What is the main message of Suicide of the West?

The main message of Suicide of the West is an examination of how liberal democracies are built and sustained, and the threats they face.

How long does it take to read Suicide of the West?

The reading time for Suicide of the West varies depending on the reader's speed, but it typically takes several hours. The Blinkist summary can be read in just 15 minutes.

Is Suicide of the West a good book? Is it worth reading?

Suicide of the West is worth reading because it offers a thought-provoking analysis of the challenges faced by liberal democracies and provides insights into their potential solutions.

Who is the author of Suicide of the West?

The author of Suicide of the West is Jonah Goldberg.

Suicide of the West Summary of Key Ideas and Review

Name: Suicide of the West
Rating: 4.1 (100 reviews)
Author: Jonah Goldberg

Introduction

What’s in it for me? A miraculous manifesto to save the West.

In the late seventeenth century, England witnessed a miracle. It put an end to the conditions that had made life, as the philosopher Thomas Hobbes once put it, “nasty, brutish and short.” A period of immense innovation began: wealth increased and violence declined. The future looked brighter than ever.

The secret? Enlightened, liberal institutions which repressed human nature’s darker, tribalistic side. The miracle spread and found no better torchbearer than the United States, a republic founded by a farseeing elite who cherished the right to life, liberty and property. It was a winning recipe for the West.

Today, however, the West’s legacy is in danger. Tribalism is once again on the rise. Left-wing identity politics, Trumpian nationalism and the populist rejection of liberal institutions threaten the miracle of modernity on all sides.

So what can be done? Well, a good place to start is to understand what first made the West great, which is precisely what these blinks explore.

In the following blinks, you’ll learn

how the philosophy of Locke and Rousseau still shapes our understanding of modernity;
why individualism makes civil society stronger; and
how human nature can be held in check by institutions committed to liberal rights.

Key idea 1 of 8

Modernity is nothing less than a miracle.

Human history has mostly been a miserable affair. For a considerable portion of it, poverty and violence were the norm. In the words of the English philosopher Thomas Hobbes, life for the majority of our ancestors was “nasty, brutish and short.”

That is, until around 1700, when something happened that changed everything. It was nothing short of a miracle.

But before we get to that, let’s take a closer look at how humans used to live.

For most of human existence, Homo sapiens were nomadic apes – primitive hunter-gatherers who lived off what they could scavenge and catch. Then, around 15,000 years ago, agriculture emerged, kick-starting a period of rapid development. It’s not quite the miracle, but it was miraculous. At that moment, the first recognizable human “societies” took shape.

The real miracle came later – more precisely, it happened in the late seventeenth century when humanity once again revolutionized the way it organized itself.

Economic data tells a good deal of the story of just how much things changed after 1700. Before the eighteenth century, most people lived on around $1 a day; afterward, their income skyrocketed. After centuries of stagnation, global GDP per capita started rising ever higher, with no end in sight.

But people didn’t just become richer – they also started thinking differently. From the late seventeenth century onward, new ideas emerged in the West about how to structure society and government.

Take the Glorious Revolution of 1688. William of Orange invaded England and overthrew King James II. Unlike previous palace coups, however, William didn’t just cement his own rule; he passed revolutionary reforms. The Bill of Rights, for example, set clear limits on the monarchy and gave parliament a much greater say in running the country. It was one of the first times in history that the right of parliamentary representatives to govern in the name of the people was set in stone.

If we want to preserve the gains of this miracle, we need to understand it. That’s what we’ll be doing in the following blinks.

Key idea 2 of 8

England provided uniquely fertile soil for the miracle to take hold.

No two experts agree on what exactly made the miracle possible. What virtually everyone agrees on, however, is that it first unfolded in England. Why there of all places? Well, as British writer and conservative politician Daniel Hannan points out, the country provided uniquely fertile soil for the miracle to put down deep roots.

One important factor was the common law system, the foundation of the rule of law in England. Unlike civil law, the legal system used across the rest of Europe, common law limits the power of monarchs. That’s because the latter provides precedents – previous legal cases and verdicts – that a judge can use to inform his decisions.

Unlock the full key idea

Key idea 3 of 8

The miracle triumphed despite the fact that humans are naturally prone to violence and distrust.

What makes the miracle so, well, miraculous? For one, it triumphed over human nature. That’s no mean feat when you consider the fact that studies of infants and traditional societies have shown again and again that exclusion and violence are deeply embedded in the human psyche.

That’s not to say we aren’t capable of moral behavior – indeed, there’s plenty of evidence to suggest that morality is innate. But so too is distrust of strangers.

Unlock the full key idea

Key idea 4 of 8

Modernity split Enlightenment philosophers into opposing camps of optimists and pessimists.

Not everyone saw eye to eye on the new societies that emerged after the miracle. In fact, the greatest Enlightenment philosophers were often at loggerheads. Take the differences between John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Their disagreement was about the role of the state. Locke thought the point of states was to protect property; Rousseau believed their purpose was to defend the collective.

Locke claimed that the modern state was an answer to what he called the “state of nature,” the condition in which humans are constantly forced to fight others to protect themselves, and all arguments are settled by force rather than a higher authority. Men create states to protect their inalienable rights to life, liberty and property – the things that can’t be safeguarded by nature.

Unlock the full key idea

Key idea 5 of 8

Aristocracy is natural and necessary but it must be subjected to limits.

Anti-establishment feelings are on the rise across the West. The public mood has soured and elites are increasingly in the firing line. That’s a problem. Contrary to popular belief, there’s nothing inherently wrong with elitism.

In fact, even aristocracies can be meritocratic. Just consider the word itself. It’s borrowed from ancient Greek and simply means “rule by the best.” In a true aristocracy, it’s not your title that gives you a right to power but your proven excellence. An aristocrat is a member of an elite selected by ability.

Unlock the full key idea

Key idea 6 of 8

The administrative state is causing the West’s demise.

When did things start to go wrong in the United States? One date that sticks out is 1913. That was the year President Wilson created a fourth branch of government – the administrative state. This was intended to provide social services and tackle income inequality. But it’s fundamentally undemocratic, illiberal and largely responsible for the decline of America.

Its biggest flaw is the fact that it’s created a class of people above the law. The administrative state isn’t elected; it’s staffed by bureaucrats appointed directly by the president who are virtually impossible to fire. As USA Today put it, “Death – rather than poor performance, misconduct or layoffs – is the primary threat” to job security in the administrative state.

Unlock the full key idea

Key idea 7 of 8

Identity politics is another threat to the miracle.

The American dream holds that anyone who believes in liberty can succeed. Today, that ideal is crumbling. The reason is simple. The United States has embraced identity politics, a potent threat to one of the most important principles of the miracle: equality.

Take race. The notion of color blindness is increasingly being rejected. That’s about as un-American as it gets. After all, color blindness is central to meritocracy – the idea that anyone should be able to succeed on merit, no matter their skin color. That was what Martin Luther King Jr. fought for. He dreamt that his children would no longer “be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

Unlock the full key idea

Key idea 8 of 8

If we want Western civilization to survive, we must rediscover its core values.

Tribal tendencies might be part of human nature but tribalism can be held in check under the right conditions. Our task is to tame ugly tribal instincts so that the principles of liberty, individualism and property rights can prevail.

A good place to start doing that is supporting the family – a vital bulwark against tribalism. Parents are the first line of defense against the darker sides of human nature. Their job is to educate their children and direct them toward the “unnatural” but miraculous ideals of liberalism and capitalism.

Unlock the full key idea