In [TS] Changing Bedfellows, David Brooks invents a fantasy world where liberals don't exist.

If American politics could start with a clean slate today, the main argument wouldn't be between liberalism and conservatism, words that have become labels without coherent philosophies. The main fight would pit populist nationalism against progressive globalism.

The populist nationalist party would be liberal on economics, conservative on values and realist on foreign policy. It would bring together a wide array of people who are disenchanted with their respective parties' elites, and who would find they have a lot in common. It would bring Kevin Phillips together with Pat Buchanan, the Virginia senatorial candidate James Webb together with Lou Dobbs, Al Sharpton together with James Dobson.

...The progressive globalists, on the other hand, would be market-oriented on economics, liberal on values and multilateral interventionists in foreign affairs. The leading spokesman for this movement would be Tony Blair. Domestically, it would be led by the major presidential aspirants, who don't differ much: John McCain, Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney, Mark Warner and Rudy Giuliani.

Several interesting things there. Note the opposition set up between realism and multilateral intervention...very interesting coming from an unflagging supporter of the Iraq invasion. Also note he is willing to apply the liberal/conservative dichotomy to 'values' (sneer quotes are used to indicate undefined terms here) even though they have become labels without coherant philosophies...yet the opposite of 'liberal' economics is called 'market-based' rather than 'conservative' economics.

And we haven't even touched on the representative speeches Mr. Brooks produced for each camp.

Here's how a populist nationalist candidate would sound: "We are the ordinary, burden-bearing people of this country. We are the ones who work hard and build communities. It's time for us to come together and recognize that our loyalty to our fellow Americans comes first.

"That means we can't waste our precious blood and treasure on poorly planned, pie-in-the-sky wars to bring democracy to the Middle East. We need to get out of Iraq now. That means we can't sell our ports to our enemies. That means we must secure our borders against terrorists and illegal immigrants who break the law, take our jobs and drive down wages.

"We need to stand up to the big money interests who value their own profits more than their own countrymen, who outsource jobs to China and India, who destroy unions and control Washington. We need to fight off their efforts to take away our Social Security and Medicare. Instead of widening inequality and a race to the bottom, we need universal health care and decent wages. We need a government that will stand up to Internet porn and for decent family values.

"We're tired of both the corporate elites and the cultural elites. We want leaders who understand our anxieties and are, like us, tired of a world where nothing is safe, where everything can be swept away by a serious illness, a divorce or a terrorist's bomb."

It's like a Merle Haggard-Dixie Chicks mash-up.

The example speeches make it clear Mr. Brooks is talking about the divide that exists in the Republican Party. They also make it clear what a total fantasy it is. You see, in order for this realignment to take place (Mr. Brooks assumes some such like will come to pass) white folks will have to work with Black folks, at least on the populist side. That means the Southern Strategy would have to be undone...and since that strategy took advantage of broadly held opinions that are rooted in the very dawn of American history that's pretty unlikely.