← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Texas Dissident
Thread ID: 3613 | Posts: 12 | Started: 2002-03-29
2002-03-29 08:04 | User Profile
Can America Be Saved?
by Larry Greenley
Patrick Buchanan expresses virtually no hope in [u]The Death of the West[/u]. The John Birch Society holds a contrary point of view.
Pat Buchanan's new book, [u]The Death of the West[/u], has scaled the heights of the New York Times Best- Seller List. Its subtitle "How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil Our Country and Civilization" captures the book's main theme, which is that present demographic trends indicate that the West will soon shrivel up and die.
Buchanan's treatment of the demographic front in the "Culture War" is well written and informative. But his book is handicapped by two serious flaws: First, the identification of low birth rates, high immigration rates, and cultural Marxist ideology as the most important "clear and present dangers" for America; and second, the book's pervasive sense of defeatism and helplessness.
Click on the following for the rest of the article
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2002/04-08-2002/vo18no07_america.htm
2002-03-29 17:08 | User Profile
The one thing that nobody wants to face up to is this very conspiracy theory of the John Birch Society. It's the only thing that makes any sense to me. It seems pretty obvious when you think about it, we keep going down this linear path to destruction. So what else would do for an explanation. Besides that, there is so much documentation about the end goal, the NWO, that I don't think it even qualifies as a (secret) conspiracy anymore.
What seems so obvious and yet is never mentioned in the press is the invisibility of the elephant in the living room. When Forbes lists the richest men in the world, they don't list Rothschild or Rockefeller. They actually start with Bill Gates. Doesn't that beg the question?
2002-03-29 23:31 | User Profile
the richest dont have any income ON PAPER. they are in banking, media and natural resources. and they own intelligence services.
20 some years ago they asked david rockefeller how much he paid in taxes. the sheepish answer was like 600 bucks.
i recently got in an email war with a web pundit i read and have circulars mailed from.
he published the idea that we should still have some kind of estate taxes so that nobody could accumulate the wealth of a rockefeller. i was all over him for days over that. the estate tax is what keeps even the gateses from joining the rockefellers and rothschilds. RnR dont mind paying estate taxes after they have hired all the lawyers, accountants and politicians to help them to so many other fund streams.
the lack of an estate tax can only help level the playing field between the mega-rich and the near-mega-rich.
2002-03-30 06:52 | User Profile
With the CEOs/managing editors/producers of CBS/ABC/NBC/PBS/CNN/LATimes/WashPost/NYTimes, et al., holding membership in the Council on Foreign Relations and Trilateral Commission (do a Google search, get up to speed), how fast do you think Buchanan and Alan Keyes would disappear from Media radar, were they to touch the Grand Design/World Government/Conspiracy theory, uncovered and bravely championed by the John Birch Society since 1958?
Right.
"You can't serve two masters." (somewhere in the Bible)
2002-03-30 10:24 | User Profile
I have always admired the JBS ever since a neighbor gave me a load of their materials back in 1970 for a report I had to make in my English class. When it comes to research I consider them second to none. I think that they can best serve in the capacity of education.
When it comes to activism I think that something along the lines of the Council of Conservatives Citizens are needed. An organization like that should be the activist arm of the conservative movement.
2002-03-30 10:36 | User Profile
[quote=Primal,Mar. 29 2002,11
8]
Primal,
| **Quote** | ||||
[u]What seems so obvious and yet is never mentioned in the press is the invisibility of the elephant in the living room.[/u] ÃÂ When Forbes lists the richest men in the world, they don't list Rothschild or Rockefeller. ÃÂ They actually start with Bill Gates. ÃÂ Doesn't that beg the question?**
In the past they were *very modest* to say the least. You never read in the brief bios at the end of an article about the writer`s membership, nor was it ever mentioned on t.v. when one of these clowns were on. You would know everything else about them, **but this.**
Today, it is different. Just watch FOX, for example, and you will see their membership mentioned all the time for alot of them. (Gingrich is still modest about his) Apparently, they don`t see this as a handicap that they used to.
Nonetheless, I`m quite happy to see them take credit where credit is due, for it shows that those of us who have been pointing this out for years were correct. I hope that this new found openness one day proves to be a detriment to them when their house of cards comes tumbling down.
