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!

The CBOafs And Tax Cuts

Debt, Economy, Political Economy, Private Property, Reason, Taxation, The State

The prediction of the CBOafs (The Congressional Budget Oafs) with respect to the “cost” of tax cuts is only as good as their premise, which is faulty. That premise is that property stolen by the state from its rightful owners (taxpayers) will be used to pay down the debt and the deficit incurred by the same band of brigands.

And CBOafs will fly. (Apologies, by the way, to bandits for comparing them to government officials. As one libertarian wag once pointed out, highway robbers are fairer and more benevolent than government, because they rob you once, usually, and then leave you be.)

As the Congressional Budget Office warned today, “Last month’s bipartisan tax cut legislation will drive the government’s deficit to a record $1.5 trillion this year.” (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/26/federal-deficit-hit-trillion-budget-office-projects/)

In logic, a conclusion can be correct and untrue at once. The debt will go up—not because of tax cuts, but despite of them.

No matter how much these highway robbers take from the creators of wealth, the debts they incur will only go up. The lesson? Money is always safest with those who make it.

UPDATED: An Ass With Ears

Barack Obama, China, Economy, Education, Energy, Politics

OBAMA IS. You can coast to the presidency absent any understanding of economics. The rise of China Obama put down, in his pep-talk to the nation, to the child-rearing methods of the Tiger moms (http://barelyablog.com/?p=33597). Sinophobia notwithstanding (http://www.ilanamercer.com/phprunner/public_article_list_view.php?editid1=584), as American society is increasingly silhouetted by the State, China is undergoning considerable economic restructuring and market reforms, the consequence of which is a 300 million strong Chinese middle class, and poverty levels that have receded from “53 percent in 1981 to 8 percent in 2001. Only about a third of the economy is now directly state-controlled. As of 2005, 70 percent of China’s GDP was in the private sector.” The Chinese financial system is duly being liberalized—banking is diversifying and stock markets are developing. Protections for private property rights are being strengthened as well.

Obama thinks that a nascent China owes its increasing economic strength not to this liberalization, but to the fact that they “started educating their children earlier and longer, with greater emphasis on math and science,” and that the government is “investing in research and new technologies. Just recently, China became home to the world’s largest private solar research facility, and the world’s fastest computer,” he added.

The truth is that the US is in the red and getting redder, not China.

***

The central planner-in-chief also denounced his subsidies to the oil industry—he did a lot of denouncing of policies he had either put in place, or could have repealed—while, in the same breath, recommending that we “invest in tomorrow’s energy.”

In other words, state planning is a “subsidy” when it is applied to “bad” energy, but an “investment” when applied to the “good” energy source.

The Goods on Gas for Asses: The more efficient the source of energy, the less waste and pollution are involved in its conversion into energy. Think of the totality of the production process! The fewer resources expended in bringing a fuel to market, the cleaner and cheaper is the process.

Oil is the second most efficient, cheapest source of energy, Obama’s wish is our demise. For ordinary folks, the biomass-based economy means life without the basics.

UPDATE (Jan. 27): In reply to Bob’s comment: Neither do I hold China to be a capitalist society, if you read the article I cited. But neither do I think the US is capitalistic any longer; we just pretend we are. My comments spoke to a trend: China is growing because it is liberalizing its economy; we are shrinking because we are centralizing ours.

Politicians Pair Off For Their Big Night (Not Ours)

Barack Obama, Celebrity, Democrats, Ethics, Government, Politics, Republicans, Ron Paul, The State

Care about principles? Then the only time you want your representative to reach across the aisle is to grab a Democrat or an errant Republican by the throat. What about sitting together at the biggest “Stalinist extravaganza” (http://barelyablog.com/?p=33815) of the season, the State of the Union Address? “More than 60 members have signed up to sit next to one of their colleagues from a different party,” reports CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/01/25/brazile.congress.sit.together/index.html?hpt=T2). Reporters are giggling and cooing over who’s dating whom. I could not care less about the seating silliness. Let the statists play at symbolism. It’s a matter of time before tea partiers, bar the Pauls, slip between the sheets with their big-spending profligate pals.

Watch the formations—the twosomes and the threesomes into which the pols pair. That ought to tell you something about future alliances.