Nation-states, happiness, identity, and rootlessness

“The nation state has taken the place of God. Responsibilities for education, healing and public welfare which had formerly rested with the Church devolved more and more upon the nation state … National governments are widely assumed to be responsible for and capable of providing those things which former generations thought only God could provide – freedom from fear, hunger, disease and want – in a word: “happiness”.”

― Lesslie Newbigin, The Other Side of 1984

There is, I think, a great deal of truth to this!

The problem is magnified still further now, though, by the fact that nation-states are under attack by stateless globalism which seeks to supersede them, and that claims to be driven by “progressive values” – but in fact is driven largely by economics (the progressives who have allied themselves with globalism are among the “useful idiots” of whom Stalin spoke, back in Soviet days).

Nation-states at least are / were somewhat organic, in most cases relatively local, with their own identity and cohesion. They share(d) ties of language, culture, ethnicity, and often, religion. Globalism promotes – ostensibly in the name of “equality,” but actually because it makes people easier to manipulate – a stateless, rootless, amorphous mass of humanity, entirely lacking in cohesion, identity, and therefore the ability to successfully resist the strings of the puppeteers.

Now, the globalists may one day learn that a tool sometimes turns in the hand of its wielder; that amorphous mob may one day turn on them! But the result seems unlikely to be a return to “normalcy” as it used to be understood – depending, of course, on how far things have degenerated by then – but rather a further descent into a newer and truer Dark Age. I fear for the future of humanity…

Moscow is our friend. Honest. – The Boston Globe

“Anti-Russia sentiment is deeply anchored in the American psyche” … unfortunately.

Source: Moscow is our friend. Honest. – The Boston Globe

Somewhat surprised to see this, coming from the Boston Globe! But as my dear father used to say, “even a stopped clock is right twice a day.” Of course, the author, Stephen Kinzer, has to take a few digs at the Trump administration. But in general, I think he is pretty squarely on:

“Russia does not threaten any vital American interest. Its policies in Syria and the rest of the Middle East are in line with America’s stated desire to crush militant fanatics. Its wariness of China matches our own. As for charges that Russia intervened in an American election, they are serious and deserve investigation — but hardly the basis for howls of anger from a country that is the world champion in manipulating foreign elections.”

Touché! Kinzer goes on to point out,

“The Russia ‘scandal,’ as we are being told to consider it, plays perfectly into the hands of Washington power. It is the ideal distraction. Republicans love it because as long as it dominates the news, there is less space for coverage of stories like the effect of new immigration policies or the rollback of environmental regulations. Democrats are just as happy, for another reason. Embracing the fantasy that Russian interference cost them the 2016 election allows them to avoid facing the reality that their defeat was really the result of presenting a widely loathed candidate and a set of policies far distant from the concerns of ordinary voters…

“Our interests are to lure Russia away from a possible strategic partnership with China; establish a security architecture in Europe that protects both NATO countries and Russia; and work with Russia to stabilize the Middle East. When emotion and prejudice are put aside, Russia is revealed as a potential partner of ours, not an enemy. In the present political climate, however, making that argument is almost suicidal. Washington’s mighty megaphone has told us that Russia is our greatest global foe. By treating it that way, we create an enemy where none exists.”

Amen!

New study finds liberals are less tolerant than conservatives – The Rebel

A new poll by PEW Research has found that leftists are far less tolerant than their right-wing counterparts.

Source: New study finds liberals are less tolerant than conservatives – The Rebel

Who is surprised by this, I wonder…? “Liberal,” used as a political descriptor in the present day, is worse than meaningless, it is positively false and misleading. And it’s not just about Trump! Far from it. He is a bellwether, but the issue goes much deeper than that. Much deeper!

End of the EU? Wave of populism takes over bloc despite Merkel’s Brexit relief | World | News | Express.co.uk

European Union bosses breathed a sigh of relief when Marine Le Pen was defeated by Emmanuel Macron in France – but new studies have revealed the spread of populism is FAR from over.

Source: End of the EU? Wave of opulism takes over bloc despite Merkel’s Brexit relief | World | News | Express.co.uk

Angela Merkel revealed just last month she was rocked by Brexit, and feared for the future of the EU, but the result of the French presidential election gave her new hope.

However, that hope may be dashed after the findings of Epicenter (the European Policy Information Centre).

Populism is being described as the ‘third force’ in Europe – with right-wing parties gaining renewed support across the bloc.

The Epicenter report revealed the total number of European voters who bucked the Brussels rhetoric and chose an anti-system force at the last political elections was 21.4 percent.

This means 55.8 million people preferred an alternative to traditional political forces – or those preferred by the EU.

Read on for more. More and more people in Europe appear to be waking up to the existential threat posed to European countries’ history, heritage, culture, and way of life by the “soft” invasion unleashed by Merkel and her fellow-travelers (helped along, sadly, by American stupidity in taking down governments – such as Libya, and we’re working on Syria, too – that helped to hold back the tide). But will it be enough, and will it be soon enough, to prevent irreparable harm? That is the question…

The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

“The image of Germany as a sinister, predatory, warlike nation only took root in the twentieth century. Nineteenth century Germany, by contrast, was seen as a place of peace and enlightenment.”

Source: The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation  – Smash Cultural Marxism

Although this article suffers, in my estimation, from its none-too-subtle anti-Jewish bias, what the author has to say about the demonization of Germany is squarely on the mark.

I have shared elsewhere on this blog (“Who’s to blame for World War One?”) how the idea that Germany is solely or even primarily to blame for the First World War is entirely counter-factual, the result of Allied propaganda created to mask their own complicity and to justify a horrific and completely unnecessary war; and is is widely recognized by sober and objective historians that the rise of Hitler and the Nazi party was a direct and perhaps inevitable result of the draconian punitive measures leveled against Germany by those same Allies, when victorious.

Prior to World War One, “Germany was admired by the world as a center of learning, for its high culture and for its achievements in every field; but also for its culture of honesty, hard work, orderliness and thrift, which existed even at the lowest level of society. British scholars and journalists had been very favorably disposed toward all things German, including their history, culture, and institutions throughout the nineteenth century,” and “British author Thomas Arnold (June 13, 1795 – June 12, 1842) saw Germany not as a nation with a unique predisposition toward authoritarianism and regimentation, but rather as a ‘cradle of law, virtue, and freedom,’ and considered it a ‘distinction of the first rank’ that the English belonged to the Germanic family of peoples.”

Continue reading “The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation”