October 21, 2006
Obsessing over Global Warming is a way to avoid facing the big problems...
Charlene and I have been reading Mark Steyn's America Alone. It's about demographic implosions and the collapse of civilizational morale in the Western world. And about population growth and growing aggressiveness in the Islamic world, which is moving into the vacuum at a frightening rate...
And it's all stuff I already know about and have blogged about. But it's different having a brilliant writer like Steyn slam it into your face. All at once, not picked up her and there. Grim. Painful. Highly recommended...
....The single most important fact about the early twenty-first century is the rapid aging of almost every developed nation other than the United States: Canada, Europe, and Japan are getting old fast, older than any functioning society has ever been and faster than any has ever aged. A society ages when its birth rate falis and it finds itself with fewer children and more grandparents. For a stable population—i.e., no growth, no decline, just a million folks in 1950, a million in 1980, a million in 2010—you need a total fertility rate of 2.1 live births per woman. That's what America has: 2.1, give or take. Canada has 1.48, an all-time low and a more revealing difference between the Great Satan and the Great White North than any of the stuff (socialized health care, fewer hand-guns, more UN peacekeepers, etc.) that Canucks usually brag about. Europe as a whole has 1.38; Japan, 1.32; Russia, 1.14. These countries— or, more precisely, these people—are going out of business....
...In the fourteenth century, the Black Death wiped out a third of the Continent's population; in the twenty-first, a larger proportion will disappear—in effect, by choice. We are living through a rare moment: the self-extinction of the civilization which, for good or ill, shaped the age we live in. One can cite examples of remote backward tribes who expire upon contact with the modern world, but for the modern world to expire in favor of the backward tribes is a turn of events future anthropologists will ponder, as we do the fall of Rome...
The vastness and strangeness of the changes that are happening leave me abashed, and I don't feel like pontificating. But I found it interesting that Steyn quotes Henri de Lubac, who placed the blame for the modern world's many troubles on "atheistic humanism." De Lubac wrote, famously, "It is not true, as is sometimes said, that man cannot organize the world without God. What is true is that, without God, he can only organize it against man."
My gut feeling is that that's the key.
Charlene surprised me by remarking that it's a "fun book." I resisted the impulse to say, "You're crazy," but yet I immediately understood, evil fellow that I am. We are witnessing a great bonfire of failures of everything we hate. Trendy leftism, smug secularism, feminism, multiculturalism. Pacifism. Big-government liberalism. Anti-human environmentalism. Atheism. The Culture of Death (and how!). Nihilism! Steyn captures it perfectly when he writes that it's the belief that everything is going to end up being like Sweden. (In whose capital, by the way, the most popular boy's name is now...Mohammed.)
...Across the developed worid, we're at the beginning of the end of the social-democratic state. The surest way to be in the demographic death spiral is to be a former Communist country in Europe: the five lowest birth rates in the wor!d are Latvia, Bulgaria, Slovenia, Russia, and Ukraine. But the next surest way is just to be in Europe: nineteen of the lowest twenty birth rates in the world are on the Continent (the twentieth is Japan). Conversely, the only advanced nation with a sizeabie population reproducing at replacement rate is the United States. True, there are significant variations from red state to blue state, immigrant to native-born, and in other areas: Mormons in Utah have one of the highest fertility rates on the planet, while the city of San Francisco could easily be mistaken for an EU capital, though in fairness to the good burghers of that town they had to embrace homosexuality to achieve levels of childlessness the Continentals have managed to achieve through ostensibly conventional sexual expression.Posted by John Weidner at October 21, 2006 10:31 PM
But the fact remains: Europe is dying and America isn't, Europe's system doesn't work and America's does, just about.
So here's a radical thought for Will Button and the Europeans: instead of cal!ing for America to "join the world," why not try calling on Europe to rejoin the real world? Otherwise, you'll be joining what we used to call "the unseen world."...
...and the only way to keep this inexorable change from overwhelming the West, it seems to me, is to transform the societies that are taking over into "the West" themselves, and to do it now. Which is why Iraq is the single most important thing we can be doing right now...planting a model state that can lead the Arab and Muslim world over the next century, one that respects individual rights and political democracy and free markets and all the things that make the West what it is...the West is Christian, yes, but it's also Jewish, and there's no reason in my mind it can't also be Muslim.
I can't imagine we'll ever win the demographic battles - those are the product of hundreds of millions of individual decisions made over lifetimes, and Europe is way too far gone. But it's not too late to light the flame of freedom in the Muslim world...
