Saying the Quiet Part Out Loud

In this Daily, I venture into dangerous territory: commentary on geopolitics. Here follows the usual disclaimer: I am no expert in politics. I did not complete a degree in politics. But I do see and read things. And I will comment as far as I feel appropriate. You’re lucky to get the disclaimer. Let’s go.

We are in the age of the comment. We are in the age of self-awareness. The Internet has brought forth the ability for anyone to comment on any issue. For them to call out our leaders and systems. A comment section comes attached to many a news article. There, you’ll find what people “really” think of the news.

Usually, it is the role of the pleb, the jester, the heckler to yell out of the crowd: “hey, that’s bullshit, and you know it!”

But now some leaders are taking the role themselves. They’re saying the quiet part out loud. Of relevance here, when it comes to international affairs. One of the quiet parts that they don’t say out loud is how global rule comes from power, not from some set of higher principles. Higher principles are what organisations like the UN are chartered upon. Principles such as self-determination. With such principles exercised, the weak can feel safe amongst the strong.

Last month, Prime Minister Mark Carney gave a prescient speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos. It was probably the most memorable speech of the event. Especially since I cannot remember the others. I didn’t listen to them. Such was the impact of his speech.

But he called out the extant rules-based world order with the metaphor of the greengrocer living under communist rule:

“Every morning, this shopkeeper places a sign in his window: ‘Workers of the world, unite!’ He doesn’t believe it. No one does. But he places the sign anyway to avoid trouble, to signal compliance, to get along. And because every shopkeeper on every street does the same, the system persists.”

The metaphor is clear. Carney refers to the extant world order, dominated by powers in the West.

“Friends, it is time for companies and countries to take their signs down”

Declared Prime Minister Carney.

Countries such as the United States need to assert their belief in a rules-based global order. This goes for other nations in the West such as Great Britain, Canada, France, and the others in the club. But the rules do not universally apply. Reading history over the last 30 years will give you a good idea. Reading history over the last 10,000 might expand your view further.

It will be a shame to take the sign down. As a citizen and resident of New Zealand, I have felt pretty comfortable with our nation’s friendly and safe place in the world. I was quite happy living within the lie.

The thing is, you’re not supposed to say the quiet part out loud. Not usually. As I understand, leaders of rich countries such as Canada do not usually bring attention to the incongruence of international power relations. And yet Carney did. In elegant and thoughtful diction.

And perhaps saying the quiet part out loud will be what this period is known for. Contrasting with Carney’s rhetorical ability is Donald Trump. An excellent showman, he made waves in 2016 assaulting the élite of Washington, America’s foreign policy, almost every aspect of the System. “He tells it like it is” was a common refrain amongst supporters. And observers. It was sometimes true too. But personally, I think all his lying and prejudice got in the way.

(I am dangerously close to commenting on territory to which my own opinions and musings do not belong.)

Originally, it wasn’t Carney who spurred me to write this Daily. It was Pete Hegseth. He is U.S. Secretary of War (a kind of Minister for Defence, but more powerful).

“Out with idealistic utopianism, in with hard-nosed realism.”

Said Pete, in a speech to senior military leaders.

Has a previous Secretary of War so openly asserted this stance? Because it seems very cynical. Realism is a political philosophy that emphasises the self-interest of a state over liberal ideals.

While individuals can be governed by a state, states amongst themselves don’t have a “world police” governing them. The point of view you take of this situation will determine how much of a realist, or a liberal, you are. Because if states exist in a “lawless” landscape, surely strength is the only law?

So does a realist keep the sign in the window?

In a charitable sense, I think it is healthy to discuss the “quiet part” out loud. We do need to reckon with the changes to the global order, and build a better one. One that leads to peace and prosperity, naturally.

I just hope that when we do say the quiet part out loud, we have something better to replace it with.