---
### Primal
*2002-04-01 02:43* | [User Profile](/od/user/9)
*i was all over him for days over that. the estate tax is what keeps even the gateses from joining the rockefellers and rothschilds. RnR dont mind paying estate taxes after they have hired all the lawyers, accountants and politicians to help them to so many other fund streams.
the lack of an estate tax can only help level the playing field between the mega-rich and the near-mega-rich.
*
van helsing
Have you ever researched how these types get rich through their many *charitable* foundations? There was a congressional investigation by some guy named Dodd back in the 50s or 60s. I may not have that right; so much info starts to run together and I never have the specifics on the tip of my tongue (fingers) when I try to pull out facts. But it was astonishing, to say the least.
---
### Primal
*2002-04-01 02:49* | [User Profile](/od/user/9)
"They were modest to say the least."
Yeah, and you, Sertorius are most kind, to say the least. {{{ }}}
---
### Sertorius
*2002-04-01 03:03* | [User Profile](/od/user/26)
|
and a Happy Easter to you and everyone else who posts here.
---
### Faust
*2002-04-14 05:59* | [User Profile](/od/user/60)
TWO REVIEWS OF PAT BUCHANAN'S 'DEATH OF THE WEST'
Defending the West from Death
"The Death of the West, How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil Our Country and Civilization," by Patrick J. Buchanan, St. Martins Press, 2002, 308 pgs. Available for $25.00 + $3.00 p&h from Northern Voice, P.O. Box 281, Wildwood, PA 15091.
Reviewed by Tom Andres é2002
In "The Death of the West," Pat Buchanan warns that falling European birthrates, the three-decades-old Third World immigration invasion and the ever advancing neo-Marxist cultural revolution are rapidly destroying Western civilization.
At the same time that the forces of economism (a hedonistic economics-is-all "mirror-image Marxism") and feminism are shrinking and breaking up its families, the West less-than-effectively urges the Third World to adopt population controls, while it flings open its borders to the Third World's mushrooming populations.
What is taking place, Buchanan points out, is no accident, but rather the result of Marxism's second attempt to destroy the West, this time by way of a cultural revolution.
Foreseeing that the imposition of rootless political systems would ultimately fail, Marxists of the Frankfurt School and their followers, such Euro-haters as Georg Lukacs, Max Horkheimer, Antonio Gramsci, Theodore Adorno and Herbert Marcuse, developed an ideology designed to make the "long march through the institutions" of the West, and eventually overturn its white male Christian hierarchy with the suffocating anti-Western, politically correct globalism being enthroned today.
Now Third World peoples are thronging into the West, and they, unlike their vacantly welcoming liberal/corporate hosts, are not paralyzed by racial guilt. On the contrary, many possess fierce racial and ethnic pride, along with deeply rooted religious beliefs. Add to that historically high birthrates, and the question is who will dominate the simmering unassimilated "multicultural" Grievance Fest to come ? Westerners or non-Westerners? One guess: probably no one. Eventually it will all break up.
"By 2050," Buchanan warns, "a third of Europe's people will be over sixty." Islam, on the other hand, is on the rise, and large numbers of Arab immigrants are now creating "replicas of their homelands" all across the West.
The Orwellian contrasts between what our elites want us to believe versus what is true go on and on. We congratulate ourselves on being "the world's last superpower," when we can't even defend Douglas, Arizona. We cluelessly (although some of us not so cluelessly) launch ourselves toward the great globalist "celebration of diversity," when "La Reconquesta" of the American Southwest has become so advanced that a key Latino California legislative leader can make smirking triumphant remarks about this being "the last gasp of white America."
Crucial to the survival of any people, Buchanan points out, is their sense of their own history. So the commissars of "Critical Theory" have been unteaching American history about as fast as they can slyly slide their erasers across a chalkboard ? and "Good-bye Columbus" and to just about every other pre-1960s historically significant "dead white male."
Perfectly illustrating this deconstruction of America are the current organized hissy-fit attacks over any display of the Confederate flag, which is now not even permitted to be a significant part of America's factual history. And if that banner is irrevocably stained by its association with slavery, Buchanan asks, what of Old Glory? The U.S. Constitution "countenanced slavery. . . for more than four generations." But, of course, those attacks have already begun.
