liberalism with Patrick Deneen, https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=-vAO_pkkizk11:00 Stefan Molyneux, Part 2, https:\/\/decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm\/episode\/stefan-molyneux-part-2-back-in-the-moly-hole51:00 Christopher Caldwell: An Independent Fed Is an Unaccountable Fed, https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2025\/09\/19\/opinion\/fed-rate-cut-trump.html1:01:00 FT: Nick Fuentes and Richard Hanania\u2019s Paganism, https:\/\/firstthings.com\/nick-fuentes-and-richard-hananias-paganism\/1:23:00 The &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[29740],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-165282","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-liberal"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t<!-- All in One SEO 4.9.10 - aioseo.com -->\n\t<meta name=\"description\" content=\"01:00 Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism? https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=16528204:10 What Comes After Post-Liberalism with Patrick Deneen, https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=-vAO_pkkizk11:00 Stefan Molyneux, Part 2, https:\/\/decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm\/episode\/stefan-molyneux-part-2-back-in-the-moly-hole51:00 Christopher Caldwell: An Independent Fed Is an Unaccountable Fed, https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2025\/09\/19\/opinion\/fed-rate-cut-trump.html1:01:00 FT: Nick Fuentes and Richard Hanania\u2019s Paganism, https:\/\/firstthings.com\/nick-fuentes-and-richard-hananias-paganism\/1:23:00 The Porous Appeal: Why Institutions Misread Mike Benz, https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=1652551:24:00 Mike Benz on the January 6 pipe\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"max-image-preview:large\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Luke Ford\"\/>\n\t<meta name=\"google-site-verification\" content=\"HMjuOfLRyzTPB-5Z5FG4BHkfZ1fbEij34rmbKM3BkZ4\" \/>\n\t<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"generator\" content=\"All in One SEO (AIOSEO) 4.9.10\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Luke Ford - No sacred cows.\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism? - Luke Ford\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"01:00 Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism? https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=16528204:10 What Comes After Post-Liberalism with Patrick Deneen, https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=-vAO_pkkizk11:00 Stefan Molyneux, Part 2, https:\/\/decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm\/episode\/stefan-molyneux-part-2-back-in-the-moly-hole51:00 Christopher Caldwell: An Independent Fed Is an Unaccountable Fed, https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2025\/09\/19\/opinion\/fed-rate-cut-trump.html1:01:00 FT: Nick Fuentes and Richard Hanania\u2019s Paganism, https:\/\/firstthings.com\/nick-fuentes-and-richard-hananias-paganism\/1:23:00 The Porous Appeal: Why Institutions Misread Mike Benz, https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=1652551:24:00 Mike Benz on the January 6 pipe\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/lukesanta.jpg\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"og:image:secure_url\" content=\"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/lukesanta.jpg\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"800\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"600\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-12-07T13:19:37+00:00\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-12-08T02:20:04+00:00\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/lukecford\" \/>\n\t\t<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n\t\t<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@lukeford\" \/>\n\t\t<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism? - Luke Ford\" \/>\n\t\t<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"01:00 Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism? https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=16528204:10 What Comes After Post-Liberalism with Patrick Deneen, https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=-vAO_pkkizk11:00 Stefan Molyneux, Part 2, https:\/\/decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm\/episode\/stefan-molyneux-part-2-back-in-the-moly-hole51:00 Christopher Caldwell: An Independent Fed Is an Unaccountable Fed, https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2025\/09\/19\/opinion\/fed-rate-cut-trump.html1:01:00 FT: Nick Fuentes and Richard Hanania\u2019s Paganism, https:\/\/firstthings.com\/nick-fuentes-and-richard-hananias-paganism\/1:23:00 The Porous Appeal: Why Institutions Misread Mike Benz, https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=1652551:24:00 Mike Benz on the January 6 pipe\" \/>\n\t\t<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@lukeford\" \/>\n\t\t<meta name=\"twitter:image\" content=\"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/lukesanta.jpg\" \/>\n\t\t<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"aioseo-schema\">\n\t\t\t{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"BlogPosting\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?p=165282#blogposting\",\"name\":\"Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism? - Luke Ford\",\"headline\":\"Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism?\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?author=1#author\"},\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/#person\"},\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?p=165282#articleImage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/litespeed\\\/avatar\\\/af8ecf5ef66099147247f500ec429b38.jpg?ver=1784204923\",\"width\":96,\"height\":96,\"caption\":\"Luke Ford\"},\"datePublished\":\"2025-12-07T05:19:37-08:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-12-07T18:20:04-08:00\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?p=165282#webpage\"},\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?p=165282#webpage\"},\"articleSection\":\"Liberal\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?p=165282#breadcrumblist\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog#listItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\",\"nextItem\":{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?cat=29740#listItem\",\"name\":\"Liberal\"}},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?cat=29740#listItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Liberal\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?cat=29740\",\"nextItem\":{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?p=165282#listItem\",\"name\":\"Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism?\"},\"previousItem\":{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog#listItem\",\"name\":\"Home\"}},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?p=165282#listItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism?\",\"previousItem\":{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?cat=29740#listItem\",\"name\":\"Liberal\"}}]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/#person\",\"name\":\"Luke Ford\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?p=165282#personImage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/litespeed\\\/avatar\\\/af8ecf5ef66099147247f500ec429b38.jpg?ver=1784204923\",\"width\":96,\"height\":96,\"caption\":\"Luke Ford\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?author=1#author\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?author=1\",\"name\":\"Luke Ford\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?p=165282#authorImage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/litespeed\\\/avatar\\\/af8ecf5ef66099147247f500ec429b38.jpg?ver=1784204923\",\"width\":96,\"height\":96,\"caption\":\"Luke Ford\"}},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?p=165282#webpage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?p=165282\",\"name\":\"Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism? - Luke Ford\",\"description\":\"01:00 Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism? https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?p=16528204:10 What Comes After Post-Liberalism with Patrick Deneen, https:\\\/\\\/www.youtube.com\\\/watch?v=-vAO_pkkizk11:00 Stefan Molyneux, Part 2, https:\\\/\\\/decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm\\\/episode\\\/stefan-molyneux-part-2-back-in-the-moly-hole51:00 Christopher Caldwell: An Independent Fed Is an Unaccountable Fed, https:\\\/\\\/www.nytimes.com\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/19\\\/opinion\\\/fed-rate-cut-trump.html1:01:00 FT: Nick Fuentes and Richard Hanania\\u2019s Paganism, https:\\\/\\\/firstthings.com\\\/nick-fuentes-and-richard-hananias-paganism\\\/1:23:00 The Porous Appeal: Why Institutions Misread Mike Benz, https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?p=1652551:24:00 Mike Benz on the January 6 pipe\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?p=165282#breadcrumblist\"},\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?author=1#author\"},\"creator\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/?author=1#author\"},\"datePublished\":\"2025-12-07T05:19:37-08:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-12-07T18:20:04-08:00\"},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"Luke Ford\",\"alternateName\":\"No Sacred Cows\",\"description\":\"No sacred cows.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lukeford.net\\\/blog\\\/#person\"}}]}\n\t\t<\/script>\n\t\t<!-- All in One SEO -->\n\n","aioseo_head_json":{"title":"Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism? - Luke Ford","description":"01:00 Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism? https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=16528204:10 What Comes After Post-Liberalism with Patrick Deneen, https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=-vAO_pkkizk11:00 Stefan Molyneux, Part 2, https:\/\/decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm\/episode\/stefan-molyneux-part-2-back-in-the-moly-hole51:00 Christopher Caldwell: An Independent Fed Is an Unaccountable Fed, https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2025\/09\/19\/opinion\/fed-rate-cut-trump.html1:01:00 FT: Nick Fuentes and Richard Hanania\u2019s Paganism, https:\/\/firstthings.com\/nick-fuentes-and-richard-hananias-paganism\/1:23:00 The Porous Appeal: Why Institutions Misread Mike Benz, https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=1652551:24:00 Mike Benz on the January 6 