Nation Revisited
An occasional e-mail to friends. # 59,
September 2009.
Dying for democracy
Politicians of all parties support the
Afghan war and accept the slaughter of British and allied soldiers. As each
young man is killed they chant the hypocritical mantra of government
propaganda: “he died doing the job he loved,” and, “he was helping to make
Afghanistan a better place.” But the warmongers cannot convince us that there
is any point in this aggression.
Britain’s new top general Sir David
Richards has predicted that we will be in Afghanistan for thirty or forty
years. And NATO’s Lieutenant General Stanley McChrystal has called for more men.
The General praised the UK’s 8,000-plus
force and said more would be welcome. He told the BBC: “I don’t know a general
who would not like to see more forces, particularly forces as good as the
British.” (Daily Mirror 13/06/09)
We can therefore expect to sustain heavy
losses in a war that we will eventually quit - just as we did Iraq. But before
we pull out we will kill thousands of Afghans and risk bloody retaliation on
the streets of our major cities. Far from ensuring domestic security we are
endangering ourselves by declaring war on Muslims after letting millions of
them into our country.
Once again a blinkered government has gone
to war without a plan. They imported cheap labour and created alien ghettos
without thinking of the consequences. Their foreign policy consists of blindly
following America and their economic policy is tied to “free markets” and “open
borders.”
City minister Lord Myners and London mayor
Boris Johnson have attacked EU plans to outlaw hedge funds (Guardian 21/07/09).
And Home Secretary Alan Johnson says that he doesn’t lay awake at night
worrying about the population hitting 70 million (Daily Mail 15/07/09).
We are fighting to impose our failed system
on a country that has never done us any harm. The 9/11 terrorists were not
Afghans, they were Arabs who trained and plotted in the United States. We are
waging war to prop up Hamid Karzai’s corrupt regime of misogynists, warlords
and drug dealers who are no better than the Taliban. This war is as pointless
as the Iraqi catastrophe and will end in the same humiliating withdrawal.
Peter’s
cunning plan
Gordon Brown is clinging to power and
praying for a miracle but there is nothing that he can do to rescue himself or
his party from defeat. By borrowing astronomical sums of money he has mortgaged
our future to the international banks and condemned generations yet unborn to
the slavery of debt.
Since Tony Blair’s showbiz election of 1997
the Labour government has wasted billions of pounds on their favourite
projects. They have increased foreign aid, particularly to Africa, and
intervened militarily in West Africa where corrupt regimes compete with
terrorists for control of the diamond industry.
They have committed our armed forces to
American wars in Asia and they are planning a new fleet of aircraft carriers
and submarines; not for defence but so we can fight anywhere in the world for
President Barack Obama.
But it’s not just abroad that our money is
being wasted. The Labour government has massively increased the ranks of
national and local government officers who enforce their policies. Thousands of
Labour Party supporters are working on political projects that are staffed by
well-paid ethnic minorities and paid for by British taxpayers.
Almost every Labour borough has run out of
money. Council taxes are being plundered as well as income tax, VAT and all the
stealth taxes that we now pay. Under spendthrift central government local
authorities have felt no need for restraint and have taken the opportunity to
fleece the middle classes.
We have been robbed by an ideologically
twisted administration that is contemptuous of this country and its people. The
Labour Party despises the white majority population. They are consumed with
hate, driven by jealousy, steeped in corruption, devoted to chaos and beyond
redemption. Even their cherished immigrants are turning against them.
When we next play the game of democratic
musical chairs the incoming government will be forced to slash spending and
raise taxes. This will mean closing hospitals, police stations, libraries,
swimming pools and schools. The trade unions will demand that jobs and services
are protected and people will not understand why their living standards are
falling. Instead of blaming the outgoing government they will blame Dave
Cameron.
As the riot cops “kettle” strikers and
demonstrators the indestructible Peter Mandelson will be quietly installed as
Labour leader in time for the next but one general election. He will promise an
end to strikes and a return to the good old days. And the ever-gullible
electorate will forget years of criminal incompetence and vote Labour once
again.
Race,
culture and nationality
There is a growing sense of English
identity, partly in response to the devolution of power to Edinburgh, Cardiff
and Belfast, and partly a result of the “football nationalism” promoted by the
popular press. Young men draped in the flag of St George chanting,
“in-ger-land” can be seen whenever we play an international match. Of course,
many of them, especially those from the big cities, are of Scottish, Irish or
Welsh descent. And some of them are clearly of Afro-Caribbean or Asian
ancestry. But they are united by “nationalism.”
