to everybody (except kappert) for placing this post in the wrong slot.

"I'm more concerned about the psychology of the aggressor (than I am the welfare of the victim).The victim is a victim anyway".

 

You make it sound like a laboratory experiment with kappert the 'caring' teacher in the role of the mad professor. 

or,even worse

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_human_experimentation

 

kappert,your opinions hold no currency with me.We are done.

 

1. Perhaps my attack on both subpar debate and on technocracy is a call to bring the "masses" up rather than the technocrats down or to separate the two. Citizens of democratic societies have a responsibility to be informed, no matter their family or career commitments.

 

2. I disagree strongly with your comments re: "degeneration" and "suicidal narcisissm". Firstly, these must be defined according to a specific standard, which must also be available for scrutiny. Secondly, I would contend that such socio-political developments are cyclical as opposed to linear.

 

3. Certainly the liberation practised by American and Anglo-Commonwealth forces and that by the Red Army differ markedly. However, as far as grand strategy was concerned, it was in the United States' self-interest to defeat Germany. Strategy is and should be cold and calculating; tactics are not. For the purposes of influencing mass public opinion, it is tactically useful to refer to "GI blood" and "saving" with regard to the American war effort; however, I believe that we can dispense with the melodrama in such circles. Similarly, it is tactically expedient for military establishments to construct mythologies glorifying their personnel and accomplishments in order to mask the reality that soldiers, not unlike policemen are little more than security guards. Indeed, such mythologies are vital unless one wants militaries to revert to the hordes of mercenaries and zealots that plagued Germany in the 17th Century.

 

4. I also take exception to your use of the term "conservative". Due to the proliferation of education, information and perspectives in the West over the past several decades, the traditional left-right spectrum is collapsing. Even the folks at Political Compass are limited by their two-dimensional quadrants (www.politicalcompass.org). Electorates are increasingly taking different stances on different issues to different degrees at different times. In particular, the demographic and identity crises challenging many Western societies are also pressuring traditional notions of liberal, conservative or socialist responses. Indeed, multiculturalism and diversity appears to undermine welfare statism and promote economic liberalisation - the "shift to the right" taking place from Berlin to Ottawa. Moreover, major parties are adopting more centrist platforms in the effort to secure votes e.g. New Labour.

 

5. In the contemporary context of the West's demographic crisis and its associated public policies, it is evident that revolutionary action is required, and possibly revolutionary violence. However, revolutionary action requires socio-economic turmoil such that the upper classes fear for their security of wealth and income, the middle classes are unable to maintain or advance their positions and the "best and brightest" from all classes have no opportunities to succeed without forcibly replacing the prevailing "establishment". Of course, this is all sensitive to ethno-national contexts. Ultimately, revolutions are by and large led by disgruntled members of the middle class e.g. the English Civil War, French, American, Russian and German revolutions. Unfortunately, bankruptcy and defeat appear the prerequisite sparks for revolution.

@ Kapitein Andre

 

As usual, you make some interesting comments, but the underlying purpose (the 'big picture') is again unclear and questionable.

1) Yes, this was hardly "an academic crtitique".  But, your own reference to the Archbishop of Canterbury and to "eurocrats", reveals that you yourself realise that "debate" should not be the province of an "intelligent elite".  The latter often lack 'common sense' due to groupthink (a point that Monarchist cannot grasp!).

2) Like most human phenomena, the 68'ers did show positive and negative aspects.  But, their contribution to "degeneration" in western civilisation is unmistakable, and the signs of "suicidal narcissism" are all around us (read Kappert more closely).   

The quote from Matthew does NOT show that he "discards the contribution of the USAF, USMF, USN etc.." to the liberation of Europe.  That seems unwarranted speculation on your part. 

Also, if the purpose of your speculations, about an alternative hypothetical scenario for ww2, is to opine that American GI blood was not "wasted" in liberating Europe, I think that you have a strong valid point.  But, we both know that Matthew's lament was not really about the 'waste' of American blood, but about the 'saving' and the subsequent 'degeneration' of Europe.  It should help remind conservatives everywhere to be more realistic, and less idealistic, about human nature. 

