Complacent conservatives, insightful conservatives, and the election
, author of the Kerry Spot at NRO, thinks that traditional American patriotism
in time of war will produce a Bush victory, even a landslide. But as Stanley Kurtz
aptly replies at The Corner, if American patriotism is still so strong, why is the election so close? Kurtz understands, as so many naive and superficial mainstream conservatives fail to understand, that American culture has been fundamentally altered in a leftward direction.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at October 28, 2004 01:11 PM | Send
What current polls show is that either Bush or Kerry can win. It depends on turnout. In 2000, Bush was 6 ahead a week before the election. Even a day before, Bush was 4-5 points ahead in many polls. Bush eventually lost the popular vote. Clinton won by 8 points in 1996, after being ahead some 15 points most of the year.
The DWI story on the last weekend hurt. Bush was too stupid (yes) to realize that it would come out.
One of my interests lies in the realm of futurism. Since even immigrants can see that America is devoid of any will to maintain its heritage, culture, customs and tradition and there is a cultural transformation to the left, what will America 2024 look like?
Will such a geographic entity at the current rate of erasure even remotely resemble the America that exists even now?
Certainly, the most obvious thing will be a significant increase in those many disparate non-white races and cultures. Whites will almost certainly become a minority in America as population demographics and immigration patterns clearly indicate.
As Black, Hispanics and others, become more the majority, I see a scenario where even further questioning of the authority and validity of the state will become increasingly problematic. A sort of backlash seems likely to become more mainstream. Consider it the “dead white men” movement that can be recalled recently at City hall in New York where paintings of those offensive white men (the founding fathers) were replaced by an irate black council member with more diverse sources.
The special status afforded the so called “minorities” back in 1964 has created a sort of victimology cult, which lashes out at the “white” power structure and by endless extension has now come to include immigrants from every corner of the globe. The only discrimination tolerated is against whites.
This has enabled the grand collective of “minorities” (everyone except whites) to abuse the victimology and minority industry to essentially unravel America along racial and ethnic lines as each group scrambles for hegemony.
Add to the mix a determined and relentless Islamic (religious) component to the multicultural equation and you get the picture of America’s likely fault lines.
Who is responsible for the impending catastrophe of American society? The soon to be former majority of this country, the white Anglo Saxon Protestants and their enlightenment ideals. This successful environment which gave rise to America also gave rise to liberalism and liberalism is turning this country upside down.
This brings to mind the following from John Adams:
“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.”
So as the liberals seek Sodom and Gomorrah, the “untouchables”, Immigrants and minorities seek to turn America into a version of their homelands. The result can already be seen; mini Balkanized communities sprout as the emphasis on nationhood dies and the celebration of multiculturalism promotes differences, and shuns the concept of a unified people. E Pluribus Unum, out of many, one- our national motto, is as ancient a notion as those dead white men.
This can only lead to the severing of all emotional ties to the host nation state and the creation of a new creation yet to be imagined.
I agree with Andrew2’s assessment of the American crisis. I would like to add two observations. First, the Left has already won the culture war and succeeded in ruining the moral and religious soil in which Western civilization was cultivated. The few traditionalists who remain are essentially a remnant of what used to be the spiritual core of a Christian nation.
Second, a conservative back-lash might be triggered by a another catastrophic terrorist attack on the U.S., especially if it dwarfs 9/11 as some have promised. This event could be used to discredit the Left, silence the appeasers and engender the public will to seal the borders. However, despite a rise in nationalism and xenophobia, I do not see how any attack can repair the culture and undo forty years of ideological contagion.
Traditionalists, it seems to me, are facing a very grim future since no plausible alternatives are available. Perhaps we are in for several centuries of darkness before a new Christian civilization can re-emerge?
I’m reading some great thought provoking comments here. (Glad the feature is back up!) Pondering this topic, I sat in class today (law school) and the professor said, “I expect the Securities and Exchange Commission to become more and more liberal about this issue. Why do I think that? Because the SEC knows it can’t control it.”
Perhaps this has been obvious to everyone, and I’m certainly not the brightest person in the world, but a light bulb went off in my head when my professor said that. I considered the idea that perhaps America is headed in the direction its going in because it really can’t control itself.
I don’t see parents really wanting to raise their kids; even Republicans. They happily ship them off to public school (i.e. prison) and go off to make their pile. There are neighborhoods in Los Angeles that are war zones; could the cops really get them under control if they tried? Could schools really reverse multi-culturism? I imagine the hoodlums might kill the teachers!
I attended junior high school not far from Los Angeles in the 1980s. The children of the illegal immigrants all went to my school. (for free, of course.) Every night, the baseball stands would be covered in gang graffiti. Every night. You know how they stopped it? They painted a gigantic Mexican flag on the stands. So help me God this is true. The graffiti stopped. That was the 1980s. Lord knows what it’s like now.
Had to vent those thoughts out. Thanks for reading it, friends!
The Left is conducting a campaign of cultural genocide against the Whites. The young people of this country are brainwashed into believing that all the social ills of America are caused by the “evil White men”. European-American culture is dragged through the mud while racist imbeciles like Spike Lee and Toni Morrison are worshipped by the establishment.
You just reminded me of a thought I had about Lawrence Auster’s criticism of President Bush’s handling of the war and his non-conservative conservatism.
I think Bush cannot act in any other fashion than he has with regard to waging the war. The days of carpet bombing and unrestricted warfare, total Krieg, are no longer possible. Yes the destruction of Dresden or Hiroshima involved mass civilian casualties and yes, the unrestricted warfare they both represented did end the war by totally destroying the enemy in true Sherman fashion.