Nationality is a complex mixture of race,
culture, language, religion and allegiance. There are black men serving in the
armed forces that wear their uniforms with pride and are ready to fight for
Queen and country. And there are native-born whites that couldn’t care less
about nationality and have no loyalty to any flag.
European nationalists regard the current
wave of East European immigrants as cousins.
But linguistic nationalists regard English-speaking blacks as more
acceptable than unintelligible “foreigners.” Again the influence of sport and
the popular press can be seen. Many of the football players in the English
national squad are black or mixed race.
Most European countries are comprised of
regions enjoying various degrees of independence. The unraveling of the United
Kingdom may result in three or four nation states instead of one. Spain is
divided into seventeen autonomous regions. Italy is moving towards a federal structure.
Germany is a union of sixteen states. Belgium is divided between Dutch and
French speaking regions. Only France remains a monolithic state despite some
separatist attitudes in Brittany, Corsica and the Basque country. The nation
states of Europe appear to be fragmenting internally as the continent itself
moves towards a Swiss model based on local autonomy within the protective
embrace of federation.
Within this emerging federation mass
migration from the Third World will force Europeans to forget superficial
differences of language or religion. If something is not done about it the
future population of Belgium will speak Arabic rather than French or Dutch. And
King Billy and the Battle of the Boyne will mean nothing to the Somali and
Pakistani citizens of Ireland.
The answer lies in immigration control,
educational reform and solidarity. Liberalism has promoted multi-racialism over
homogeneity. But the message can be changed and people can be made aware of
their heritage. It would only take a generation to transform attitudes and
revive European consciousness. We have moved beyond crude racism and tribalism
but ethic conservation remains a legitimate objective. The survival of European
civilization with its scientific, economic and industrial capacity is essential
for all mankind.
Mussolini’s last interviews
In March 1945 Benito Mussolini gave an
interview to Magdalena Mollier. He said,
Why do you come to interview me signora?
I am dead. Look at what remains of me…Go for a swim in the lake, sunbath, enjoy
your liberty and all the beautiful things that life reserves for you; don’t
concern yourself with a ghost…This morning in my room a little swallow got
trapped. It flew about, it flew desperately, until it fell exhausted on my bed;
a little trembling creature. I caressed it and gradually, it calmed down; and
in the end it dared to look at me. I went to the window, I opened my hand. It
still stunned, did not understand immediately…then it opened its wings and,
with a cry of joy, it flew to liberty…I will never forget that cry of joy. The
only doors that will open for me are those of death. And it is also just. I
have erred and I shall pay…I have never made a mistake following my instinct,
but always when I obeyed reason…I do not blame anyone, I do not reproach anyone
apart from myself. I am responsible, just as much for the things that I did
well, that the world can never deny me, as for my weaknesses and my decline…My
star has set. I work and make an effort, even though knowing that everything is
a farce…My star has set, but I did not have the strength or the courage to
retire in time…Have you ever seen a prudent, calculating dictator? They all
become mad, they lose their equilibrium in the clouds, in quivering ambitions
and obsessions. And it is actually that mad passion which brought them to where
they are. A bravo borghese would never discomfort himself so much…There is no
doubt that we are heading towards, in short, a Socialist époque…I see the
salvation of Europe only in a socialist union of European states. A formidable
block that will defend our civilization and existence against the red
materialism of the Bolsheviks and for us more or less damaging experiments of
the American type. Soon the German, French, Spanish, Italian etc. question will
be of no interest; only Europe will be of interest. Everyone will realize it.
If in time or not, who knows?
Days later he spoke to the journalist Ivanoe Fossani. He
said,
If
England, instead of sending the knights of St George to create discord and
unquenchable hatreds, had fused Europe into a block of ideals and interests,
our position would be unassailable…Before entering into the Pact of Steel I
tried everything to reach an understanding with the other side…England didn’t
want it. It wanted our neutrality and our ports at its disposal…But Italy’s
geography meant it had to choose war, either with one side or the other…Our
geographical position is outside the orbit of neutrality. Either accept war or
become an encampment of enemy armies…The only socialism workable
socialistically is corperativism, the point of confluence, equilibrium and
justice for private interests in respect of the collective interests.
