The mirage of moral universalism: why the west lost faith in its own values
What we call moral universalism today is often little more than moral confusion. It's time to recover true universal values and the confidence to defend them.
We live in a strange moral moment. A moment in which a schoolteacher can lose her job for expressing concern about biological sex, while cultural practices that oppress women, criminalise dissent, or endorse violence are defended in the name of inclusion. A moment in which nations are scolded for securing borders, yet applauded for outsourcing their moral obligations to international institutions.
This is what we might call the age of distorted universalism. On paper, universalism is a noble idea: that all human beings possess inherent dignity and should be treated accordingly. That justice, truth, and liberty are not the property of one culture or another, but the birthright of all. This is the universalism of Kant, of Martin Luther King, of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
But that is not the universalism driving today’s political and cultural orthodoxy. What we have instead is a hollowed-out version: a blend of moral relativism and performative cosmopolitanism, masquerading as principle. It proclaims that all cultures are equal, that all values are valid, and that making distinctions between them is not moral reasoning, but heresy. Or worse, bigotry.
The result is incoherence. We uphold women's rights in theory, while importing ideologies that deny them in practice. We celebrate freedom of expression while policing speech that might offend those deemed marginalised. We insist on moral neutrality while vilifying anyone who dares defend the West as morally superior in any way.
In this environment, the West has become unsure of itself. Worse, it has lost the confidence to defend the very values it once championed. The values that defeated fascism and communism, built liberal democracies, and elevated the rights of individuals above the tyranny of tribe.
True moral universalism is not afraid to make distinctions. It insists that some ways of life are better than others, not because they are Western, but because they better uphold the moral goods that belong to everyone: dignity, reason, equality under law. It is not afraid to say that liberal democracy is better than theocracy. That freedom of conscience is better than enforced dogma. And that the rights of women, minorities, and dissenters are not negotiable.
But that clarity has been lost in the fog of guilt and performative tolerance. In the name of inclusion, we exclude truth. In the name of equality, we abandon justice. And in the name of humanity, we tolerate the intolerable.
The philosopher Roger Scruton once observed that the West is unique not because it is perfect, but because it developed the capacity for self-criticism. But self-criticism untethered from moral confidence becomes self-abasement. And that, in turn, becomes paralysis.
Into this vacuum step the populists. Not because they are right in everything they say, but because they are willing to say what the mainstream will not: that a nation has the right to defend its borders, that some cultures are better at protecting human dignity than others, and that loyalty to country and tradition is not a shameful relic but a necessary glue.
If we want to resist the excesses of populism, we must first recover the moral confidence they’ve hijacked. That starts with reclaiming true universalism from its distorted cousin. It starts by remembering that equality, freedom, and truth are not the property of a global elite or an international NGO. They are the common inheritance of humanity. And they are worth defending.
Further reading
The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion by Jonathan Haidt
A brilliant exploration of moral psychology and the unconscious drivers of tribal division, showing why people with good intentions often talk past each other.
The Open Society and Its Enemies by Karl Popper
Popper’s seminal defence of liberal democracy and intellectual pluralism — and a warning against the seductive pull of totalising ideologies.
The Madness of Crowds by Douglas Murray
A sharp and polemical critique of identity politics, cultural orthodoxy, and the silencing of dissent in the name of progress.
On Liberty by John Stuart Mill
Still unmatched in its clarity, Mill’s defence of free speech and individual conscience remains a foundational text for any serious liberal ethic.
"True moral universalism is not afraid to make distinctions. It insists that some ways of life are better than others, not because they are Western, but because they better uphold the moral goods that belong to everyone: dignity, reason, equality under law. It is not afraid to say that liberal democracy is better than theocracy. That freedom of conscience is better than enforced dogma." Precisely this. Well said.
Very interesting — thanks.