Consider, for example, how a resurgence of left-wing social conservative politicians in Latin America was covered recently by the Americas Quarterly:
It’s no secret that the Latin American left has a strongman problem. From Havana to Caracas to Managua, self-proclaimed socialists are notorious for taking office only to never step down. But while left-wing autocrats and their human rights abuses garner much media attention, an emerging crop of leftist politicians in Latin America poses a more insidious threat: they’re embracing regressive social values. If they continue to fail in elevating the causes of equality, diversity and individual freedom, the new leaders on the left will leave the region’s most vulnerable and underrepresented communities at great risk.
Reread that paragraph for a moment to let it sink in: Socialists taking office and then remaining as dictators is bad. Their human rights abuses are bad. But leftist politicians with socially conservative views are worse. Left-wing politicians who support the view of marriage every nation on earth held circa 2000 and believe children in the womb should be protected are “a more insidious threat” than dictators are. It’s hard to get a better picture of self-described progressives’ real views than that. …
Western progressives are so outraged now at the thought of a biological male being denied access to the women’s bathroom that they forget how insane this sounds to entire nations of people still connected to reality. … Progressives refuse to admit that “populism” — if that’s the right word — is often a backlash against the consistent destruction of social norms. …
When they write “veered to the right,” they actually mean that many leftists have not followed them down the gender ideology rabbit trail. The trans movement and its accompanying insanities are very new, but anyone who has not adopted this post-2014 ideology is now a diehard social conservative simply for believing there are only two genders. Leftists in countries not as wealthy as America are still dealing with economic issues, and have not yet begun to obsess over pelvic platforms as we have here in the West.
But none of this occurs to progressive academics. Instead, they blast Peru’s new socialist president-elect Pedro Castillo for opposing “gender ideology,” because they don’t understand why he might not want thousands of girls seeking double mastectomies and growing beards after absorbing Western propaganda. They worry about Ecuador, a left-wing bastion, that still stubbornly refuses to rescind protections for pre-born children (with Rafael Correa even working to maintain these protections). …
To Western progressives who believe that “leftist” is synonymous with “sexual revolutionary,” this is all very confusing. Don’t these people know that it is 2021?
All of this has made progressives quite despairing. “[M]ore leftists have opted for the right-wing veer than not,” Freeman and Angelo write, not considering that perhaps they are the ones that have veered rather than their comrades. But no — Drag Queen Storytime, kids getting sex changes, and an entire month to celebrate sexual diversity and smash heteronormativity cannot possibly have anything to do with it.
The West has long seen itself as a moral leader, but many other nations see us as a cautionary tale — and that includes economic leftists. Progressives, of course, are far too blind to see it. I hope it will be their downfall.
In the west, queers and trans are part of the left’s coalition of the fringes. They are also some of its most motivated, active, and politically talented members.
But leftists in non-western countries are not trying to win by changing the demographics of their country by importing left voters from the third world — obviously — so they have not adopted the coalition-of-the-fringes strategy. They still champion their working class, which in Latin America is often largely white. They just think the sexual revolutionary agenda is nuts.
hat-tip Stephen Neil