Quotations from
Mussolini, A New Life by Nicholas Farrell, Phoenix 2003
Keeping an
open mind
Five billion
non-whites outnumber one billion whites because nature regulates fertility in
response to the food supply. The hungry Third World has big families but in
affluent Europe the birth rate doesn’t even maintain the population. Our
current slide into poverty might prompt an increase in the birthrate, and the
HIV-Aids epidemic might slow down the black African explosion, but as thing
stand the whites will decline and the non-whites will flourish.
White liberals
welcome Third World refugees and reject immigration controls. But they will
probably change their minds when non-whites surround their leafy white suburbs.
The late Mayor of Philadelphia Frank “Big Bambino” Rizzo said that a
conservative was a liberal who had been mugged.
Muslims are
supposed to embrace humanity. But the Arabs enslaved black Africans and imposed
their culture on half the continent. And black footballers transferred to
Turkish clubs have complained about racist chanting at matches.
It seems that
Muslims can be as racist as Christians.
The Chinese,
Japanese and Koreans will be impartial observers. They have resisted various
“barbarian” invasions and remain overwhelmingly East Asian. The decline of the
white nations can only help their growing economic exploitation of the Third
World.
The Indians
have a discriminatory caste system and Indian settlers in Africa are just as
racist as the whites. The Indians of Guyana refuse to mix with the blacks, and
relations between Afro-Caribbean and Indian communities in the UK are less than
harmonious.
The Jews will
have mixed feelings. They have long been persecuted by white Christian
civilization and they have always championed the non-white races. But they will
not welcome the take over of Europe, Russia and North America by people hostile
to Zionism.
Srdja
Trifkovic’s article should be studied by anyone interested in the survival of
European civilization. Americans still fighting the Cold War will be horrified
by the idea of being united with the Russians. And those Britons who can’t
accept a loose confederation of states like the European Union will hardly
embrace a world union of white people. But if we are going to survive as an
ethnic group we must keep an open mind.
The North Worth Saving – by Srdja Trifkovic
(This article first
appeared in Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture. I thank the editor of
Orthodoxy Today for leading me to the original source.)
"Defeat in detail" is a military concept that denotes the rout of an enemy by dividing and destroying segments of his forces one by one, instead of engaging his entire strength. A brilliant example was Stonewall Jackson's 1862 Shenandoah Valley campaign, when his force of 17,000 beat three mutually unsupported Union commands almost four times his strength.
The concept is as old as Sun Tzu ("if enemy forces are united, separate them") and was more recently restated by Mao ("concentrate a superior force to destroy the enemy forces one by one"). It is highly relevant to the American interest because the civilization upon which this country is founded—usually described as "Western," although "Northern" would be more accurate—is in danger of being defeated in detail by its enemies, internal and external.
The problem was aptly summarized by Russia's ambassador to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, in an interview with Russia Today last November 18:
"Defeat in detail" is a military concept that denotes the rout of an enemy by dividing and destroying segments of his forces one by one, instead of engaging his entire strength. A brilliant example was Stonewall Jackson's 1862 Shenandoah Valley campaign, when his force of 17,000 beat three mutually unsupported Union commands almost four times his strength.
The concept is as old as Sun Tzu ("if enemy forces are united, separate them") and was more recently restated by Mao ("concentrate a superior force to destroy the enemy forces one by one"). It is highly relevant to the American interest because the civilization upon which this country is founded—usually described as "Western," although "Northern" would be more accurate—is in danger of being defeated in detail by its enemies, internal and external.
The problem was aptly summarized by Russia's ambassador to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, in an interview with Russia Today last November 18:
There is a new civilization
emerging in the Third World that thinks that the white, northern hemisphere has
always oppressed it and must therefore fall at its feet now…If the northern
civilization wants to protect itself, it must be united: America, the European
Union, and Russia. If they are not
together, they will be defeated one by one.
Rogozin’s statement
reflects a profound understanding of the biological, cultural and spiritual
commonalities shared by one billion Europeans and their overseas descendants in
the "white, northern hemisphere"—an understanding as accurate as it
is odious to the Western elite class.