It would be impossible to read a book covering such a sweeping subject as the survival of a civilization without finding some points of disagreement. This reviewer can't help thinking that Buchanan's deeply held religious beliefs may have gotten him a bit off-track on the population question.
Is the drop in birthrates during the Great Depression best characterized by Americans being "dispirited"? Or was much of it due to perfectly sensible decision making by those who thought it imprudent to try to support a half-dozen children while fearing unemployment? Just as having much larger families in the earlier wide-open frontier days often made good sense, ordinary, thinking Americans in periods of shortage, including shortages of space, really do have some inkling of the resources it takes to adequately raise a given number of children.
Also, what if one cause of population shrinkage is an earlier overexpansion? It sometimes seems that if Pat Buchanan were to be magically transported to Easter Island in 1550, he would admire such an advanced and populous Polynesian civilization, with its gigantic stone statues and its devout religious ceremonies. Coming back a hundred years later he might shake his head sadly at the severe drop-off in fertility, seeing it as a sure sign of how "dispirited" everyone had become, without noticing that the earlier population boom had stripped the island bare.
It undoubtedly would be disastrous for ethnic Europeans to drop below replacement levels as they substitute non-Westerners for themselves. But, our harebrained immigration policies aside, it is a tribute to European peoples that have cared enough about the quality of life of their own grandchildren that they have generally refrained from big-familying their way into the teeming shantytowns common in the Third World. And such human anthills cannot simply be explained away as being the result of political corruption, since overpopulation itself tends to worsen political corruption.
There is also the related too simplistic impression given that dire consequences must inevitably fall upon less fertile nations that share borders with more fertile ones. This has the unfortunate effect of playing into the hands of those, completely unlike Buchanan, who hide from the illegal invasion issue by telling themselves that nothing can be done, because, well, you know, it is all just so terribly "unstoppable."
POPULATION GROWTH VERSUS QUALITY OF LIFE
Of course the illegal immigration invasion is not unstoppable. In fact, we are in luck, because it just so happens that we keep on hand for this exact type of problem a large group of brave young men who wear uniforms and march in orderly columns.
Actually, as we know, U.S. population is increasing rapidly, thanks to our post-1965 immigration binge, a boom, perhaps because of the racial trickiness of it, Buchanan seems to underplay.
Or maybe it also has to do with his pro-fertility stance. While tumbling tumbleweeds are not yet glancing off the abandoned skyscrapers of Tokyo, Japan is said to be in a terrible population slump, while China, with its continued population explosion, now at 1.3 billion, and its apparent out-of-house-and-home need to soon spill over into underpopulated Siberia, is in a position that is made to sound almost enviable. Really?
If capitalism's social programs now mean that Japanese and European populations must never ever stop growing, then current big-government capitalism has a problem that really needs to be solved. And Buchanan inadvertently aids a pro-immigrationist argument by continually referring to the West's future economic "need" to import ever more immigrants, when it has now been repeatedly shown that mass immigration represents a net national economic loss. Besides, really now, who in their right mind would argue that Japan, which is smaller than Montana ? or any nation ? can continue doubling its population forever? No, on this Thomas Malthus was ultimately correct.
Overpopulation is also a matter of freedom itself. Someone once said about a city not too far away, "People feel like they can't clean out their garage without getting permission from their neighborhood association." Generally speaking, the more people there are around you, the more they will want to meddle in your life. And much of it is unavoidable, such as traffic and zoning regulations.
That there may be some lack of clarity on this issue can also be seen in Buchanan's prediction that California's energy problems will continue to worsen because of its ever increasing immigration-driven population growth. Yes, exactly. There are resource and quality of life constraints to population growth. We no longer live in biblical times. There are now over six billion people on the Earth.
So it really comes down to the question of what kind of a nation do we want to live in. Which brings to mind something that one courageous American once declared: "A republic, not an empire."
But, while it would be ridiculous for us to try to get into a baby-making competition with the Third World ? and, actually, its runaway birthrates are more likely to be its tragic undoing, not ours, were we to finally find the courage to end immigration and defend our own borders ?Buchanan is exactly right in his overall theme, much of it echoing what Oswald Spengler wrote about almost 70 years ago, that the West is being culturally destroyed and demographically overwhelmed.
What should be done?
