General Debate 23 November 2025
Guest Post: The Peasants are Revolting
A guest post by Peter Lynn:
Over the last 30 years, state sectors of Western democracies have expanded and senior level state employment, with its high pay, security and access to the levers of power became a magnet for the academically gifted, especially independence minded younger women. University educated they initially moved into ministries before spreading back into academia, and out to media, consultancies, mainstream political parties, the legal profession (including the judiciary), local government and lately, HR departments of larger corporates. During this period their political centre of gravity moved sharply left- at least partly driven by self-interest as they accrued advantages from an ever-larger government sector.
During this process they disconnected from their wider populations. Remaining family connections slowed this somewhat, but even by the early 2000’s they had rejected more traditional values in favour of social liberalism and often, an oppressed/oppressors world view. Deep into hubris and secure in their new-found wealth and power, they dived into various fashions, fads and luxury diseases. With influence in excess of their numbers, many of these causes became public policy.
But trust in the institutions they subverted has gradually eroded and by 2025 signs of a peasant’s revolt were unmistakable, notwithstanding the cancel culture and lawfare (use of legal process to intimidate) that this new elite employs to suppress dissent.
Growing opposition to destructive fashionable causes such as Open Borders (social divisions and escalating crime), Black Lives Matter (and others don’t?), Me Too (repudiation of due process and innocence until proven guilty), Gender Identity (particularly the abomination of irreversibly ‘transitioning’ mixed up kids) and Body Positive (being obese is good!?), are a sign of the push back. The rise and rise of reactionary political movements outside traditional parties is another: Trump, AfD, Reform and etc.
That there is such a revolt building is deplored by its target of course- they accuse Trumpists and other reactionaries of fomenting a culture war. But their embrace of identity politics and other spurious social justice causes set it off. Nor are they correct in labelling opposition as ‘extreme right’. Resistance is coming from ordinary people – many of whom have previously voted Left. Trump and other reactionaries are symptoms not a cause.
What is startling is the destructiveness of their various fashionable issues. It almost seems like this is intentional.
Here are some of the main ones:
Net Zero: Policies by which various Western countries have committed to zero emissions on unrealistic timeframes. Not that global warming isn’t an existential problem, but net zero fails in every way: it increases rather than decreases global emissions by shifting emissions to other countries (since 2008, the UK has de-commissioned 22 coal fired power stations while China has built around 850 new ones) and rising energy costs severely damage home economies. Energy costs rise exponentially as the percentage of wind and solar increases because of expensive ‘grid forming’ inverters, over-sized transmission lines to cover intermittency, and the cost of keeping dispatchable generation on standby. By 30% wind and solar, total energy bills roughly double – Australia, the UK and Germany for example. Above 30%, with battery storage, costs are likely to double again. Urban elites are insulated from these costs by their wealth, but the people they make the rules for are not. The peasants are stirring as their energy bills increasingly make a mockery of the “renewables are cheaper” mantra still being peddled by some governments. Net zero goals are delusional, an emperor with no clothes.
Multiculturalism: Denying thousands of years of treachery, violence and warfare between different ethnicities, religions and cultures, our liberal political classes have the delusion that cultures competing for dominance in the same space can live in peace and harmony. They generally don’t- Lebanon with its 18 official religions and endless civil wars for example. Even Belgium with historic tensions between Walloons and Flemish remains uneasy. Culturally homogenous countries like Korea, Japan, and Denmark are generally peaceful, harmonious- and prosperous. In countries with incompatible cultures, emphasizing and promoting shared values and goals can keep the peace while divergent groups coalesce- which generally happens over the longer term providing no-one stokes the grievance industry. The ‘American dream’ provides a positive model. Now, Western countries with their ‘celebrate differences’ mantra, promotion of victimhood and rewards for claiming discrimination, inflame divisions and impede this process. Integration and assimilation have become dirty words. Unthinkable even 30 years ago, the possibility of civil war is now openly discussed in the UK and in New Zealand, energetic promotion of Maori exceptionalism by the liberal establishment has created expectations that seem unlikely to be peaceably resolved.
Open borders: A subset of multiculturism, many Western countries have been welcoming people from very different cultures with almost no restrictions: granting access to social services and explicitly not requiring or even encouraging integration. Sweden is the poster child for this: after 20 years of such policies, it is no longer an envied Nordic country. Their economy is underperforming, social cohesion has collapsed, educational standards have plummeted, and crime has skyrocketed. In countries that have gone down this path, policy makers live in safe secure neighbourhoods while populations at large often become minorities in the own communities, surrounded by people who do not speak their language, do not respect the law and do not ascribe to values such as equality for women. In such areas, crime, and sex crimes in particular, are many times the national averages. Why urban liberals have done this is a mystery- misplaced empathy maybe? But the consequences are dire and long lasting. On this issue the peasant’s revolt is in full swing, with mainstream political parties scrambling to change direction- and to deflect blame.
