One of the central tenets of the Enlightenment is its universality (since it is based on reason and empiricism, it is independent of culture). It can be argued (and has been on this site) that the Enlightenment ended up undermining itself by showing this tenet to be false.

It is easy to conflate the "Enlightenment" with "Modernity," which was one of its children.  Another Enlightenment value was that social status should be based on merit, not birth.  It is also easy to forget that "western liberal democracy" was not the only political offspring of the Enlightenment.  

The other notable political offspring was the Soviet State. They embraced the same universal values as the others.  It can be argued that they were much more effective in identifying and nurturing talent wherever it was found than were most "western democracies."  

Universality proved very useful to the governance of a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural society. They had no use for nationalism or racism with so many nationalities and ethnicities.  Religion was suppressed in the name of rationality.  I am, of course, referring to the official dogma, not actual practice.  Apples to apples, as it were.

Since 1989 we have seen a general retreat from universal values and a rise of nationalisms.  This has  become the context to the rise of market fundamentalism.  But these universal values were never too well rooted anywhere, and were repeatedly overwhelmed by nationalism and racism in the 19th and 20th centuries.

 

As the Dutch said while fighting the Spanish: "It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."