Category Archives: The West

UPDATE III: Why Do WASP Societies Wither? South Africa As A Case Study

America, Foreign Policy, Israel, Multiculturalism, Nationhood, Political Correctness, South-Africa, The West

“Why Do WASP Societies Wither? South Africa As A Case Study” was the title of my address to the 3rd Annual Meeting of the HL Mencken Club, on October 23, 2010. It is now up on VDARE.COM. (http://www.vdare.com/mercer/110126_south_africa.htm) Here is an excerpt:

“… Often called ‘The White Tribe of Africa’, Afrikaners are perhaps the toughest tribe in Africa. They had a 350-year history on the Continent—as long as their American cousins have been in North America. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, creator of the Sherlock Holmes character, dubbed the modern Boer ‘the most formidable antagonist who ever crossed the path of Imperial Britain.’

So why is it that the Afrikaners, unlike their Israeli allies, failed to endure as a nation-state? Why did the modern Boer burn bright for a relatively short while, and then, despite superior military prowess, simply, as Hermann Giliomee put it in a 1997 journal article, ‘surrender without defeat’?

I earlier mentioned General Viljoen, the former Chief of the South African Defense Force. ‘You and I and our men can take this country in an afternoon’, Viljoen famously said to the Army Chief, General George Meiring, as President De Klerk was preparing to cave into ANC demands, forgoing all checks and balances for South Africa’s Boer, British and Zulu minorities.

Why on earth did the formidable SADF capitulate to Mandela’s ragtag ANC? And the very same people, in the very same spirit, went on to dismantle the six nuclear devices they had built at Pelindaba, west of Pretoria.

Why did the Afrikaner give up his birthright for a mess of pottage?

Since it all makes so little sense, my conclusions are more philosophical than factual” …

The complete address, “Why Do WASP Societies Wither? South Africa As A Case Study,” is now on VDARE.COM.

UPDATE I (Jan. 27): To “Sioux”: This address is hardly about race. Only crazy, race-obsessed people would construe it thus.

UPDATE II: JIM was not man enough to post his comment to the blog, so I will do it for him. It’s the “nudge nudge, wink wink” “Jewy” angle I’ve come to expect:

“Why no mention of Slovo and his handiwork behind the scenes that led to the collapse of SA? LOL, no need to answer that one.”

Joe Slovo is mentioned in the actual book with derision. There are many other culprits one doesn’t mention in an address lasting half an hour, and no allotted Q & A time.

“The Characters” chosen for the address were ones that inspired me; the “Culprits” selected comport with an analysis that focused on major, international movers-and-shakers that brought South Africa to it political knees. This reader implies that because I’m Jewish, I chose not to focus my address on a relatively minor figure in the grand scheme of things.

UPDATE III: From my address: “… as President De Klerk was preparing to cave into ANC demands, forgoing all checks and balances for South Africa’s Boer, British and Zulu minorities … ” For the idiots and ignoramuses who are blinded by race and ignorant of the South African landscape: who do the “Freepers,” who removed this address from their generally tedious threads, think the aforementioned Zulus are? Whites? One of my heroes (“Characters”) in this address is the Zulu chief Dr. Mangosuthu Gatsha Buthelezi, a conservative gentleman who wanted—and deserved—self-determination for his people. He got the deracinated communists of the ANC to call his lords and masters!

UPDATED: Economic Indices Ignore ‘Century of the State’

Economy, Free Markets, Individual Rights, Liberty, The State, The West

Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Canada and Chile have leapfrogged over the United States on the Fraser Institute’s index of economic freedom.

“In this year’s index, Hong Kong retains the highest rating for economic freedom, 9.05 out of 10. The other top 10 nations are: Singapore (8.70), New Zealand (8.27), Switzerland (8.08), Chile (8.03), United
States (7.96), Canada (7.95), Australia (7.90), Mauritius (7.82), and the United Kingdom (7.81).”

Forty-two data points are used to construct a summary index and to measure the degree of economic freedom in five broad areas:
1 Size of Government: Expenditures, Taxes, and Enterprises;
2 Legal Structure and Security of Property Rights;
3 Access to Sound Money;
4 Freedom to Trade Internationally;
5 Regulation of Credit, Labor, and Business.

With some variation, The Heritage/WSJ’s economically freest countries are these:

1- Hong Kong
2- Singapore
3- Australia
4- New Zealand
5- Ireland
6- Switzerland
7- Canada
8- United States
9- Denmark
10- Chile

Lest you forget, these indices provide important but woefully incomplete data. Long ago, Pierre Lemieux, a libertarian Canadian economist (a friend too) explained:

“If ‘economic freedom’ is inseparable from the rest of human liberty in a social context (using one’s property to express dissenting opinions, travel, have sex, grow marijuana, store one’s firearms, raise funds from “public” investors, etc.), the freedom indexes are off the mark.

“This explains why some countries ruled by hard tyrannies (as opposed to the soft, Tocquevillian brand we know in the West), where nobody in his right mind would want live except to make a buck as a privileged foreigner or a member the local nomenklatura, make it to the top of the list. Who would want to live in Hong Kong (ranked 1st of 151 countries in the HF/WSJ index), that is, under one of the worst tyrannies on earth, and so much so for its very efficiency? Who would want to be a peasant under other Asian tyrannies like Singapore (ranked 2nd)?”

“The selective definition of economic freedom also explains why the indexes show growing economic freedom while everybody who lives in the real world must know that the 20th century, rightly described by Mussolini as ‘the century of the state,’ is continuing in the 21st with a vengeance. During the 12 years of the HF/WSJ index, economic freedom is supposed to have increased. For example, over that period, both the U.S. (now ranked 9th) and Canada (ranked 12th) have improved their scores by 11%, while in both countries (and others) the Surveillance State was growing uncontrollably, including on financial markets. In the U.S., so many business executives are going to jail that perhaps repression will have to be outsourced to China.”