It indicates that, in some important respects, Russia is freer than the United States or the European Union: No American or Western European diplomat of his rank would dare make such a statement, even if he shared the sentiment—or hope to remain in his post after making it.
And finally, it correctly diagnoses the attitude of the Third World to the northern civilization as inherently adversarial, based on the myth of the latter's oppressiveness and on the expectation of its eventual collapse.
Europe's demographic self-annihilation is well advanced, from the Atlantic to the Urals and beyond, with Russia and the rest of the Old Continent sharing the same downward trend. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia's population has fallen six percent, from around 150 million to just over 140 million. The combination of a low birthrate, an aging population, and a public-health crisis may result in the country's population collapsing by one third, to around 100 million, by 2050. On current form, there will be a 40-percent drop in the size of the core (ages 14 to 25) group, ensuring a continued decline for the rest of the century. At the same time, the number of self-identified Muslims in Russia has risen by 40 percent in the last 15 years to 20 million, partly fueled by immigration from Central Asia and the Caucasus.
In Metropolitan France, an ostensibly healthy birthrate of 12.2 per thousand conceals the fact that, of some 800,000 births in a nation of almost 60 million, Muslim immigrants (predominantly from North Africa) and their French-born descendants account for more than a quarter. Italy will plummet from today's 57 million to a much older 40 million by 2050. By that time, the continent as a whole will face a net loss of some 150 million people. Europe's population has aged to such a degree that it will continue to shrink even in the unlikely event that birthrates rebound to the replacement level. This "negative momentum" means that even if women in the future should have an unexpected fertility increase to two children on average, the population would be destined to continue shrinking.
In the 1970's, the U.S. birthrate not only dipped below replacement but fell below the European rate. In the years since, the American rate recovered modestly to just below replacement level. The fertility rate of white Americans slipped below the replacement rate in the early 1970's, however, and it never recovered: Today it stands at about 1.8 babies per woman.
Demographers say that the U.S. population will grow by 135 million in the next four decades—a stunning 44-percent increase—but that growth will be entirely the result of immigration (overwhelmingly from the Third World) and increases in the nonwhite population.
In Russia, Rogozin's thesis is disputed by two very different groups. The Westernizers—insignificant in numbers but influential in the country's intelligentsia—reject the notion that Russia can be, or should aspire to be, an equal partner of Europe and America unless and until she is reformed in their image. The Eurasianists, by contrast, see Russia's destiny in the great continental heartland and in strategic partnership with her southern and southeastern neighbors. They believe that Russia's interests and those of the United States are inherently divergent. In their view, détente with Islam is more desirable than cooperation with the West. As Aleksandr Dugin says, the new Eurasian empire should be based on the rejection of Atlanticism and liberalism: "This common civilizational impulse will be the basis of a political and strategic union" between Russia and the Heartland, the Slavs and the Turkic peoples of the Central Asian steppe.
Continental conservatives—German Christian Democrats; French, Spanish, and Italian rightists—are natural Northerners even when they are squeamish about admitting it. Members of the dominant European left, however, are overwhelmingly enthusiastic about Barack Obama because they are ashamed of their own roots and looks. The sentiment is becoming all-pervasive: Even The Economist opined that Obama's victory "would salve, if not close, the ugly wound left by America's history." The left flatly denies that a common Euro-Russo-American civilization exists, let alone that it is worth preserving or jointly defending.
It is in the United States that the obstacles to a northern paradigm are the most formidable. Opponents are present, to some extent, in every influential segment of this country's foreign-policy community.
American exceptionalists believe that the United States differs qualitatively from Europe (not to mention Russia) by virtue of her "propositional credo," which transcends the shackles of ethnicity, race, culture, and faith. Global hegemonists seek dominance over Europe and fragmentation of Russia, rather than partnership with them. Many hegemonists are also visceral Russophobes, owing to their own ethno-cultural baggage rather than any objective assessment of Moscow's global position and impact on U.S. interests. Obama's selection of Joe Biden as his Vice President, Hillary Clinton's appointment to State, Robert Gates' retention at the Pentagon, and General Jones's management of the National Security Council point to the President's willful blindness to the collapsing economic foundation of the American "hyperpower."
Multiculturalists oppose any notion of "our" physical or cultural space that does not belong to everyone. They deny that we should have a special affinity for any particular country, nation, race, or culture, but demand the imposition of our preferences upon the whole world. They are the mortal enemy of any notion that any shared legacy of the European family is worthy of preservation.
