Wednesday, 20 December 2017

Trump: 'A nation that is not proud of its history cannot be confident in its future'

'A nation that is not proud of its history cannot be confident in its future. And a nation that is not certain of its values cannot summon the will to defend them.'

Donald Trump, speaking on Monday, coined a good aphorism.

Germany is an obvious example of the truth of the observation. Compare Austria and Germany today. But Western Europe in general has lost pride in its history. Eastern Europeans have not, but as more and more intellectual Eastern Europeans are educated at Western universities Western guilt and self loathing starts to seep into the previously uncontaminated Eastern half of the continent.


  1. And a nation that is not certain of its values cannot summon the will to defend them.

    There's no such thing as national values.

    There are no shared values. Even within the same ethnic group there are no shared values. Values in this sense is a word totally devoid of meaning.

    And isn't the US supposed to be a "pluralistic" society? Doesn't that mean that everyone is entitled to his own values?

    The only way to enforce shared values is by some sort of totalitarianism. Nazi Germany had shared values. Stalinist Russia had shared values. Shared values is a fundamentally totalitarian concept. Shared values in the modern West are enforced by soft totalitarianism.

    You can have a national identity based on shared history, religion and culture. You can have a national identity based on loyalty to a monarchy. I can't think of any other mechanisms for creating national identity.

    1. "Values" is something that had to be invented by Conservatism Inc. as a consequence of their raceless, cultureless view of America. It helps to spearate white Christian suckers from their cash and enables hucksters like Rich Lowry and Rush Limbaugh to heat their mansions. (And in the case of Limbaugh fund their prescription drug habits and sex holidays in the Dominican Republic.)

      Unfortunately, for the rest of the country nobody has this abstract idea of patriotism except white conservative Americans. Their non-white fellow citizens can't even bring themselves to support the US soccer team when they play against Mexico in LA. Black NFL players and cheerleaders no longer stand for the national anthem. This is how it works. Non-whites have their own people, ethnostates and real homelands while whites are left with this imaginary propositional nation.

    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

  2. What is identity as opposed to values? Values are part of that identity right? No values, no identity, or an at best a nihilistic identity.
    Take Iran where the great majority in Iranians prefer an Islamic theocracy with very strong and rigid values, and are really ready to go nuclear to defend them.
    Alas there is a shift in the West towards eliminating all it's traditional values, in particular it's religion, so indeed there is no sign that there will be a will to defend whatever seems like needs to be shed. Or is it?
    I do understand the urge to doubt the national values concept; when you are part of a minority, you do not understand what shared values are, and hope/imagine this is just an empty word. But for others, this shared values thing is real.

    1. I do understand the urge to doubt the national values concept; when you are part of a minority, you do not understand what shared values are, and hope/imagine this is just an empty word. But for others, this shared values thing is real.

      I think we appear to disagree because we're not using the word values in the same way.

      I'm using it in the sense that (I assume) Trump was using it, to mean secular and political values. When a politician uses the word shared values he generally means that we should share the same broad ideological views - support for the farce known as representative democracy, support for social views that would have been considered incredibly and dangerously radical just a few decades ago, support for feminism, support for "tolerance" (which means sexual degeneracy), support for a blank slate view of human intelligence, support for capitalism, support for the precious right of women to murder their unborn babies, etc.

      These values change over time and can be manipulated by the media. They're of no use in maintaining social and cultural cohesion. They're values that not everybody shares and therefore they need to be enforced by a system of soft totalitarianism.

      You seem to be thinking more in terms of traditional religious values and those values are more organic. They're a result of a shared culture, a shared history, a shared religious belief.

  3. Here is someone who appears pretty certain of his values:

    'Mount Athos, the spiritual heart of the Orthodox Church, represents something so utterly vital in the life of this world - and the next - that I believe we must do all in our power to maintain its life and traditions.

    For many of those who visit the Holy Mountain a new dimension is opened in their hearts. It seems to me that we have managed to do in the West is to educate out this heart-centredness in our lives and to destroy that awareness of our intuition which is so vital if we are going to lead a balanced existence. Through the perennial wisdom of the Athonite fathers it is possible to start to retrieve that lost balance."

