The Mirage of Utopia: Unpacking the Radical Left's Push for "Decriminalisation," Open Borders, and the Erasure of Identity, By James Reed

 Swishing in the swirling chaos of modern political discourse, few narratives capture the imagination, or ignite the fury, like the so-called "liberal globalist agenda." Proponents paint it as a benevolent march toward equity, compassion, and a borderless world where humanity transcends petty divisions. Critics, however, see it for what it often manifests as: a reckless blueprint for societal unravelling, dressed in the robes of progressivism. At its core, this agenda champions three pillars that sound noble in theory but crumble under scrutiny: decriminalising vast swaths of crime, dissolving national borders, and systematically "cancelling" white men as the scapegoats du jour.

Let's start with the euphemism of the decade: "decriminalising crime." Advocates argue that prosecuting minor offenses, like shoplifting, drug possession, or even certain violent acts, disproportionately harms marginalised communities, perpetuating cycles of poverty and incarceration. On the surface, who could argue against mercy? But peel back the layers, and you reveal a policy framework that effectively rewards lawlessness while punishing the law-abiding. Take San Francisco's Proposition 47 in 2014, which reclassified theft under $950 as a misdemeanour. The result? A surge in organised retail theft rings, with stores like Walgreens and Target fleeing the city, leaving behind boarded-up windows and economic deserts. Crime isn't "decriminalied" — it's relocated to the balance sheets of everyday businesses and the fears of ordinary citizens.

This isn't compassion; it's capitulation. Data from the FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting shows that in cities embracing such reforms, like Portland and Seattle, violent crime rates spiked post-2020, correlating with defund-the-police movements and lenient prosecution policies. The agenda's architects claim it's about "restorative justice," but in practice, it erodes the social contract. Why work honestly when the system winks at looting? Why respect property when the state treats it as optional? This isn't progress; it's a regression to a Hobbesian state of nature, where the strong prey on the weak, and the weak are told it's "systemic oppression" at fault, not the predators enabled by policy.

Next up: dissolving borders. The rallying cry here is "no human is illegal," a slogan that tugs at heartstrings while ignoring the hard realities of sovereignty. Globalists envision a world without walls, where migration flows freely, enriching cultures and economies. Sounds idyllic, right? Until you confront the chaos it unleashes. Europe's experiment with open borders under the Schengen Agreement has morphed into a migration crisis, with millions crossing the Mediterranean since 2015, straining welfare systems, housing, and social cohesion. In the U.S., the former Biden administration's lax enforcement saw record illegal crossings, over 10 million encounters since 2021, per Customs and Border Protection data, fuelling human trafficking, fentanyl epidemics (killing 100,000 Americans annually), and overwhelmed border towns.

Borders aren't bigoted barriers; they're the membranes that allow nations to function. Without them, you lose control over who enters, what diseases spread (remember COVID's global ping-pong?), and how resources are allocated. The agenda dismisses this as xenophobia, but ask the residents of small-town America or European suburbs now grappling with unvetted influxes. It's not anti-immigrant to demand orderly processes; it's pro-sanity. Dissolving borders doesn't create a utopia, it creates a vacuum where cartels, terrorists, and opportunists thrive, while citizens foot the bill for an experiment in enforced cosmopolitanism.

And then there's the pièce de résistance: "canceling white men." This isn't hyperbole; it's the explicit undercurrent of much progressive rhetoric. From academia's obsession with "decolonising" curricula (read: purging Western thought) to corporate DEI mandates that prioritise diversity over merit, white men are cast as the eternal villains of history, privileged, oppressive, and expendable. Hollywood scripts it, universities teach it, and social media amplifies it. The #MeToo movement, vital in exposing abuse, morphed into blanket indictments of masculinity. Affirmative action policies, reframed as "equity," often sideline qualified candidates based on race and gender.

The irony? This agenda claims to fight "systemic racism" while institutionalising a new form: anti-white, anti-male bias. Studies from the American Enterprise Institute show that white male enrolment in elite colleges has plummeted, while initiatives like Google's "Next Billion Users" explicitly favour non-white, non-male hires. It's not empowerment; it's revenge politics. Cancelling white men doesn't elevate others, it fosters resentment and division, turning society into a zero-sum game where identity trumps individuality. History warns us: when you demonise a group en masse, you sow the seeds of backlash, not harmony.

So, why push this agenda? Follow the money and power. Globalist institutions like the World Economic Forum and billionaire philanthropists (hello, Soros and Gates) benefit from a weakened nation-state: cheaper labour via migration, diluted accountability through decriminalisation, and a fragmented populace easier to control via identity wars.

In truth-seeking mode, I'll concede: inequality exists, borders can be reformed humanely, and historical injustices demand redress. But the radical prescription, decriminalise, dissolve, cancel, is a poison pill masquerading as a cure. It erodes order, security, and unity, leaving behind a shell of what functional societies require.Let's build a world on merit, responsibility, and genuine equality, not one where crime is a lifestyle choice, borders are punchlines, and half the population is persona non grata. The agenda isn't liberal; it's illiberal. And it's time to call it out before the house of cards collapses on us all.