[linguae]

This dis-alignment of global values is happening within the West where the fortunes of world-class "winner" cities like New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, London, and the like have diverged from the fortunes of second- and third-tier cities and rural areas within the same countries. The past three or four decades of economic policy has benefitted the middle class and wealthy in many "winner" cities. If somebody bought a home roughly 20 years ago in a metro area with many high-paying job opportunities, that person is likely to have enjoyed massive gains in equity provided that person weathered the 2008 crash. Many people living in these areas also take advantage of a wide range of well-paying job opportunities. But what about the urban poor in these metro areas who can't get a high-paying job due to a lack of credentials? Closer to the point of the article, what about those living in areas far away from booming metro areas?

A significant cause of the rise of the populist right in the West (e.g., Donald Trump/MAGA in the United States, Brexit in Britain, various European right-wingers such as Marine Le Pen and Viktor Orban) is the economic woes faced by people who have been left behind. Think of the hollowing out of industrial and rural America, for example, and how this has reduced economic opportunities for the people living in these areas. Unfortunately, these economic concerns have been eclipsed by "culture war" matters, with a strong belief that the values of prosperous urban areas in the West are at odds with the values of less-urban parts of the West. If urban areas are becoming more internationalist, then rural areas are becoming more nationalist. Some of these populist right-wingers have an authoritarian bent; to quote the OP, the rise of the populist right definitely consists of examples of "cultures respond[ing] to perceived existential threats by rallying around authoritarian leaders, implementing stricter regulations."

[mostlysimilar]

"Culture war" matters are pushed by the ultra-wealthy (and the politicians they own) in order to distract us all from our real enemy: the ultra-wealthy. If we're too busy arguing over trans kids or abortion or whatever we can't fix the fundamental problems that are letting these greedy people extract our wealth and take advantage of our labor.

[spencerflem]

I think that's part of it for sure, but another part is that 'culture war' stuff is Very Important for the people it affects and seems relatively winnable. Like, we got Gay Rights!!! That's maybe one of like 2-3 good things that's happened in the last 50 years.

[tivert]

> "Culture war" matters are pushed by the ultra-wealthy (and the politicians they own) in order to distract us all from our real enemy: the ultra-wealthy.

Even if that's the case, it's important to note: those matters are not manufactured by the ultra-wealthy.

> If we're too busy arguing over trans kids or abortion or whatever we can't fix the fundamental problems that are letting these greedy people extract our wealth and take advantage of our labor.

But personally, I think the "culture war" is mainly the result of the self-undermining tendencies of urban liberalism. It can't do anything about the ultra-wealthy because, while it can identify them as a problem, it simultaneously pushes dis-unifying cultural changes that prevent action on it.

And I'm not even sure how long it will keep identifying the ultra-wealthy as a problem, given how its losing the working classes (e.g. working class whites swung to Trump in 2016, and now working class minorities are starting to swing the same way).

[AnimalMuppet]

> Unfortunately, these economic concerns have been eclipsed by "culture war" matters, with a strong belief that the values of prosperous urban areas in the West are at odds with the values of less-urban parts of the West. If urban areas are becoming more internationalist, then rural areas are becoming more nationalist.

I'm not sure you can say that nationalism isn't an economic concern. If the jobs went overseas, then nationalism (putting your own country first), or at least economic nationalism, makes perfect sense as a response.

[linguae]

When I said "nationalism," I was thinking in the context of the cultural aspects, such as immigration policy, assimilation vs. multiculturalism, how history is taught in public schools (especially when it comes to conflicts between different groups, whether internally or internationally), etc.