    HRH The Prince of Wales

  4. Sounds like just the same old banal platitudes. Trump doesn't even believe it himself. He ran on a revolutionary, Buchananite campaign but from Day 1 in office he was pushing the same old nation-destroying neocon crap as Bush: no border wall, trade reform with China shelved, Syria attacked, NATO preserved, new sanctions on Russia, Bannon out, Gary Kohn and Jared Kushner in. Things would have been no different if Marco Rubio had been in the Oval Office. Trump promised an America First foreign policy but we got an Israel First policy even worse than under Obama. The UN vote on Jerusalem is a national humiliation.

    If Trump really believed what he says about being proud of America's history he would have at least taken a stand on preserving the controversial Robert E Lee monument in Charlottesville and he would have been supported by the majority of Americans. Instead he signed a resolution condemning those protesting its removal. Trump is selfish liar, a sell out and an old buffoon.

    1. Passage of the tax reform bill providing $5.5 billion in cuts and repealing the Obamacare mandate.
      Increase of the GDP above 3 percent.

      Creation of 1.7 million new jobs, cutting unemployment to 4.1 percent.

      A rebound in economic confidence to a 17-year high.
      A new executive order to boost apprenticeships.
      A move to boost computer sciences in Education Department programs.
      Prioritizing women-owned businesses for some $500 million in SBA loans.
      illing job-stifling regulations

      Signed an Executive Order demanding that two regulations be killed for every new one creates. He beat that big and cut 16 rules and regulations for every one created, saving $8.1 billion.
      Signed 15 congressional regulatory cuts.
      Withdrew from the Obama-era Paris Climate Agreement, ending the threat of environmental regulations.
      Signed an Executive Order cutting the time for infrastructure permit approvals.
      Eliminated an Obama rule on streams that Trump felt unfairly targeted the coal industry.
      Fair trade

      Made good on his campaign promise to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
      Opened up the North American Free Trade Agreement for talks to better the deal for the U.S.
      Worked to bring companies back to the U.S., and companies like Toyota, Mazda, Broadcom Limited, and Foxconn announced plans to open U.S. plants.
      Worked to promote the sale of U.S products abroad.
      Made enforcement of U.S. trade laws, especially those that involve national security, a priority.
      Ended Obama’s deal with Cuba.Boosting U.S. energy dominance

      The Department of Interior, which has led the way in cutting regulations, opened plans to lease 77 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico for oil and gas drilling.
      Trump traveled the world to promote the sale and use of U.S. energy.
      Expanded energy infrastructure projects like the Keystone XL Pipeline snubbed by Obama.
      Ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to kill Obama’s Clean Power Plan.
      EPA is reconsidering Obama rules on methane emissions.
      Protecting the U.S. homeland

      Laid out new principles for reforming immigration and announced plan to end "chain migration," which lets one legal immigrant to bring in dozens of family members.
      Made progress to build the border wall with Mexico.
      Ended the Obama-era “catch and release” of illegal immigrants.
      Boosted the arrests of illegals inside the U.S.
      Doubled the number of counties participating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement charged with deporting illegals.
      Removed 36 percent more criminal gang members than in fiscal 2016.
      Started the end of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival program.
      Ditto for other amnesty programs like Deferred Action for Parents of Americans.
      Cracking down on some 300 sanctuary cities that defy ICE but still get federal dollars.
      Added some 100 new immigration judges.
      Protecting communities

      Justice announced grants of $98 million to fund 802 new cops.
      Justice worked with Central American nations to arrest and charge 4,000 MS-13 members.
      Homeland rounded up nearly 800 MS-13 members, an 83 percent one-year increase.
      Signed three executive orders aimed at cracking down on international criminal organizations.
      Attorney General Jeff Sessions created new National Public Safety Partnership, a cooperative initiative with cities to reduce violent crimes.

      Trump has nominated 73 federal judges and won his nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.
      Ordered ethical standards including a lobbying ban.
      Called for a comprehensive plan to reorganize the executive branch.
      Ordered an overhaul to modernize the digital government.
      Called for a full audit of the Pentagon and its spending.
      Combatting opioids

      First, the president declared a Nationwide Public Health Emergency on opioids.

      The Department of Health and Human Services laid out a new five-point strategy to fight the crisis.
      Justice announced it was scheduling fentanyl substances as a drug class under the Controlled Substances Act.


  5. So minorities can't share religion or belief in fair play, justice and social order then. Sure.

    1. So minorities can't share religion or belief in fair play, justice and social order then. Sure.

      I assume that by minorities you mean members of other ethnic groups. Religious minorities, by definition, cannot share the religious beliefs of the majority.