DEI: Officially standing for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion but in practice re-establishing the Discrimination, Exclusion andInequity that only recently (and imperfectly) gave way to the principle of ‘one law for all’. Recently in the sense that the principles of equality before the law and appointments, employment and promotion based on merit not class, gender, ethnicity or religion slowly and painfully emerged from the 18th century enlightenment in Western countries. Imperfectly because such principles come up against hard wiring to favour kith and kin that evolution has programmed us with. Regression to appointment, employment and promotion based on identity alienates those passed over for being the wrong colour, sex or political opinions. Their growing resentment is a time-bomb. It also drives dis-harmony, instils a sense of entitlement amongst those who are advantaged, and unfairly labels some who are competent with the ‘DEI hire’ pejorative. Worst of all it places people who are not the most competent available into critical roles – a drain on productivity, prosperity, and national competitiveness.
Transgenderism: People should not face discrimination for innate sexual proclivities except when these lead to exploitation and abuse, especially of children. There is wide public support for this view in the West and those with divergent sexual orientations now live their lives substantially free of persecution- and can fully contribute (which they do, often disproportionately). Transgenderism is a bridge too far however- the notion that men can be women and women can be men is nuts (except for < 0.1% with genetic ambiguity) and is rejected by an overwhelming majority whenever such views can be expressed freely. What’s beyond disgusting is that for more than 10 years, transgender activists have been persuading vulnerable mixed-up children- some as young as five but mostly adolescents- to ‘transition’ with puberty blocking drugs that have irreversible long-term effects (like sterility), and even surgery. A significant proportion of children experience bouts of gender dysphoria, often because of unrelated issues, but most eventually get their heads straight again. Now, significant numbers have a life’s sentence of irreversible hormonal and surgical interventions. Fortunately, the high-water mark for this abomination seems to have passed with various medical authorities finally weighing in on the science (delayed by personal attacks and threats to their careers). The silent majority is finding its voice on this issue.
Palestine: The perennial intractable international issue- justice for one side being injustice for the other. A principle for deciding who to support in global conflicts is to go with the protagonist whose values are closest to those you think will make the world a better place. For me, freedom of beliefs, one law for all and representative government are definitive. Hence, I support Ukraine because an expanded Russia will make the world a worse place. Taiwan over China for the same reason- and Israel over Palestinians because Israel, for all its current outrageous military adventurism is a democracy, operates by the rule of law and allows diversity of religions and beliefs- while Islamic societies do not. Weirdly, if there’s one cause that binds liberal urban elites into a global tribe it is support for Palestine. Weird because Palestinian culture is in almost every way antithetical to urban liberal values of equality- for women of course but also for homosexuals and newly defined sexual identities. Islamic societies treat homosexuality harshly and women are the property of their closest male relative, cloistered at will. That affluent Western women with feminist credentials support or, at least, do not much criticise cultures that practice honour killing and genital mutilation is a signal hypocrisy. Palestine has become a notable fracture line in the culture war: urban elites are strongly (and stridently) supportive while the peasants, not so much- whenever they have opportunity to express their views free of intimidation and censorship.
Self-Loathing: The liberal establishment has come to loathe the culture that built and now sustains the world that enables their privilege. Statues are cast down, Europeans are denigrated as colonisers (might as well be for walking on two legs- also a universal human behavioural trait), history is re-written, science gives way to ‘feelings’ and ‘indigenous knowledge’. New Zealand earns its place in the world by efficient production of food but has been conducting a ‘war on farming’, loading farmers with productivity destroying regulation (elsewhere too). The preferred organics could at best support a tiny fraction of the world’s current population- but I suspect they don’t see themselves as the ones who will starve and die.
Mining is evil- don’t believe this? – just watch Avatar. Proposed mining projects in the West are besieged by nimbies and dedicated teams intent on finding reasons why they can’t happen- usually the presence of some conveniently discovered species that could be endangered. But metals and minerals are essential underpinnings of our unprecedented (in historical terms) prosperity, freedoms and social justice- that enable urban liberals to indulge their various delusions. Self-harm mental illness on a national scale.
Unfair? If you’re of the class I’ve singled out as culpable, you’re possibly thinking “but I don’t agree with all this either”. Of course, individual views differ within the liberal establishment, but diversity of opinion is discouraged by personal attacks and cancel culture.
If, because of wanting to belong, or fear of losing career and friends, you haven’t stood against this destructiveness, then you’re guilty as charged.
What Now? Will the entrenched political establishments choose power over principle and respond to resistance by some shuffling of the furniture and quietly shelving their more destructive policies?
Or will they increase repression and double down, causing the peasant’s revolt to build and eventually prevail- when the urban elites will fade into the shadows claiming that they ‘never really supported all this nonsense anyway’- like Mao’s Red Guards when they grew up and German people after WW2?
Or will this all become irrelevant when the world is gripped by a global financial meltdown- because nothing destroys delusions as fast as fiscal reality?
Whichever, irrational policies promoted by urban ruling elites that are destructive of prosperity, security and social cohesion need to be cast off if Western countries are to overcome the geopolitical challenges they are now encountering.
Peter Lynn, Ashburton, New Zealand, November 2025
DPF: Note the author is the engineer/kitemaker Peter Lynn, not the financial services executive and trained actuary.