3) You are very wrong on your last point.  Great "wealth and income" do NOT act as "constraints" to necessary action. On the contrary, they are 'liberating'.  For example, they have so far enabled US technological superiority and (temporary) 'victory' in the cold war.  The lack of action you decry is the direct result of cultural decadence or moral degeneration, not high income or wealth.   What you mean to say is that the latter have helped to foster illusions and laxity (e.g. Kappert!), which in this case is true, but not inevitable.   

Matthew H: Just look at him. Pathetic. Outrageous. Beneath contempt.

 

Hardly an academic critique. Perhaps Peregrine Worsthorne was correct that what passes for debate has been "dumbed down" and that it should be the province of an "intelligent elite", as it is "not accessible to all" in any event. Then again, Worsthorne lauds the Archbishop's comments and that technocrats and representative democratic politicians are responsible for the problems facing most Western countries (http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/?storyID=16399). After all, are Eurocrats not an "intelligent elite"?

 

Matthew H: The suicidal narcissism of les Soixante-Huitards incarnate. The blood of every American GI wasted in saving that sorry, degenerate continent cries out to heaven.

 

Corresponding social upheavals occurred in the United States. Moreover, the 68ers sparked the Prague Spring and opposition to Latin American juntas. Interesting that Matthew discards the contribution of the USAF, USMC, USN and various special forces units to the liberation (or alternately, White Supremacist Capitalistic Patriarchal conquest) of German-occupied Europe. Perhaps this is for merely hyperbole...

 

In any event, had the United States solely concentrated its energies on Japan, Berlin would have eventually negotiated an armistice with Moscow, isolated the British Isles and consolidated the resources of the Continent, albeit with difficulty. Within a very few years, Germany's nuclear programme would have produced an atomic device that could be wedded to V-2s or later variants which could have forced the unconditional surrender of London and ultimately the United States. This scenario ignores that the Japanese Navy successfully tested an atomic device near a base in occupied Korea some two days after Tokyo's surrender.

 

Even if the United States produced one before either Japan or Germany, it would not be able to construct them in sufficient number before the Axis' acquisition of them. Furthermore, the USAF would be denied the use of Great Britain as an airstrip and Germany was developing jet-powered and strategic bomber aircraft alongside rockets.

 

Matthew H: I am reminded of the way Russians might have felt witnessing the collapse of the Soviet state. It is all happening so fast, and in this case, apparently by the choices of ostensibly free peoples. And this time it is not the malign empire of International Socialism that is dying but the free and liberal nations, the vessels and guarantors of reason, law, order, science and art not to mention the Christian Faith.

 

Agreed. However, the Russians were and remain largely in dire socio-economic straits, whereas Westerners' wealth and income constrains them from supporting the revolutionary activism required to prevent their own society's collapse.

But then again, is it really all that surprising the leftists at the Guardian are running columns praising the Archbishop? Somewhere, an alliance between the left and Islam was formed, it's very strange...

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with
human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition,
revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our
Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made
only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the
government of any other." -John Adams

The US constitution serves as perhaps the greatest foundation for a free nation in the history of man. However, Liberty, peace and democracy are very fragile things indeed. There is no freedom without adherence to moral law. By deviating from the moral law man violates his own freedom and becomes imprisoned within himself. This imprisonment engenders self loathing which in turn leads a man to actually seek out his own bondage and destruction. As individuals go, so do nations.


The Church of England is, and was founded as a political entity as much as a religious one. England remains scarcely a Christian nation and it's religious leaders have all but forsaken God and are little more than trumpeters of leftist and anti-western mantras.

"For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind"

I am reminded of the way Russians might have felt witnessing the collapse of the Soviet state. It is all happening so fast, and in this case, apparently by the choices of ostensibly free peoples.

Soviet state was collapsing since Lenin took over the country. Only really brainwashed people over there could think otherwise. The Soviet Union was dissolved by the communists themselves and I dare to say that even them could not feel free under this regime. Russian society is really pathetic, they would never free themselves from this regime. Without few exceptions they have the nature of slaves. Author could read more about communism if he intend to make such references, because it looks naively idealistic for somebody who has some clue about these matters. Vladimir Bukovsky "A Judgment in Moscow" would be an eye opener for him.

About American remaining frontrunners I entirely agree.

"The civilizational traitors, such as McCain, Hillary, Obama, Williams, are in charge of our civilization. That's the truth."

The whole world against Lawrence Auster! Poor guy!