These groups share the radical notion that America is not a real country, but a metaphysical concept or a tool for their own Will to Power—or both. They do not want this country to belong to the people whose ancestors created her and who have inhabited her for generations. They celebrate the resulting random mélange of mutually disconnected multitudes as somehow uniquely "American" and virtuous.
Ideologues will deny it, but in the decades to come Europe, Russia, and America will be in similar mortal peril from those very multitudes. The magnitude of that threat will become clear as those nations age and the numbers of hostile aliens grow. In the end there will be no grand synthesis, no crossfertilization, and certainly no peaceful coexistence, between the North and the Third World.
The short-term prospects for fostering a sense of unity among Europeans—Eastern, Western, and American—are dim and will remain so for as long as the regimes of all the major states of the West are controlled by an elite class hostile to its own biological roots and cultural fruits.
In the longer term, however, it is at least conceivable that the ongoing financial and economic crisis will produce salutary political and cultural effects. In the face of diminished property values, rising unemployment, and collapsed retirement portfolios, our elites risk a comprehensive loss of credibility and authority comparable to that experienced by Europe's ruling class in 1914-18. When the dust settles they may no longer be heeded as arbiters of who we are, what we are to think, and how we are to lead a good life. As the credibility of American global dominance tanks with the dollar, Europe may increasingly see its interests tracking with those of Russia, forcing Washington to acquiesce.
No refocusing of international policy will matter if there is not a reversal of demographic and immigration trends. The richer the country, the emptier its cradles. A trend toward Third World living standards may lead to Third World birthrates. Increased scarcity may finally break the political taboo about addressing non-European immigration.
Can we hope that a reminder of the harsher realities of life will revive the North's sense of itself as a Christian civilization and resistance to the stealth jihad being waged in our midst? Sadly, the more likely result of the crisis we now face is deepening demoralization, increased demands for government solutions and services, and ever more inane adulation of such purveyors of political snake oil as our newly enthroned President Messiah. In the early eighth century the triumphant march of Islam into Christendom seemed unstoppable, until it was halted at the gates of Constantinople (718) and at Tours (732). Conversely, in July 1914, Europe was at the peak of every imaginable human achievement, only to be turned into a pale shadow of its former self a mere century later.
Much of this depends on leadership. Can we find political leaders who will serve as catalysts for social regeneration? If there are any Dmitry Rogozins lurking in the corridors of American and European politics, this would be a good time for them to step forward.
Rogozin's position on the essential dilemma of our time coincides with what I have repeatedly advocated in these pages over the past decade: a paradigm shift in the West that would pave the way for a genuine Northern Alliance of Russia, Europe, and North America, as all three face similar existential threats in the decades ahead. In an uncertain and ever more brutal world, the Northerners may finally consider banding together, lest they be defeated in detail. I do not know if and when they will do so. I do know that, if they don't, the best and greatest civilization the world has known will be finished forever.
It indicates that, in some important respects, Russia is freer than the United States or the European Union: No American or Western European diplomat of his rank would dare make such a statement, even if he shared the sentiment—or hope to remain in his post after making it.
And finally, it correctly diagnoses the attitude of the Third World to the northern civilization as inherently adversarial, based on the myth of the latter's oppressiveness and on the expectation of its eventual collapse.
Europe's demographic self-annihilation is well advanced, from the Atlantic to the Urals and beyond, with Russia and the rest of the Old Continent sharing the same downward trend. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia's population has fallen six percent, from around 150 million to just over 140 million. The combination of a low birthrate, an aging population, and a public-health crisis may result in the country's population collapsing by one third, to around 100 million, by 2050. On current form, there will be a 40-percent drop in the size of the core (ages 14 to 25) group, ensuring a continued decline for the rest of the century. At the same time, the number of self-identified Muslims in Russia has risen by 40 percent in the last 15 years to 20 million, partly fueled by immigration from Central Asia and the Caucasus.
In Metropolitan France, an ostensibly healthy birthrate of 12.2 per thousand conceals the fact that, of some 800,000 births in a nation of almost 60 million, Muslim immigrants (predominantly from North Africa) and their French-born descendants account for more than a quarter. Italy will plummet from today's 57 million to a much older 40 million by 2050. By that time, the continent as a whole will face a net loss of some 150 million people. Europe's population has aged to such a degree that it will continue to shrink even in the unlikely event that birthrates rebound to the replacement level. This "negative momentum" means that even if women in the future should have an unexpected fertility increase to two children on average, the population would be destined to continue shrinking.
