Douglas Murray: An Intellectual For Our Time
Do you like or hate Douglas Murray?
Douglas Murray is a British author and journalist. To some people, he may be most known because he is hated by many liberals. And he probably has had every negative adjective in the dictionary thrown at him. But like many of today’s best intellectuals, he is principled and intellectually nimble. While you can fairly categorize him as a conservative or classical liberal this can become a curse word to some and a box that critics will weaponize unfairly against you. (And yes this happens on both sides, but that’s not the main issue in this case.)
Freedom of Speech and Liberal Institutions
Murray is a great intellectual because he stands for freedom of speech, individual liberty, and national sovereignty. Especially in specific instances when it may be harmful to himself to do so. For example, standing up for limited migration in Europe can offer quick rebukes of “right-wing populist”, which is sometimes code for xenophobe, and worse.
In a recent debate with Flavia Kleiner, a Swiss founder of the anti-populist political movement Operation Libero, Murray argued persuasively for not simply advocating for liberal institutions just because they are liberal institutions. But to look deeper into the historical ideas that underpin them. Kleiner in her anti-populist message kept advocating for liberal institutions without fundamentally understanding their past and current significance.
The key point here is that liberal institutions, like independent courts and a democratically elected legislature are good ideas and worth fighting for, but it doesn’t mean they can’t be criticized or improved. Kleiner, as a representative here for broadly left-wing values, may perceive attacks from the right as wrong and at times malicious. But what Murray does so well is he attacks your ideas with better ideas. Unless you attack him personally and then he will reciprocate.
The Immigration Debate
In the debate with Kleiner and at a debate on the global refugee crisis in Doha, Qatar, Murray stood out for his very specific use of language and the powerful ideas he sharply expressed. This was also in opposition to the moderator of all people. His main argument was when it comes to refugees there is competition between the competing values of mercy and justice. Which many like to ignore under the guise of moral correctness.
Immigration debates in the U.S. have been framed by the extremes of mercy, i.e. let everyone in. And the extremes of the justice argument, let no one in. Murray’s passionate arguments don’t come off as biased or myopic, but as intellectually credible, historically grounded, and as wisdom earned. Which is a recommendation to read or listen to his words carefully to learn more about the world.
Another good intellectual move Murray makes is talking about European identity but from the perspective of someone outside of Europe. As an American mostly focused on U.S. history and current events it can be easy to miss substantive differences across countries. For example, going to Turkey or at least trying to think and empathize from their perspective, would be an interesting way of looking at the U.K. or the U.S. For both the similarities and differences.
Mercy vs Justice
The tensions between mercy and justice arise when it comes to the number of migrants leaving and entering different countries. People, especially immigrants, vote for where they want to live with their feet. Unfortunately, due to war and financial insecurity, people need to leave or flee their home country. Murray is sympathetic to this view, but also understands the security and cultural disruption concerns from a large number of immigrants entering a new country. While not everyone has to agree with this perspective it’s important to understand that reasonable people can hold this belief for good and bad reasons. To ignore the fact that some migrants could be terrorists or shift cultural norms is to ignore the world as it is, and look at it as you wish it to be.
People complain that our politics and media is broken, divisive, and polarized. But individuals can still make choices to be fair, open-minded, generous, and respectful with people they disagree with. This social-cultural norm has largely disappeared on social media, but I like to optimistically believe that the average person can still have respectful conversations with ideological opposites. The research also bears out that there are more centrists than extremists overall. It’s just extremists are usually louder.
Murray through his books, articles, and podcast appearance continues to speak up for what he thinks with a rigorous understanding of history, diverse cultures, and philosophies. He is someone more people with large platforms should engage with. Because with free speech and fair open-minded debate the best ideas will eventually come to the forefront. While this process may be slow-moving the history and progress of the 20th century and the 21st century tells us some of the best ideas will win. Like capitalism and certain forms of democracy. This doesn’t mean that the world is perfect or close to it in the 20th century or today. And this is not the belief that history automatically trends in a positive or moral direction. But if enough people work to spread their good ideas in more effective ways then they will catch on. As the 19th-century writer Victor Hugo said, “There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come.”