As important as Steyn's writings on the demographic disaster have been, reasonable discussions alone will accomplish nothing as long as our institutions continue to punish human fecundity. High taxes, abominable health care costs, byzantine bureacratic impediments to initiative, pointless formal education, mega-agriculture and modern religionism are all slanted against new human life. Nothing is so discouraged in Western culture as having a large happy family. Oppressive institutions suppress ad hoc family creation. The only kind of family welcome to the bureaucrats is one that is wholly dependent upon them.
Posted by: Kent Steinkamp at October 22, 2006 10:40 AM"...there's no reason in my mind it can't also be Muslim."
Steyn's point is that, whether we like it or not, much of the Western world will be be Muslim. But given that the 'modern' Muslim mindset remains fixed in the 14th century or earlier and that Islamic culture leans heavily towards totalitarianism and dictatorship the prospects for a liberal democracy flourishing under its influence is slim indeed. Be afraid for your children and grandchildren, very afraid.
Actually, there's another way to do it. Impose the REAL Pax Americana, not this K-Mart 2-bit nicey-nicey job we're doing now (not that W's efforts aren't faaar better than the Defeatocrats at their best). Announce to the world that we've had enough. There are certain things we will no longer tolerate anymore, including (not an exhaustive list):
Allowing one's citizens to teach their children that America is the Great Satan.
Large-scale oppression a la Rwanda, Sudan, etc.
Nukes in the hands of anyone of whom we don't approve.
Give everyone who's not in compliance with the list 2 weeks warning. Then, if still intransigent, nuke their capitol, using something small, tactical, etc. No need to produce excessive fallout. If necessary, invade. But no boots on the ground. Send Jr High principals and county execs, with a few special forces. If they're shot at, drop back and lob a tactical on the location.
I predict it won't take long before there is abject surrender in the Muslim world, including our 'buddies' the Saudis, the Pakis, etc. They honor strength, and they don't have the death-before-surrender thingy the Japanese had.
Will they hate us? They hate us now.
Will innocents die? They're dying now, and better theirs than ours.
I'm sure there's flaws in this plan, but is it any worse than simply waiting for the Muslims to inherit France's 'Force Frappe' while we pursue UN sanctions against Iran? Obviously there's no political will for this currently, but who knows what'll happen after the first nuke goes off in a major city in the US...
Posted by: Doc at October 22, 2006 11:50 AMMuslims claim to organize their entire world around an alleged supreme deity they call allah. From where I sit it would appear they have assuredly organized their world against man.
Does this make islam an exception to De Lubac's generalization?
Posted by: MarkZ at October 22, 2006 02:30 PMGive everyone who's not in compliance with the list 2 weeks warning. Then, if still intransigent, nuke their capitol, using something small, tactical, etc. No need to produce excessive fallout. If necessary, invade. But no boots on the ground. Send Jr High principals and county execs, with a few special forces. If they're shot at, drop back and lob a tactical on the location.
Holy shit. You can't possibly think murdering millions and millions of people is wise policy. Good Lord, you are truly insane...
MarkZ, that's a good question. One of the biggies, and I don't have an answer.
The radicals, well, we don't call them "Islamo-fascists" for nothing. They learned a lot of evil stuff from guys like Hitler and Lenin. But Islam in general? They don't seem to have what Christians or Jews would call a right relationship with God.
"Allah," by the way, is not a name. I believe it simply means "god" in Arabic, and that Arab Christians also call God "Allah."
Posted by: John Weidner at October 22, 2006 03:21 PMAlms - for the love of Allah! Anybody remember the old Arab beggars cry. Now od course it is Arms - for the love of Allah! How things change.
Posted by: Frank Pulley at October 22, 2006 03:40 PMI'd like to echo Ethan Hahn's thoughts: when Muslims are busy getting educated, and pursuing careers, they don't have any stomach for "jihad" - as in India. This underscores the importance of democratizing Iraq ...
Posted by: Tony C at October 23, 2006 06:53 AM[quote]when Muslims are busy getting educated, and pursuing careers, they don't have any stomach for "jihad" - as in India[/quote]
Most of the 9/11 Terrorists were well educated and had a future. It would be great if solving the problem were that easy.
Posted by: Darrell at October 23, 2006 01:36 PMDoc is right. We must use massive, overwhelming force against our enemies.
The Muslim world does not believe they have the military capacity to beat us. They do believe--and rightly so--that they have the will to win whereas we do not.
We must make this idea collapse in their mind. The only way to do this is to make clear that any person who takes up arms against us (or supports those who do) ensures their own personal destruction.
When al-Sadr commands his followers to attack us or our allies, we should IMMEDIATELY smash that part of the city from which he operates. No warning, no threats.