“Thus, the ‘economic freedom’ that is being measured is a rather special animal: it is the freedom to do what is narrowly defined as freedom in the statistics underlying the index. In practice, the freedom indexes encompass some general conditions for economic freedom (like a stable currency, or narrowly defined ‘property rights’), specific government restrictions or controls (on foreign investment, for example), and consequences of state intervention (the informal economy or corruption). And, of course, the weights assigned to the components of the indexes are arbitrary.”

“I am not saying that such indexes are totally useless. They do regroup variables that are correlated with GDP per capita and its growth, but keep in mind that GDP is a very unreliable construct that reveals basically nothing about the general welfare, and is based on arbitrary value judgments (this is pretty standard welfare economics: see my upcoming article in The Independent Review). The indexes may correlate with the difficulties the businessman will have with local bureaucracies. They may even indicate opportunities for investors to make money in limited contexts, assuming the information has not already been incorporated in prices. The HF/WSJ publication even contains some useful country summaries and international statistics.”

“But the freedom indexes have little to do with ‘economic freedom’ as we use the term in politics, economics and philosophy.”

UPDATE (Oct. 17): Interestingly, John Stossel has addressed Myron’s question:

“This evening on Eric Bolling’s show, Follow the Money, when I argued that economic freedom brings prosperity, lefty lawyer Ron Kuby said I was ‘full of it’ because the freest countries are not at the top of a list of the world’s richest countries:

1- Monaco
2- Liechtenstein
3- Norway
4- Luxembourg
5- Channel Islands
6- Qatar
7- Bermuda

But this is deceptive nonsense, like so much of what lefty lawyers say. It’s no surprise that small oil-rich nations, tax havens, and countries with old wealth have the highest per capita income. But the freest counties are all near the top of the list. Here’s Heritage’s list of the least economically free countries:

172- Democratic Republic of Congo
173- Libya
174- Venezuela
175- Burma
176- Eritrea
177- Cuba
178- Zimbabwe
179- North Korea

Do you want to live in any of those counties? I sure don’t.”

UPDATED: They Call It “Quantitative Easing”

Debt, Economy, Federal Reserve Bank, Inflation, The West

“Quantitative Easing” is state-speak for the government monkeying with the money supply. “Fed head Ben Bernanke,” who tinkers all the time, has announced that inflation is too low, no less. “The solution?” writes Larry Kudlow, is to “punch up the money supply and punch down the dollar.” By another $1 trillion, I believe.

The increase in the money supply is in fact inflation. This legalized counterfeiting raises prices; the new money generates price hikes throughout the economy. However, it reaches the politically connected first. They get fat checks well before the general price increases caused by all the new money affect their purchasing power. Depreciation of the dollar spells higher prices and hardship for those of us who are removed from power and from the new money.

Then there’s hyperinflation.

“In a system with fractional reserve requirements, an increase in bank reserves can support a multiple expansion of deposits,” explains economist Anna J. Schwartz. “An increase in the supply of money works both through lowering interest rates, which spurs investment, and through putting more money in the hands of consumers, making them feel wealthier, and thus stimulating spending.”

They feel wealthier, but they are not, Schwartz ought to have added. Yes, and the outcome of “easing” is “malinvestment,” never sustainable investment. Any “recovery” invariably reported by the polls is a result of this “easing,” which further serves to mask economic reality.

UPDATE (Sept. 29): Such artificial expansions of the money supply cannot but result in a massive misallocation of scarce resources, enormous waste, and, eventually, a drastic lowering of the standards of living for all.

As is argued in the July 2010 issue of The Free Market, a publication of the Ludwig Von Mises Institute, the current, unprecedented expansion, will impact our very civilization, throwing us backwards to more atavistic times.

UPDATED: They Call It "Quantitative Easing"

Debt, Federal Reserve Bank, Inflation, The West

“Quantitative Easing” is state-speak for the government monkeying with the money supply. “Fed head Ben Bernanke,” who tinkers all the time, has announced that inflation is too low, no less. “The solution?” writes Larry Kudlow, is to “punch up the money supply and punch down the dollar.” By another $1 trillion, I believe.

The increase in the money supply is in fact inflation. This legalized counterfeiting raises prices; the new money generates price hikes throughout the economy. However, it reaches the politically connected first. They get fat checks well before the general price increases caused by all the new money affect their purchasing power. Depreciation of the dollar spells higher prices and hardship for those of us who are removed from power and from the new money.

Then there’s hyperinflation.

“In a system with fractional reserve requirements, an increase in bank reserves can support a multiple expansion of deposits,” explains economist Anna J. Schwartz. “An increase in the supply of money works both through lowering interest rates, which spurs investment, and through putting more money in the hands of consumers, making them feel wealthier, and thus stimulating spending.”

They feel wealthier, but they are not, Schwartz ought to have added. Yes, and the outcome of “easing” is “malinvestment,” never sustainable investment. Any “recovery” invariably reported by the polls is a result of this “easing,” which further serves to mask economic reality.

UPDATE (Sept. 29): Such artificial expansions of the money supply cannot but result in a massive misallocation of scarce resources, enormous waste, and, eventually, a drastic lowering of the standards of living for all.

As is argued in the July 2010 issue of The Free Market, a publication of the Ludwig Von Mises Institute, the current, unprecedented expansion, will impact our very civilization, throwing us backwards to more atavistic times.