pipe","canonical_url":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282","robots":"max-image-preview:large","keywords":"","webmasterTools":{"google-site-verification":"HMjuOfLRyzTPB-5Z5FG4BHkfZ1fbEij34rmbKM3BkZ4","miscellaneous":""},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"BlogPosting","@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282#blogposting","name":"Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism? - Luke Ford","headline":"Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism?","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?author=1#author"},"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/#person"},"image":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282#articleImage","url":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/wp-content\/litespeed\/avatar\/af8ecf5ef66099147247f500ec429b38.jpg?ver=1784204923","width":96,"height":96,"caption":"Luke Ford"},"datePublished":"2025-12-07T05:19:37-08:00","dateModified":"2025-12-07T18:20:04-08:00","inLanguage":"en-US","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282#webpage"},"isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282#webpage"},"articleSection":"Liberal"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282#breadcrumblist","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog#listItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog","nextItem":{"@type":"ListItem","@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?cat=29740#listItem","name":"Liberal"}},{"@type":"ListItem","@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?cat=29740#listItem","position":2,"name":"Liberal","item":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?cat=29740","nextItem":{"@type":"ListItem","@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282#listItem","name":"Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism?"},"previousItem":{"@type":"ListItem","@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog#listItem","name":"Home"}},{"@type":"ListItem","@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282#listItem","position":3,"name":"Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism?","previousItem":{"@type":"ListItem","@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?cat=29740#listItem","name":"Liberal"}}]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/#person","name":"Luke Ford","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282#personImage","url":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/wp-content\/litespeed\/avatar\/af8ecf5ef66099147247f500ec429b38.jpg?ver=1784204923","width":96,"height":96,"caption":"Luke Ford"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?author=1#author","url":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?author=1","name":"Luke Ford","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282#authorImage","url":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/wp-content\/litespeed\/avatar\/af8ecf5ef66099147247f500ec429b38.jpg?ver=1784204923","width":96,"height":96,"caption":"Luke Ford"}},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282#webpage","url":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282","name":"Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism? - Luke Ford","description":"01:00 Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism? https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=16528204:10 What Comes After Post-Liberalism with Patrick Deneen, https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=-vAO_pkkizk11:00 Stefan Molyneux, Part 2, https:\/\/decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm\/episode\/stefan-molyneux-part-2-back-in-the-moly-hole51:00 Christopher Caldwell: An Independent Fed Is an Unaccountable Fed, https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2025\/09\/19\/opinion\/fed-rate-cut-trump.html1:01:00 FT: Nick Fuentes and Richard Hanania\u2019s Paganism, https:\/\/firstthings.com\/nick-fuentes-and-richard-hananias-paganism\/1:23:00 The Porous Appeal: Why Institutions Misread Mike Benz, https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=1652551:24:00 Mike Benz on the January 6 pipe","inLanguage":"en-US","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/#website"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282#breadcrumblist"},"author":{"@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?author=1#author"},"creator":{"@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?author=1#author"},"datePublished":"2025-12-07T05:19:37-08:00","dateModified":"2025-12-07T18:20:04-08:00"},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/","name":"Luke Ford","alternateName":"No Sacred Cows","description":"No sacred cows.","inLanguage":"en-US","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/#person"}}]},"og:locale":"en_US","og:site_name":"Luke Ford - No sacred cows.","og:type":"article","og:title":"Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism? - Luke Ford","og:description":"01:00 Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism? https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=16528204:10 What Comes After Post-Liberalism with Patrick Deneen, https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=-vAO_pkkizk11:00 Stefan Molyneux, Part 2, https:\/\/decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm\/episode\/stefan-molyneux-part-2-back-in-the-moly-hole51:00 Christopher