But the modern framework any President must now work within has international dimensions and structures that preclude any use of American force in the manner necessary to kill the enemy and destroy his will to fight. President Bush could not for example raze an Iraqi city and cause the death of even one innocent inhabitant. Proportional use of force rules and such make it illegal. The political cost as well as world outrage would be incalculable.
Bush is clearly is an open boarders politician. But I am wondering if a second term will give him the opportunity to turn his focus on the illegal crisis. Perhaps if he spent some time in your old neighborhood in LA he would quickly change his mind. If his immigration record continues he is willfully but curelessly promoting the dismantling of America.
I think he could not stop the immigrant invasion short of putting the guard on the border. I think however that no President would have the support nor will to order this.
So in essence, as you said, there seems to be no longer any control possible. America appears to have become a runaway train on its way to third worldism.
Very insightful regarding Iraq: you’re right, there is no way we could pull a Dresden on Baghdad. Of all people, the Germans would likely protest the move!
I feel that Bush has gotten a bad rap for his conduct of the war. I’m not saying we should have gone in, that is another discussion. What did the U.S. public expect? It sat idly by while the Clinton administration slashed the military budget. Did the U.S. expect us to go into Iraq like the Germans went into Russia, with 100 divisions? (It’s amusing to hear Kerry say he’ll add 2 more Army divisions. Hell will freeze over before that happens.)
In the end, perhaps you’re right: we are spinning towards third-worldism. If the Metropolitan Police Department, the Park Police, and the Secret Service cannot secure the streets of Washington, D.C. 100 yards from the White House, how do people expect the U.S. military to secure the entire nation or Iraq 10,000(?) miles from home?
I think the Administration miscalculated the degree of chaos it will encounter and the “experts” of the Administration didn’t take into account the ethnic fault lines in Iraq.
When attempting to interpret the closeness of the election, keep in mind the smouldering, seething rage among many of us lower-class “wallpaper” white folks over the president’s lunatic immigration policy. Here in horrid Southern California I know of many who plan to abstain on Tuesday. They just can’t see any reason to bestir themselves to help continue an administration that, on this most crucial issue, has shown itself utterly hostile to their interests, neighborhoods, culture.
It’s sad, but in a strange way I’m happy to hear that southern california is that angry. I lived there in the 1980s and the immigration problem was bad then. I recall that no one in the rest of country knew anything about the “invasion.” At least now it’s getting national press!!
“Bush is clearly is an open boarders politician. But I am wondering if a second term will give him the opportunity to turn his focus on the illegal crisis. Perhaps if he spent some time in your old neighborhood in LA he would quickly change his mind.”
Bush does not think we have a crisis, illegal or otherwise. For Bush Mexicans are good little brown people just dying to work on his ranch.
I want immigration reform now. I want someone to do something about this disaster before America in its totality resembles a combination of South Central LA, Dearborn Michigan and 180th Block neighborhood of Queens.
But Bush is not going to do it. I hope he is only playing possum on this issue and is not really and ostrich.
A long time ago, Robert Kennedy visited “Bed sty” Brooklyn personally to open an office designed to help out the many poor black people of that ghetto area. He was asked by someone what he thought he would be if he grew up there. His reply was “Probably a JD (juvenile delinquent)”.
I think every politician in this country should be required to personally visit the main cities on the front line on the immigrant invasion and multicultural subversion of America before they can campaign. If they ever saw South Central LA, or Bedford Stuyvesent up close, they would quickly realize the world they inhabit is not the reality of the rest of America.
But if politicians can’t even recognize what can plainly be seen a few blocks from the White House, specifically the result of dangerous immigration and multicultural promotion which has destroyed any reasonable hope for the future of those many cities currently affected, what will?
Andrew2: It wouldn’t do Bush any good. In 2000, he gave a speech praising the fact that there were cities in the US where one scarcely heard English (I think Mr. Auster has a link to this remark). Bush is a thorough multicultural liberal. He actively promotes the invasion with such idiotic justifications as “family values don’t stop at the Rio Grande.”
I can’t help but wonder if he has dynastic ambitions for the Bush family (his bother Jeb is married to a dauighter of the Mexican ruling elite). Nephew Jorge P. Bush was in the motherland earlier this year denoucing US Border Patrol agents for using pepperball (paintballs containing hot pepper) against illegal aliens. The coyotes, drug smugglers, and Mexican army units who routinely cross our border with fully-automatic firearms and fire upon the border patrol received no mention, of course. Perhaps young Jorge thinks they should respond to AK-47’s with spitballs instead. Rove or someone in the campaign at least had the sense to tell young Jorge to put a sock in it lest the old gringos get irritated.
Another theory (seen at VDARE) is that Vincente Fox (who has been every bit as supportive of the Iraq war as Jacques Chirac) and his hombres have pictures of W in his party animal days, some of which were spent south of the border. Nothing like a little blackmail between members of the aristocracy.
Andrew2: One can’t escape the onlaught of multiculturalism - even in small-town Idaho. Take heart - our fearless caudillo has told us that “family values don’t stop at the Rio Grande.” That includes “Sopranos” family values, too - evidently.
About 2 years ago in a small Nebraska town, there was a Mexican-style bank robbery (charge in with guns blazing and kill everyone in sight) that left 5 dead. It was carried out by some of Jorge’s “family values” practicioners. The Mexican regime has been pressuring states not to apply capital punishment to Mexicans on trial for heinous crimes. Vincente can’t bear the thought of his hombres facing the cruel needle, and Jorge genuflects and courtseys accordingly.