Some people like David McWilliams and historian Niall Ferguson think that Trump's victory is symptomatic of a cultural shift in America whereby there is a wholesale rejection of wokeism. Trump was elected despite an almost universal realisation that he was an amoral, irreligious, narcissistic, misogynistic, racist, elitist, fraudster prone to inciting violence if it suits his agenda. But almost 50% of the electorate didn't care and voted for him anyway. When it came to a choice between Trump and Kamala Harris, a candidate who seemed to embody wokeism for them, they chose Trump.

No doubt there were other factors which helped Trump on his way: The support of high profile and successful billionaire entrepreneurs like Musk, an aging and tired looking Democratic party elite, and a yearning for economic status and success as in the hey day for American military and industrial ascendency. Feeling threatened more by China than Russia, there was a concern to get back to the fundamentals of industrial strength. The problem was not Ukraine, but others stealing America's lunch; not Putin, but Europeans free-riding on US defence spending and the profits of US corporations.

And its not as if any of this is new. The USA has always appeared to worship money above all. Even televangelists measure God's favour in terms of audience ratings, advertising revenues, donations, and the numbers attending their mega churches. For many, personal wealth is a proxy for energy, virality, ambition, ability, and God's favour. Violent expansionism is the very foundation of the USA, so why not Greenland or Canada today?

While Europe worries about gender quotas, the USA has always been about "masculine energy" - self-sufficient pioneers or brave cowboys unencumbered by laws. The women barely featured in popular culture, and if so, largely in supporting roles. You're either an all-American hero or you are nothing. Government is for losers: diversity, equality and inclusion programmes be damned. If you can't make it on your own, it's all your own fault.

It's possible to exaggerate the distinctions, of course. Neither the USA nor Europe are all either one thing or the other. The recently formed Irish government contains just three female cabinet ministers out of fifteen, one less than before. Does that matter if the ministers chosen are the best available? Few criticised the appointment of Michael McGrath as Ireland's EU Commissioner to replace Mairead McGuinness, even though the Government refused Ursula Von Der Leyen's request to nominate both a male and female candidate. The Treaties give Ireland the right to nominate the Commissioner of their choice, subject only to ratification by the EU Parliament. Von Der Leyen doesn't get to choose her own Commissioners.

But the question raised by Trump's election is whether it also marks a cultural turning point in the USA and possibly the wider world under their influence (The USA maintains 750 military bases in 80 countries around the world). Has the priority become to protect "western ascendency" in the world from increasing threats from China and the global south? The BRICs now far exceed the G7 in terms of GDP and reduced indebtedness. Should our traditional concern for Third World development be replaced by fear of Third World takeover? Does western hegemony matter more than climate change? Are white males the new discriminated against, as many like to claim? Is wokeism to blame?

It seems madness to be more concerned about about wokeism than (say) incel culture. Is gender equality, sexual diversity, and the inclusion of minorities really to blame for the relative decline of the West, or just a convenient scapegoat? Would our economic development even have been possible without the greater inclusion of women and minorities in the workforce, including in leadership positions? Is the anti-woke rebellion (if that is what it is) just a temporary over-reaction to some perceived excesses of wokeism and will normal service soon be resumed?

There seems little doubt that the (mostly) still male white elite in the USA felt threatened by the rise of women and minorities to leadership positions, and young white males, whose forebears might have had unencumbered access to good jobs and careers, feel the brunt of increased competition in the labour market from highly qualified and (mostly) non white immigrants. Musk has made no bones about his support for increased immigration visas for (in his view) smarter, more hard working, and cheaper immigrants, and has come up against vehement opposition from the (mostly white) MAGA base who want better job opportunities for "indigenous" -read long established immigrant - Americans.

Much of American business depends on cheap labour from (often undocumented) immigrants who they can fire at will or at their pleasure without problems from unions, the law, or the authorities. Many are in menial jobs with poor pay and conditions most Americans wouldn't want anyway. Many businesses and wealthy families will be severely disrupted if Trump does follow through on his promise to deport millions of immigrants and end programmes by which their status can be regularised.

Closer to home, one of the ironies of Brexit is that it has led to increased immigration (mostly from outside Europe) despite the reduction in EU workers in the UK. People don't always get "what it says on the tin" or on the side of a bus where political marketing of ideas like Brexit or MAGA are concerned. Much of Europe is in demographic decline and simply not producing enough workers to sustain the economy, never mind grow it, without at least some immigration. And who will care for the increasing numbers of retired workers?

So, it remains to be seen whether Trump will follow through on his campaign promises on immigration and represent a turning point in US political culture or is he just a speedbump on the road to greater diversity, equality and inclusion in our societies? Perhaps most people have come to accept concepts like non-discrimination on the basis of race, colour, creed, and religion to such an extent that positive discrimination and government and business programmes to promote diversity, equality and inclusion may no longer be required, or at least, not to the same extent. No doubt there will be diverse views on this!

But I remain sceptical that woke is dead, or that it serves no good purpose. Harnessing the talents of all our people and mitigating disabilities is key to our continued economic and social success in the future. Ireland's workforce has almost trebled since the 1960's and yet unemployment is at historic lows and wages and living standards have never been higher. That is not to say that states like Ireland do not retain the right to decide who they will and will not allow into the country (from outside the EU) either to work or as refugees. The first responsibility of any government is to ensure the basic needs of their own people are met.

The success of the BRICS has not yet spread to many of the smaller countries in Africa where a combination of war, economic under development, political repression, population explosion, and climate change has resulted in a mass exodus of would be immigrants often facilitated by ruthless and rapacious middlemen. Helping to enable their development remains the prime and most important way to prevent the sort of mass exodus that can be destabilising for recipient countries.

Crises like the Ukraine invasion will exacerbate the situation, but all wars come to an end eventually. The costs to Russia of the Ukraine invasion already far exceed any conceivable benefit it could derive from gaining some territory. The European ideal of peace and prosperity for all through greater cooperation and integration of our economies must prevail. Let us not lose faith in our political culture just because there are storms about. Woke is about mutual respect and common sense. All else is negotiable.