In the 1970's, the U.S. birthrate not only dipped below replacement but fell below the European rate. In the years since, the American rate recovered modestly to just below replacement level. The fertility rate of white Americans slipped below the replacement rate in the early 1970's, however, and it never recovered: Today it stands at about 1.8 babies per woman.
Demographers say that the U.S. population will grow by 135 million in the next four decades—a stunning 44-percent increase—but that growth will be entirely the result of immigration (overwhelmingly from the Third World) and increases in the nonwhite population.
In Russia, Rogozin's thesis is disputed by two very different groups. The Westernizers—insignificant in numbers but influential in the country's intelligentsia—reject the notion that Russia can be, or should aspire to be, an equal partner of Europe and America unless and until she is reformed in their image. The Eurasianists, by contrast, see Russia's destiny in the great continental heartland and in strategic partnership with her southern and southeastern neighbors. They believe that Russia's interests and those of the United States are inherently divergent. In their view, détente with Islam is more desirable than cooperation with the West. As Aleksandr Dugin says, the new Eurasian empire should be based on the rejection of Atlanticism and liberalism: "This common civilizational impulse will be the basis of a political and strategic union" between Russia and the Heartland, the Slavs and the Turkic peoples of the Central Asian steppe.
Continental conservatives—German Christian Democrats; French, Spanish, and Italian rightists—are natural Northerners even when they are squeamish about admitting it. Members of the dominant European left, however, are overwhelmingly enthusiastic about Barack Obama because they are ashamed of their own roots and looks. The sentiment is becoming all-pervasive: Even The Economist opined that Obama's victory "would salve, if not close, the ugly wound left by America's history." The left flatly denies that a common Euro-Russo-American civilization exists, let alone that it is worth preserving or jointly defending.
It is in the United States that the obstacles to a northern paradigm are the most formidable. Opponents are present, to some extent, in every influential segment of this country's foreign-policy community.
American exceptionalists believe that the United States differs qualitatively from Europe (not to mention Russia) by virtue of her "propositional credo," which transcends the shackles of ethnicity, race, culture, and faith. Global hegemonists seek dominance over Europe and fragmentation of Russia, rather than partnership with them. Many hegemonists are also visceral Russophobes, owing to their own ethno-cultural baggage rather than any objective assessment of Moscow's global position and impact on U.S. interests. Obama's selection of Joe Biden as his Vice President, Hillary Clinton's appointment to State, Robert Gates' retention at the Pentagon, and General Jones's management of the National Security Council point to the President's willful blindness to the collapsing economic foundation of the American "hyperpower."
Multiculturalists oppose any notion of "our" physical or cultural space that does not belong to everyone. They deny that we should have a special affinity for any particular country, nation, race, or culture, but demand the imposition of our preferences upon the whole world. They are the mortal enemy of any notion that any shared legacy of the European family is worthy of preservation.
These groups share the radical notion that America is not a real country, but a metaphysical concept or a tool for their own Will to Power—or both. They do not want this country to belong to the people whose ancestors created her and who have inhabited her for generations. They celebrate the resulting random mélange of mutually disconnected multitudes as somehow uniquely "American" and virtuous.
Ideologues will deny it, but in the decades to come Europe, Russia, and America will be in similar mortal peril from those very multitudes. The magnitude of that threat will become clear as those nations age and the numbers of hostile aliens grow. In the end there will be no grand synthesis, no crossfertilization, and certainly no peaceful coexistence, between the North and the Third World.
The short-term prospects for fostering a sense of unity among Europeans—Eastern, Western, and American—are dim and will remain so for as long as the regimes of all the major states of the West are controlled by an elite class hostile to its own biological roots and cultural fruits.
In the longer term, however, it is at least conceivable that the ongoing financial and economic crisis will produce salutary political and cultural effects. In the face of diminished property values, rising unemployment, and collapsed retirement portfolios, our elites risk a comprehensive loss of credibility and authority comparable to that experienced by Europe's ruling class in 1914-18. When the dust settles they may no longer be heeded as arbiters of who we are, what we are to think, and how we are to lead a good life. As the credibility of American global dominance tanks with the dollar, Europe may increasingly see its interests tracking with those of Russia, forcing Washington to acquiesce.
