With the election of Donald Trump, the election in France which brought an independent to power, Brexit, and other movements, it is becoming increasingly clear that something in the West has shifted. While I suspect that it will take decades to fully understand the epoch that we are currently living through, some of the political fights indicate that at least part of the problem may be that a segment of the Western political class has forgotten the purpose of government. This matters, because government, by setting the conditions under which an economy and a society conducts itself, is key to whether a country is ultimately stable (without which broad economic prosperity among the population cannot be achieved). Although the political-economic fights of the last 70 years or so have focused on policy minutia (this tax rate vs that one, more/less social welfare spending, more/less environmental regulation, more/less defense spending, more/less education spending), the rising dissatisfaction with the political class seems to be generated in part by a lack of fundamental understanding of government’s purpose.

Although governments have grown more sophisticated over thousands of years, the real purpose of a government has not changed since that time when three groups of cavemen from different caves came together and formed a crude governing unit. Specifically, these individuals concluded that they would be better able to fend off attacks from other groups of cavemen (and the occasional saber-toothed tiger) if they came together as one. They agreed to cede some of their sovereignty in exchange for a promise of help from the other groups in the event that they were attacked (either by outside groups, or by a member of their own group). In exchange for this promise of help, the governing unit was promised loyalty from all of the individuals. Although governments have become more and more sophisticated and societies have become more and more complex, this promise of protection is still the bedrock upon which the states’ claim on the loyalty of its citizens rests. This “Protection In Exchange For Loyalty” deal exists whether the government is monarchical, oligarchical, tribal, feudal, fascist, communist, socialist, democratic or republican (or anything else).

Today in the West, many in government appear to have forgotten this simple fact. While those that argue for border security, travel pauses (known to some as travel bans), deportations, and other restrictions are depicted as morally reprehensible, these people are doing nothing more than demand that their government stand up for them against people who are not citizens. Immigration, legal or otherwise, imposes costs (and benefits) on a society. While a government may decide that a certain immigration policy is best for the country as a whole (for a whole variety of political-economic reasons), changing situations over time will dictate that an immigration policy be loosened or tightened.

Today, many in the elite appear to be taking the position that keeping foreign immigrants out is an immoral act and should be condemned. There is no doubt that the importation of Muslim immigrants into Western societies has created a method by which terrorism has been imported, even if not all Muslims are supporters of the terrorists. And yet, the response to this terror by Western governments has been to mouth platitudes about not giving into hate, condemning those calling for a more robust response (including halting immigration from certain areas) and deportations, and then ignoring things until the next attack. The assertion that the West is just going to have to learn to live with terrorism is an admission that the political class, as it currently exists, has no real intention of seriously performing its duty.

Which is to say, the governments in the West, and the governing class as a whole, are losing legitimacy. The underlying social contract of all governments (protection for loyalty) is being violated by certain parts of the political establishment and the political class. Unless they rediscover the loyalty that they owe as the governing class to their own citizens (and I fear that time may be growing short on this), politics in the West will become more and more unstable, and will eventually become revolutionary as citizens shift their loyalty to a movement or governing structure that will stand up for them.

Revolutions, by their nature, are unstable. And this is not good for safety, or economic prosperity.