When Fallujah becomes overrun with terrorists, do not allow mass exodus and then send American soldiers in to fight and die. Level the town; what's more, make clear that those who chose to use the town as a military base against us bear full moral responsibility for the death and destruction we brought to bear.
When the President of Iran announces that they will soon have nuclear capability, preempt him with our nuclear capability.
We must become morally self righteous about our survival. If we do not, the United States, the most powerful nation the world has ever known, will be defeated by 12th century primitives.
Well, now, lads, why don't you just nuke everyone outside America? House-clean the planet, so to speak, and get rid of all those nasty cockroaches.
You sound uncannily like the Islamofascists, wanting to destroy everyone you disapprove of.
Posted by: Therese at October 23, 2006 03:37 PMdbc is making, in an exaggerated way, the reasonable point that, in many cases, using force decisively and ruthlessly when attacked can prevent future attacks (thus saving not only our own lives, but those of our enemies.) It has little to do with destroying what you "disapprove of," or with cockroaches.
If the very first Islamic terrorists had been responded to with overwhelming force, the War on Terror might have been prevented at the price of mere hundreds of lives.
But it is a waste of time to discuss this, since the underlying problem, then and now, is the same. We no longer have the civilizational morale and confidence to fight that way.
And the other problem with dbc's comment is that guerilla and terrorist tactics are designed to nullify much of our military advantages. The guerilla hides, or disperses among friendly populations, or gets so close that you can't use your artillery. Or even too close to use a rifle. The real question is not about using nukes, but whether we have the guts to fight at knife distance.
Posted by: John Weidner at October 23, 2006 05:23 PMSo, Ethan Hahn, was Truman guilty of 'murder'? Actually my idiot plan is kinder and gentler than that old Democrat warhawk; I'd give them 2 wks notice to either surrender or evacuate their capitol. I'd rather not kill anyone. But what's the alternative? Wait until the first nuke goes off in NYC? Or some plague, not even deliberately brewed, but feeding off some Muslim-oppression-induced famine, spreads to the US? We can't afford to wait. It's Tours, Lepanto, and Vienna time, folks. Suit up.
Posted by: Doc at October 23, 2006 06:21 PMDoc, please. Obviously Truman's situation was a tad different - we were in a state of total war with the nation of Japan, any "peace faction" was non-existant or impotent, the only thing we demanded of them was unconditional surrender, total submission, and we were happily willing to occupy the nation for...er...yeah, we're still frickin' there.
So some paramilitary group in Jordan starts misbehaving. Are you gonna nuke frickin' Amman? Honestly? Do you want to occupy every last Muslim nation on the planet? With what troops, exactly? Or do you plan on wiping them entirely off the face of the earth? Killing maybe a billion people?
I'm completely on board with being strong. I agree with John that the wishy-washy lefties like Carter are responsible for far more death and suffering than strong righties like Reagan. I'm in favor of invading Iran, and doing it today, because I think that will save lives and liberate tens of millions.
But murdering millions, in an attempt to hold civilians hostage to change the behavior of people who have no respect for the very people you're threatening, and thinking that is either morally acceptable or effective policy? That's just lunacy.
And terrorists WANT us to commit atrocities. In fact they are trying to provoke them. The Bizarro World rules of the the game say that we get punished for atrocities; they don't.
It took thousands of brutal war crimes to provoke My Lai. Now all the murderous atrocities of the Communists are forgotten, while my kids still learn about My Lai in school. And American leftists who consigned millions of South Vietnamese to death or exile now sit in the Senate, or run for President.
It's stupid, it's evil, it's twisted, but it's the world we live in, and we have to deal with it. Bin Laden would have been happy if after 9/11 we had cringed in fear, OR if we had flattened Kabul. Either would have served his ends.
Instead he got his worst nightmare; relentless pressure around the globe, terror-supporting regimes removed in Afghanistan and Iraq, and millions of Moslems lining up to VOTE--that wasn't in any of his plans... I'd like to see more done, but we are doing pretty well so far.
Posted by: John Weidner at October 23, 2006 07:26 PMActually if the Chinese ever thought they were seriously threatened by Fascist Islam, they would think nothing of a massive and totally brutal response.
Question: What is Falun Gong? Right. And how are its followers treated in China? Right. Now what is Fascist Islam?....
And given how the Fascist Muslims have persuaded themselves that they've beaten the Soviets in Afghanistan, and are winning the total war of occupation and domination against the West, they might just figure "Allah" is on their side and have a go at the Chinese?
So let me ask you all again: why is Iran so desparate to get the Bomb? (Hint: it's not Israel, that's just the excuse.)
The post-Western world is going to be filled with holocausts...
Posted by: bcf at October 24, 2006 07:24 PM