According to Buchanan, European women must be willing to have more children, U.S. border laws must be enforced, legal immigration numbers must be rolled back, and Christianity, sovereignty and traditional values in general, including assimilation, must be reasserted. But since the West is fundamentally European, and, yes, white, isn't true "assimilation" now becoming almost impossible? If China, for example, were prosperous, tolerant, democratic and determined to do so, would it be able to assimilate a million Italians into becoming culturally Chinese?
Last December in the Atlantic Monthly, David Brooks wrote about the apparent deep division (illustrated on the magazine's cover by a bottomless chasm) between "Red" and "Blue" America, or the split between the Middle American states that voted for George W. Bush, represented in red on network election night maps, versus the more urban and coastal states that went for Al Gore, shown in blue.
Although Brooks wrote not without insight, his conclusion was a howler. Which was that, although the two Americas are strikingly different economically and culturally, "there is no fundamental conflict. . . no chasm." But how in the world could that be? Well, it goes like this, Middle Americans aren't really interested in some radical, scary, impolite Buchananite culture clash, because what they really care about most is "building and preserving local ways." Say what?!
It is yet to be seen what will happen when the rising tide of Blue America's political correctness, consisting of such things as the unnaming of George Washington elementary schools, combines with massive unassimilated Third World immigration, and the resulting revolutionary tsunami comes churning down the quiet Main Streets of Middle America, and then begins to submerge those cherished, to-be-preserved "local ways."
No chasm? Fortunately, Pat Buchanan has no such illusions. That is why he reminds us that even if Middle Americans were willing to compromise on immigration, globalism and all the rest, today's cultural revolutionaries would not allow it. Which leaves only two alternatives: political and cultural victory, or defeat.
A Shaky Thesis
Reviewed by Kenneth Robinson
Pat Buchanan's latest book, "The Death of the West," is certainly his most significant. Buchanan masterfully describes the obvious, but largely ignored, reality of the white race's suicidal failure to reproduce and of our passive acceptance of equally suicidal immigration policies.
Buchanan is a skillful communicator and he transforms the cold demographic statistics into a prophetic vision of the future that should inspire outrage. But, alas, the outrage is largely missing. To be sure, the book is selling well, as evidenced by the fact that Amazon.com ranks the book their 27th current best-seller. But, it is unlikely that you'll see or hear "Death of the West" reviewed in the establishment's media outlets.
This media blackout is not as significant as it might initially appear. We are past the point in our history where reasoned discourse can result in a democratic political transformation. The value of this book is that it will awaken some who are still asleep and that it will strengthen the resolve of the small minority who are still capable of serious thought.
This work is the most forthright discussion of the "Death of the West" from a respectable and well-known public figure, which is not to say that the truth is openly and fully proclaimed in its pages. I have heard it said that in order to get this book published, Buchanan had to change the title and do a substantial rewrite to "tone it down." I find this rumor to be entirely believable.
Nor was I surprised that the relatively obscure imprint of Thomas Dunne Books at St. Martin's Press was the publisher. Given the controversial nature of the subject and Pat Buchanan's high name recognition, this book was guaranteed to enjoy impressive sales. Despite the outstanding profit potential, the elite publishers have no wish to further Buchanan's message.
While Buchanan gets the facts right, his analysis is shallow. Still, his discussion of the recent history of the political and cultural revolution in the West is well worth reading and contemplating. He ultimately concludes that our decline stems from our straying from our "Judeo-Christian heritage." Buchanan confuses the symptoms of decline with the causes of decline. I do not believe this failure is accidental.
Buchanan has felt the wrath of the media Jews and he is exquisitely careful to say mostly nice things about Israel in "The Death of the West." He analogizes the demographic encirclement of Israel and its own internal demographic war over differential birthrates between Jews and Palestinians to the situation faced by the West due to declining white birthrates and nonwhite immigration.
Buchanan also invokes the sacred name of the "war on terrorism" to bolster his shaky thesis. Buchanan certainly knows that the attacks of 9/11 were a direct result of Washington's Israel First policy and of Israel's war against the people it displaced from their homeland. He must realize that his conventional pieties concerning Israel and our "Judeo-Christian heritage" will not convince the progressive Judenpresse that he is one of the good gentiles. But, perhaps, the inclusion of these howlers was the price of getting the book published.
