Has Liberalism Failed?
Conservatives have been pronouncing the failure of liberalism since the late 1960s. And yet liberalism continues to reign supreme as the unofficial state ideology of virtually all Western democracies.
It is time for conservatives to switch gears and begin trying to account for liberalism’s undeniable longevity and success in spite of its inherent flaws.
I think liberalism’s surprising success (I think it has deep flaws) can be attributed above all to the economic prosperity it has engendered. This prosperity provides enough citizens with a large enough stake in the liberal regime to keep it going. It also offers citizens a realistic enough prospect of economic-status advancement to remain committed to the general liberal idea of freedom to pursue one’s “best life.”
Pluralism
I think another element that conservatives, in particular, have overlooked is the cooperative potential of human beings in a pluralistic culture. There is good historical precedent and factors, at least on paper, to make one suspect that such a degree of pluralism could not possibly work in the long term.
But I think there is enough evidence now to conclude that this probably underestimates the adaptability and cooperative instincts/potential of human beings (the point above helps, of course, so it perhaps all hinges on a collective sense of progress).
I’m not saying that conservatives should become uncritical proponents of pluralism. I just think that conservative critics of pluralism need to come up with a cogent account of why the growth in pluralism over the last 60 years in countries like Australia has coincided with economic growth and stable social order.
Just a couple of thoughts on liberalism and really an appeal to conservatives to abandon the facile “liberalism has failed” mantra and come up with a more sophisticated account of liberal flaws and success that accords with empirical reality.
___
Originally published on Dr Jonathan Cole’s page.
Subscribe to his podcast, The Political Animals, for more insights.
Photo by David McBee.
One Comment
Leave A Comment
Recent Articles:
14 August 2026
2 MINS
On Monday, 17 August, the Hon. Llew O'Brien MP will introduce the Human Rights (Children Born Alive Protection) Bill 2026 into the House of Representatives. On the same day, the Baby Booties Display will grace the lawns outside Parliament House. Here's how to watch, support and pray both these events.
14 August 2026
3.8 MINS
Curtin University’s alleged on-campus abortion training for midwifery students is raising serious questions about conscience rights, religious expression, oversight, and the future of midwifery.
14 August 2026
16.4 MINS
Nation First investigates the economic, cultural, biological and environmental forces driving Australia’s fertility rate to a historic low.
14 August 2026
1.9 MINS
When I first wrote this in News Weekly (8 April 2026), sceptical readers would not believe that Australia was a bigger net energy exporter than America in 2023-24. Here are the facts.
14 August 2026
4 MINS
When we keep our eyes on Jesus’ example of love and on God’s ultimate victory, we can engage in pro-life advocacy with faith-filled hope rather than anger or despair.
13 August 2026
2.4 MINS
Young Conservatives for Christ will host a free online screening of the Australian Christian Lobby’s Born Alive Left to Die documentary on 25 August, featuring young Australian pro-life advocates.
13 August 2026
3.2 MINS
A reflection on The Recharge, where young Christians gathered to confront cultural challenges, build community, seek God’s wisdom, and embrace their responsibility to act.
Rebuttal to Dr. Jonathan Cole’s “Has Liberalism Failed?
Dr. Cole’s account of the longevity and successes of liberalism largely overlooks the underpinnings of the current pluralistic society, which, according to some analyses, is a direct result of the neo-Marxist revolution with its long march through the institutions. While Dr. Cole praises the success of liberalism due to economic prosperity, he does not acknowledge the subversive influences that have changed the fabric of society.
Firstly, while Marx originally posited a division between the proletariat and bourgeoisie, when this division failed to materialize to the extent needed for a revolution, a new approach was employed. As the West was deeply entrenched in bourgeoisie principles, the Marxist narrative adapted. Queer theory and critical race theory emerged as tools to create new divisions within society, not based on class but on race, gender, and sexuality.
These theories, according to some interpretations, were crafted with the express purpose of undermining the status quo by introducing internal conflicts that the liberal society would find hard to reconcile. Over time, these divisive concepts have gained traction in educational, media, and other major institutions, subtly shifting the societal zeitgeist.
While Dr. Cole attributes the success of pluralism to the adaptability and cooperative potential of human beings, he fails to recognize that the form of pluralism being propagated today is one influenced by these neo-Marxist theories. It’s not merely about celebrating diversity, but rather fostering divisions and emphasizing differences.
Furthermore, attributing economic growth over the past 60 years to liberalism alone is an oversimplification. Economic growth has occurred in tandem with many other variables, such as technological advancements, global trade expansion, and market dynamics.
Consequently, to suggest that liberalism has remained successful due to its inherent merit overlooks the external influences that have reshaped society. Liberalism has not failed on its own; it has been eroded and transformed by this neo-Marxist march through institutions. Instead of heralding the longevity of liberalism, it may be more accurate to acknowledge that what exists today is a version of liberalism that has been deeply influenced by other ideologies.