      Fair play and justice are meaningless feelgood buzzwords. Justice only has meaning if you properly define it. Do you mean justice in a legal sense? Or economic justice? As for social justice, it is a made-up concept that has no actual existence.

      Ethnic minorities can adopt the culture of the majority. It's called assimilation. Personally I think assimilation is destructive and racist. It means giving up your own culture, your own traditions. It means being absorbed into the melting pot and what a melting pot gives you is a bland, flavourless sludge. In the case of western societies today it means conforming to the most vacuous self-destructive trash culture that has ever existed.

      I think ethnic minorities are better off cherishing their own cultures. The ideal way to do this is by having their own countries. In cases where that it is not possible I'd prefer to see nation states that are loose federations in which members of each ethnic minority were free to live according to their own cultures and traditions, rather than unitary nation states that crush all diversity.

    2. "Ultimately the goal of globalism is not to promote the survival of ethnic cultures and identities, but rather to submerge them into one big melting pot of global consumerism, to uproot every individual from an identity and heritage and replace that with the global shopping mall, and the “global village.” Therefore multiculturalism should be viewed as the antithesis of what it is understood as being. So far from the global corporates wanting to promote so-called multiculturalism in terms of assuring the existence of a multiplicity of cultures, as the term implies; it is to the contrary part of a dialectical process whereby under the facade of humane ideals, peoples of vastly different heritage are moved across the world like pawns on a chess board. It is an example of Orwellian “doublethink.”[7] It is notable that the instigators of the “velvet revolutions” now sweeping North Africa and reaching into Iran are largely “secularized” youths without strong traditional roots. Similarly, the best way to solve France’s ethnic conflicts and to assure that France does not re-emerge again to confront US/globalist interests, is to dialectically create a new cultural synthesis where there is neither a French culture nor an Islamic culture, but under the banner of “human rights” and “equality,” a globalist youth-based culture nurtured by Hollywood, MTV, cyberspace, MacDonald’s and Pepsi. "

  6. There are certain shared cultural values. Here is an example: absent any laws, most Swiss people would not throw their trash on the ground, because they value cleanliness and their community...they may not share a language even, but they have a value they share in common - and it has nothing to do with laws or other constraints. On the other hand, a Dominican (unless he belongs to a small elite) wouldn't think twice before throwing his trash on the sidewalk (as long as it's not in front of his house). This shows a different set of shared values across cultures - even if Dominicans are more homogeneous. This is just one minor example of shared values. Polls frequently show differences in opinion among populations (Americans overall endorse the idea of free speech, for example, while Germans don't). These commonly held values have nothing to do with totalitarianism, there is no need to enforce them by law, but it's very naive not to observe them.

    1. Polls frequently show differences in opinion among populations (Americans overall endorse the idea of free speech, for example, while Germans don't). These commonly held values have nothing to do with totalitarianism, there is no need to enforce them by law, but it's very naive not to observe them.

      Americans have in practice already surrendered their freedom of speech. If you can't express a political opinion without losing your job and facing financial ruin you don't have freedom of speech. If those with non-approved opinions find that every viable public forum for expressing such opinions is closed off to them then you don't have freedom of speech. Americans have accepted this momentous change quite willingly because this particular shared value has been altered by pressure from media, the education establishment, etc.

      Therefore it was never a real shared cultural value, merely a cultural fashion subject to change by those with an interest in changing it. It has been changed by means of what can only be described as soft totalitarianism.

      Even the theoretical concept of freedom of speech enjoys steadily declining support in the US. Millennials do not on the whole support freedom of speech.

      Cultural fashions are no basis on which to build a nation. They are however a splendid basis for totalitarianism.

    2. I believe you are peddling too much doom about America and millennials. The oft-cited study which is used to claim that American millennials don't support freedom of speech was based on a University of Chicago poll. In reality, nearly half (less than a majority) of the millennials polled said that colleges should limit freedom of speech in extreme cases. You cannot take this to mean that a majority of millennials, or Americans, want to limit freedom of speech by law. Conversely, in many Western European countries, majorities of those polled are in favor of limiting freedom of speech by law (not just on a college campus in extreme cases). I still think we are dealing with different cultural values (although Western Europe and America have more in common with each other than they do with the rest of the world).