Caldwell: An Independent Fed Is an Unaccountable Fed, https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2025\/09\/19\/opinion\/fed-rate-cut-trump.html1:01:00 FT: Nick Fuentes and Richard Hanania\u2019s Paganism, https:\/\/firstthings.com\/nick-fuentes-and-richard-hananias-paganism\/1:23:00 The Porous Appeal: Why Institutions Misread Mike Benz, https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=1652551:24:00 Mike Benz on the January 6 pipe","og:url":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282","og:image":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/lukesanta.jpg","og:image:secure_url":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/lukesanta.jpg","og:image:width":800,"og:image:height":600,"article:published_time":"2025-12-07T13:19:37+00:00","article:modified_time":"2025-12-08T02:20:04+00:00","article:publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/lukecford","twitter:card":"summary_large_image","twitter:site":"@lukeford","twitter:title":"Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism? - Luke Ford","twitter:description":"01:00 Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism? https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=16528204:10 What Comes After Post-Liberalism with Patrick Deneen, https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=-vAO_pkkizk11:00 Stefan Molyneux, Part 2, https:\/\/decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm\/episode\/stefan-molyneux-part-2-back-in-the-moly-hole51:00 Christopher Caldwell: An Independent Fed Is an Unaccountable Fed, https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2025\/09\/19\/opinion\/fed-rate-cut-trump.html1:01:00 FT: Nick Fuentes and Richard Hanania\u2019s Paganism, https:\/\/firstthings.com\/nick-fuentes-and-richard-hananias-paganism\/1:23:00 The Porous Appeal: Why Institutions Misread Mike Benz, https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=1652551:24:00 Mike Benz on the January 6 pipe","twitter:creator":"@lukeford","twitter:image":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/lukesanta.jpg"},"aioseo_meta_data":{"post_id":"165282","title":null,"description":null,"keywords":null,"keyphrases":{"focus":{"keyphrase":"","score":0,"analysis":{"keyphraseInTitle":{"score":0,"maxScore":9,"error":1}}},"additional":[]},"primary_term":null,"canonical_url":null,"og_title":null,"og_description":null,"og_object_type":"default","og_image_type":"default","og_image_url":null,"og_image_width":null,"og_image_height":null,"og_image_custom_url":null,"og_image_custom_fields":null,"og_video":"","og_custom_url":null,"og_article_section":null,"og_article_tags":null,"twitter_use_og":false,"twitter_card":"default","twitter_image_type":"default","twitter_image_url":null,"twitter_image_custom_url":null,"twitter_image_custom_fields":null,"twitter_title":null,"twitter_description":null,"schema":{"blockGraphs":[],"customGraphs":[],"default":{"data":{"Article":[],"Course":[],"Dataset":[],"FAQPage":[],"Movie":[],"Person":[],"Product":[],"ProductReview":[],"Car":[],"Recipe":[],"Service":[],"SoftwareApplication":[],"WebPage":[]},"graphName":"BlogPosting","isEnabled":true},"graphs":[]},"schema_type":"default","schema_type_options":null,"pillar_content":false,"robots_default":true,"robots_noindex":false,"robots_noarchive":false,"robots_nosnippet":false,"robots_nofollow":false,"robots_noimageindex":false,"robots_noodp":false,"robots_notranslate":false,"robots_max_snippet":"-1","robots_max_videopreview":"-1","robots_max_imagepreview":"large","priority":null,"frequency":"default","local_seo":null,"breadcrumb_settings":null,"limit_modified_date":false,"ai":{"faqs":[],"keyPoints":[],"titles":[],"descriptions":[],"socialPosts":{"email":[],"linkedin":[],"twitter":[],"facebook":[],"instagram":[]}},"created":"2025-12-07 13:19:38","updated":"2025-12-08 02:29:15","seo_analyzer_scan_date":null},"aioseo_breadcrumb":"<div class=\"aioseo-breadcrumbs\"><span class=\"aioseo-breadcrumb\">\n\t\t\t<a href=\"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\" title=\"Home\">Home<\/a>\n\t\t<\/span><span class=\"aioseo-breadcrumb-separator\">&raquo;<\/span><span class=\"aioseo-breadcrumb\">\n\t\t\t<a href=\"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?cat=29740\" title=\"Liberal\">Liberal<\/a>\n\t\t<\/span><span class=\"aioseo-breadcrumb-separator\">&raquo;<\/span><span class=\"aioseo-breadcrumb\">\n\t\t\tWhy Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism?\n\t\t<\/span><\/div>","aioseo_breadcrumb_json":[{"label":"Home","link":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog"},{"label":"Liberal","link":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?cat=29740"},{"label":"Why Is Everyone Talking About Post-Liberalism?","link":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=165282"}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/165282","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=165282"}],"version-history":[{"count":18,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/165282\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":165302,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/165282\/revisions\/165302"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=165282"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=165282"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=165282"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}