Buchanan also makes genuflections to the gods of racial inclusiveness with a generous sprinkling of respectful references to "Dr." Martin Luther King. Like King, Buchanan also has a dream as evidenced by his selection of a grotesquely unqualified black woman as his running mate in his last presidential bid and his even more bizarre political alliance with ultra-leftist Lenora Fulani. Buchanan's dream turned out to be a nightmare for many of his former supporters.
Buchanan's timidity about facing and naming the root cause of our crisis inevitably diminishes the value of "The Death of the West." Buchanan was a guest on the Bob Grant radio talk show to promote his book. For those who are not familiar with Bob Grant, a little background is in order. Grant's radio talk show is an immensely popular one originating from New York City. Grant is a unique phenomenon in broadcasting in that he is willing to speak the truth about racial realities and to allow his callers to ask real questions and to voice racially conscious opinions.
MORE BUCHANANITE FENCE-STRADDLING
One astute caller asked Pat his opinion of why Roman Catholic Mexico was not successful. It was amusing to hear the polished and imperturbable Pat Buchanan bob and weave to avoid directly answering that question! Buchanan noted that Roman Catholic European countries were successful but that Roman Catholic Central and South America were considerably less successful. He then went on to rather delicately acknowledge that the ethno-racial composition of Mexico is largely mestizo, an admixture of Spanish and Indian stock. Buchanan then noted in a convoluted way the rise and fall of various civilizations. With unconvincing circularity he came back around to assert the superiority of Christian societies and Western civilization.
Buchanan refuses to acknowledge the contradictions in his book: on one hand he asserts the superiority of Christian society and on the other hand he devotes many pages bemoaning Mexican immigration into the United States. Well, most of those Mexicans are more devout in their Christianity than the Anglos they are displacing in Southern California.
While Buchanan flirts with "racism," he is never quite willing to openly acknowledge that our crisis is largely racial in nature. From where does this reluctance to speak the whole truth arise? On the most obvious level, crossing that line would result in the end of his access to the mainstream media. But, I suspect the answer is subtler. Buchanan is a sincere Christian and Christianity is a universal religion. Christians believe that all men stand before God as equals, at least in a spiritual sense.
Of course, in the past, this truism of spiritual equality was not understood to include natural equality or even social and political equality. But even the most traditional of today's Christians are hard pressed to resist the spirit of egalitarianism that infects our era. The wall of separation between spiritual and worldly equality has crumbled in the minds of almost all members of the white world.
In "The Death of the West," it's all too obvious that Buchanan accepts the view that the West's superiority arises from its superior ideas and beliefs, rather than from the contextually superior attributes of the white race. Thus, the fact that most Third World countries fail to prosper and progress, even if they are Christian and are ostensibly committed to the sacred doctrine of "freedom and democracy," must remain an unsolvable mystery to those who are unwilling to consider the matter in primarily racial terms.
Buchanan also hints that there might be a naturalistic progression to the rise and fall of civilizations. Yet, Buchanan never cites the work of Oswald Spengler, the foremost exponent of the naturalistic view that societies are born, have a period of youthful vigor, followed by a period of maturity and then of an inevitable decline and death. This omission is not surprising. The Spenglarian view of society as a part of the eternal cycle of nature is incompatible with the Christian worldview, which sees the history of the world as a linear progression moving inexorably to a spectacular and decisive conclusion.
I concur with Buchanan that our crisis has no political solution. However, I cannot concur with his prescription that the West be revitalized by a renewed dedication to its "Judeo-Christian heritage." I fear that our "Judeo-Christian heritage" is analogous to a powerful drug that preternaturally increases vital functioning, but that ultimately proves to be highly toxic. If Buchanan wishes to discern the mystery of the decline of the West, I believe that he would be better served by contemplating Nature, rather than the revelations of the heretical offshoot of an alien and unpleasant Semitic tribal religion.
Want to be fully informed on the issues from a nationalist perspective? You won't be until you subscribe to The Nationalist Times, the monthly newspaper of the American Nationalist Union. Features hard-hitting articles and commentary by America's best nationalist writers. If you're not yet a subscriber shame on you! Only $40 per year, $75 for two years. The Nationalist Times, P.O. Box 426, Allison Park, PA 15101.
url: