It seems in the current time period that the Western world is suffering from a dangerous case of nostalgia: a sentimental longing for a bygone era. While nostalgia can be an emotion that provides comfort, we are currently witnessing this as a motivator of global action. This is seen in President Trump’s campaign to “Make America Great Again,” England leaving the European Union, and the rise of right-wing political groups across Europe as shown currently by the popularity of Le Pen in France. I argue that the rise of these representatives of a previous era and their use of outdated tactics are the exact opposite of the approach needed to deal with current global problems. This is by no means a ruthless youthful criticism of a nostalgic mindset, as I believe that these responses are understandable due to the rapidity that changes have taken place. The world has become interconnected to a level that was seen to be fantastical 50 years ago and to many, this transformation is extremely threatening.

The most obvious example of this is the rise and support of “strong men”, specifically president  Putin and Trump who rose to power through frustration with more liberal politicians who were seen to be too indecisive. However, it could be argued that the more action-centered policies of these new leaders could as easily be classified as “shooting first and asking questions later.”  This has recently been demonstrated by the dynamics of North Korea and South Korea, with both sides escalating the risk of potential conflict in order to maintain their image of strength. This is reminiscent of a Kennedy-esque Cold War style policy of refusing to back down against the Soviet Union over Cuba. While it is true Kennedy won massive domestic popularity for this display of strength, it was also the closest that the world has come to global nuclear war, many of the details of which have only recently become unclassified and, if they were released at the time, the situation would have never have gotten nearly as close as it did.

A reason why these strong man approaches are unnecessary is that the nature of the threat has changed due to the rapid change in technology. The new enemies are no singular entity, terrorists follow what Sean N. Kalic labels a “hydra” structure, where chopping off the head only creates two new ones. More often than not, the weapon of choice of these terrorists is information. Cyber terrorists could hack infrastructure and use the West’s tools against it, for instance causing havoc with the stock market, or even faking the signals of an incoming attack. There is no way to attack these threats with conventional weapons with one strike solving all problems, instead, the socio-political problems must be addressed to prevent future threats. This means following the attempted American strategy in Vietnam of “winning hearts and minds.”

However, this nostalgia is not limited to the sphere of conventional politics as some traits of it can be distinguished in the rhetoric of some of the right-wing terrorist groups longing to return to a time of supposed “racial superiority” or a country without multiculturalism. Furthermore, terrorism has provided one of the most persuasive arguments that can be used by opponents of multiculturalism. By masking their narratives with allegedly objective statistics they attempt to frame those narratives as scientific facts to avoid being labelled as “racist.”  Moreover, nostalgia is not exclusive to the “West”, as Islamic terrorist groups such as ISIS aim to create a caliphate, to return the glory days of previous eras. This tendency in across different cultures may be a result of the cultural shock brought about by the rapid social change, globalization, and resistance to what may be perceived as a movement towards more uniformity.

Another big causal factor in the creation of this nostalgia is the change in the economy. Using the example of America, many of the “blue collar workers” are disgruntled by the changes in the domestic economy brought by the rise in globalisation that allowed multinational companies to move factories and jobs to develop countries as a way to bring down costs. This change has taken place within one to two generations, so understandably lower-middle-class families are questioning why it is that while they are unable to maintain their way of life when both parents work multiple jobs, while their father was able to support the family with a single job.

However, this anger has been cleverly challenged away from the legitimate and rightful targets and has been funnelled and used to bring to power the very people who benefitted from these systems.  This is where it can be seen that this old mindset is the problem repeating history as it falls into the same traps. The repetitive solutions are all centred around individualism, I would even argue that the whole conception of the American Dream is centred around individual achievement at the expense of others, as clearly illustrated by the idea of the “self-made man.” This is a dangerous myth, as it completely ignores the fact that no person is self-made, since everyone is bounded within the contexts they exist in; everyone successful has benefited in some way, whether it be the fact of their race, where they live, or if they had opportunities not available to other people. This prevents any possible solution based on collective action, as this is labelled as “communism.”

I would like to end this article by asking the question: were times really better in the past? For Trump to make America great again the solution can only come from identifying when America was great. Was this the 1950’s? A period often used in support of this question, this was a time of “family values,” and great national wealth. This was also a period of a national apartheid. Was England better off outside of the European Union, an organization that was created in fulfilment of the global idea of international organizations to create peace through trade? While hindsight is 20/20, the future is unclear and for many that lack of clarity is inherently threatening. However, it could as equally be faced with excitement and the promise of possibility.