No refocusing of international policy will matter if there is not a reversal of demographic and immigration trends. The richer the country, the emptier its cradles. A trend toward Third World living standards may lead to Third World birthrates. Increased scarcity may finally break the political taboo about addressing non-European immigration.
Can we hope that a reminder of the harsher realities of life will revive the North's sense of itself as a Christian civilization and resistance to the stealth jihad being waged in our midst? Sadly, the more likely result of the crisis we now face is deepening demoralization, increased demands for government solutions and services, and ever more inane adulation of such purveyors of political snake oil as our newly enthroned President Messiah. In the early eighth century the triumphant march of Islam into Christendom seemed unstoppable, until it was halted at the gates of Constantinople (718) and at Tours (732). Conversely, in July 1914, Europe was at the peak of every imaginable human achievement, only to be turned into a pale shadow of its former self a mere century later.
Much of this depends on leadership. Can we find political leaders who will serve as catalysts for social regeneration? If there are any Dmitry Rogozins lurking in the corridors of American and European politics, this would be a good time for them to step forward.
Rogozin's position on the essential dilemma of our time coincides with what I have repeatedly advocated in these pages over the past decade: a paradigm shift in the West that would pave the way for a genuine Northern Alliance of Russia, Europe, and North America, as all three face similar existential threats in the decades ahead. In an uncertain and ever more brutal world, the Northerners may finally consider banding together, lest they be defeated in detail. I do not know if and when they will do so. I do know that, if they don't, the best and greatest civilization the world has known will be finished forever.
Views on the
news
We will probably never know if Abdelbaset
Ali al-Megrahi committed the Lockerbie bombing. The Scottish authorities
apparently released him on humanitarian grounds without talking to the British
or American governments. But with our record for arresting the wrong people in
terrorist cases there’s a good chance that Megrahi is innocent. And the
interest of the oil industry in Libya is reason enough to doubt the official
story. President Barack Obama’s outrage can’t be taken seriously when he leads
a nation drenched in the blood of the innocent. On The 3rd July 1988 the
American cruiser USS Vincennes shot down an Iran Air A300 Airbus in Iranian
airspace over the Strait of Hormuz. All 290 passengers and crew were killed.
Six months later on 21st December an American Boeing 747 airliner
designated Pan Am 103 was brought down over Lockerbie with the loss of 259
passengers and crew and 11 local residents. It’s difficult to believe that
these atrocities were unconnected.
MEP Daniel Hannan is best known for his
anti-EU column in The Daily Telegraph. He upset the European People’s
Party to such an extent that the Tories have quit the leading bloc of the EU
parliament to align themselves with the ECR group; a collection of
reactionaries led by Poland’s Michal Kaminski. Hannan has now embarrassed his
party by telling Fox TV that he “wouldn’t wish the National Health Service on
anybody.” The Tories support health care and realize that it would be suicidal
to campaign against it. Daniel Hannan should do the decent thing and join his
Eurosceptic pals in UKIP. Dave Cameron is too frightened of the “bastard”
faction to sack him. But sooner or later the Tories will have to confront the
Thatcherite clique that still believes in unrestrained capitalism and total subservience
to Wall Street.
The far right
claims figures between 20 and 60 billion pounds for Britain’s membership of the
EU. Most of these calculations come from the Bruges Group but they do not tally
with government figures. “ In 2003/4 Britain’s net contribution was 3.2 billion
and in the following years was at 3.9 billion, 4.4 billion, 3.5 billion, 4.2
billion and 3.0 billion before hitting 4.1 billion this year under current
spending plans.” (The Daily Mail 23/08/09) The Bruges Group says that their figures
include hidden costs associated with quality control and health and safety. But
they do not mention the benefits of belonging to the world’s biggest trading
bloc. They want Britain to quit the EU but keep trading arrangements like
Norway and Switzerland. But these countries still have to conform to EU rules
and regulations without having any say in them. If we struck out on our own we
would still have to maintain EU standards.
European Action is a newspaper promoting European consciousness.
Available from PO Box 415, Ramsgate, CT11
9WW
No comments:
Post a Comment