Sunday, January 4, 2015

When The Structure of The System Becomes More Important Than The People

Here is a very good article by Daniel Greenfield entitled The Two Empires We Must Defeat.

"There is a thread that connects many of our conflicts, whether it's the one against terrorism or the one between the Republican establishment and its conservative insurgency. To win a war, we have to understand the nature of the conflict and how we got there. And that's often the missing piece."



  1. Very interesting and explanatory He certainly describes well just why NO current political party or school of thought that is in or near power, seems to have any regard for the wishes of the people they are in power over.

    I just wonder if these internationalists and empire-builders have any real conception of just how miserable a nation full of muslims will become? Do they not watch the world they are welcoming and encouraging this immigration FROM, or is it perhaps they think they will be immune from the disaster that this non-integrating integration will cause?

  2. Good article, lady red. I think he makes some good, valid points. Resistance to Islam is coming from many fronts now, the most recent being Sweden.

    As for the fight between the Republican establishment and conservatives, I'm very much in support of Louie Gohmert as a replacement to Boehner. I think he is an honest, intelligent, hard-working constitutionalist that could possibly change things up in DC and I'm looking where to send messages of support for him.

  3. There are a few parts which don't quite hang together for me -

    - The Muslim immigration thing is much more a problem in Europe than here.

    - FWIW, like it or not, immigration and "importing cheap labor" is as American as apple pie. The reason that "this time is different" is that rather than amalgamating the new immigrants into a dominant American culture, the immigrants are encouraged to remain separate - and then instructed as to how to monetize their grievances. Lovely.

    - The salient difference between the right - even the "establishment RINO" right - and the left is that the former do not hate the previously dominant American culture. The left do.

    - "Empire" doesn't bother me. It's a natural order of things. The world is living through a uniquely benign period in that while the US is the global hegemon, it is (largely) an accidental one. A world without any international order is IMO a less desirable world, and the isolationist-right narrative of a world of equal sovereign nations staying out of each other's affairs and engaged in consensual commerce is as naive and ahistorical as any left wing vision of universal peace and love. (Rick Grimes for SecDef, please).

    - "Nationalism" bothers me, only because the 20th century variety was largely based on mythical foundations. E.g. Germany and Japan (just to pick on the losers) promulgated ideology on a golden past that was largely imagined.

    - "Statism" bothers. To quote Happy on Sons of Anarchy, "it needs to die. Like a lot."

    - "Statism" is a tool in the service of either Nationalism or Empire. In fact it's historically more associated with Nationalism.

    - "Empire" is more associated with regional autonomy, historically.

    - And "regional autonomy" is, I think, a reasonable and plausible political goal - much more so than the idea that we might elect an American leadership which will dismantle "Empire", end "globalism" and "international law".

    - the minions of Empire are not interested in Empire per se but in statist control. (IMO, of course. Just sprinkle "IMO" about every fifth word here, 'k?)

    - Insofar as I have any hope for politics at all it is for regional autonomy and local control. Mayors over Representatives. Governors over Senators. I'm happy to see local defiance, even if it comes from the left. Let Berkeley and Davis and Cambridge do their thing - I don't have to live there.

    Even the liberals of Portland, Oregon have become dimly aware that that other name for the things we choose to do together is capable of destroying the homegrown, craft, small batch, artesianal lifestyle they're so fond of - because along with all those attributes comes another. Unregulated.

    I'm not optimistic at all - I think the social justice warriors have gained the upper hand and I'm not sure how to dislodge them. They aim to destroy American culture and America will follow.

    "International law", "Empire" and "globalism" are kinda far down on my to do list of things to eradicate.

    1. Lewy 14 said ...

      FWIW, like it or not, immigration and "importing cheap labor" is as American as apple pie. The reason that "this time is different" is that rather than amalgamating the new immigrants into a dominant American culture, the immigrants are encouraged to remain separate ...

      As usual, you've nailed it. On a positive note, my experience with the Muslims and Mexicans do not seem to be succumbing the "separate" narrative. Most are assimilating very well. Of course, there are exceptions, such as virtually everyone in CAIR who have a vested interest in strife, discord, and "separation" per se. I know almost no one, less than 1-2% who listen to a word CAIR pronounces. That's perhaps partly because most Muslims I know are Shiite, and CAIR is anything & everything but. The Mexicans are of various backgrounds, but almost all seem to have assimilation on their minds, not separation..none the less retaining many of their cultural features. Kind of like me, of Irish decent, who still appreciates that history. Both groups, all groups, spread widely throughout the metro area as their fortunes improve.

      Maybe I am too much the optimist, but I doubt it. I acknowledge a bias toward looking for the best in people. I have to go with what I see, feel, and observe around me. We are nothing like Sweden, UK, et al., where I live. We are the opposite.

  4. lewy, your analysis is really top notch, I always learn allot from what you have to say.

    But I just have to ask you...what do your liberal compadres in Portland think of the black brunch people who ruined the WWII vet's medal award ceremony? I'd like to know just what Ron Wyden thought about that as well...

    1. flo, I haven't had the chance to talk to anyone but my sense is that this hurt the hands-up agitators. This kind of thing doesn't fly so well in pdx.

      Wyden was his typical cowardly self - canceled the townhall meeting. If you look at his social media and blog, it's like the incident didn't happen. No mention.

      I'm far from a Wyden fan boy but he's better than some.

    2. Wow, he *is* a coward to make no mention of it. If it had been teaparty people that wouldn't have been the case. I agree that he's better than some but I lost a lot of respect for him by his actions (and non-actions). Thanks for weighing in.

  5. I should add that there are no "ghettos" here where I live...contrary to a few idiots, some political, who assert otherwise. They are easy to spot...always hysterical and citing "facts" that are pure fantasy. I could name a few, but I'd rather not give them the ink, so to speak.

    1. I should clarify my reference to "no ghetto" here. I am referring specifically to the Arabic and Mexican communities, both of whom expand out in to the city over time, and in to the far suburbs. Where I attend church in Detroit is a clustered parish in what was a decade a go a Romanian neighborhood, now nearly all moved on and replaced by Mexicans who have moved out from their original area of Detroit. Fully 95% of the congregation is now Mexican, with a few black families as well....and a few of us gringos. The Mexicans, almost all of them, bring their kids to church with them...which makes it a delightful observance without the dreary old time religion. In my own specific neighborhood a great Mexican restaurant (very authentic) has opened up a block & 1/2 from our house, so the Arab community is being diluted as well.

      Many claim Detroit per se is still a ghetto, true in large part, but that is changing also, just more daughter now lives in the central city core as the 30 & 40 somethings (youth in my frame of reference) are moving back in to the city. Kim was raised solely in the far suburbs, but jumped at the chance to move downtown when her employer offered bonuses to those employees who moved downtown with the firm, from the suburbs...that's 5000+ jobs that weren't there before. I tend to sense confidence when the money moves to a location...e.g., follow the money is sometimes correct.

      My sense is that as opportunity appears people can move with it and to it. I know some black families who would love to move to Farmington Hills, as many others have done. Given that Farmington Hills had deed covenants prohibiting "Negroes and Jews" through the mid-60's, it is surprising how things can change. I'm always perplexed by the screeching naysayers around here who can't see what is plainly right before their own eyes.

    2. My monthly dose of semi-bigotry:

      Q: How do you know Romanians have moved in next door?

      A: When they gaudy ceramic tile their entire front porch and steps, whether brick, concrete, or wooden.