(picture from the guardian, armbands of the anti-immigration (and Roma) Jabbik party in Hungary) So there's a good deal of doom and gloom on the RTP and rightfully so! From Chavez to Правда the world seems to believe that the US is falling into the deep precipice of Socialism! Conservatives are arming themselves in record numbers (even some here?) driving up ammunition prices to record highs, and even as we speak/type, we are all shareholders in GM. In this world where our values seem to be unraveling at the seams I offer this shimmering star of hope that shines undaunted amidst all the dark arts and foes that the all seeing big-gov't eye has amassed against us:
Europe.
This might have flown underneath the radar for many, but there was a round of local municipal elections throughout England today that heralds the continued triumphant march for British Conservatives. Much of it, likely, has come about by the awesome stories covering the expense account scandal that's rocking Parliament but this has been a part of an on going local trend in England for the last few years (and this). In fact, Labor hasn't had a good showing since the last election in 2005 so while they may clutch on to power till the next elections (June next year) it's a strong indicator that the round of European Parliamentary elections (going on this weekend continent wide) in England will have the conservatives drum labor and bring more European Members of Parliament that want to take down Euro-socialism.
Moving beyond England, there seems to be a continent wide resurgent tide of conservative parties that are poised to do well in the elections. As the article notes, there are very few political issues that are tied with the vote, thus, most of those voters that will likely turn out for the elections will be those that are negatively motivated, i.e., they are voting against the EU (thus voting for the conservatives), or they're protesting the parties in charge. Either way, we're likely to see a good turnout for conservative parties continent wide.
What does this mean continent wide?
In my humble opinion, I think this is going to lead to a more rancorous EP that will make the European Commission less likely to delegate more power to Parliament (which has been done in the past in order to account for the EU's "democratic deficit") in any future revision of the Euro-Constitution. When such a document turns out, which will most likely occur if the Irish vote down the Lisbon treaty again, it will give the conservatives extra momentum to keep the current tide going. Secondly, Muslim countries won't be allowed entry (sorry Ottomans). Thirdly, we'll see more autonomy/diversity in European foreign policy (which, unfortunately, could be a boon for the Soviets as well as for u.s.).
Within the domestic affairs of Europe, this wave of resurgent conservatism has brought about a wave of anti-immigration and calls for protection of traditional conservative values (go to the end of the article where the conservatives list their grievances with the UN) and also in the increasing conservative victories in Austria, Hungary, and the Netherlands (READ THIS) .
There's hope on the horizon folks. Even in countries where native European populations are about to be outbred into minority status within the decade (Netherlands), even the most leftist, liberal, socialist voters will react to an assault on their culture. But this all begs the question: Many of these folks are cultural conservatives which don't necessarily believe in such things as free markets and what not. Many are flocking to cultural conservative banners, but we also see some people going to the more independent hard-core socialist banners (see the Guardian article about the East German Socialist Party's rise and anti-EU stance). Which indicates that many voters are not only voting out of fear of the lose of their cultural heritage but out of rejection of the current state of affairs. If conservatives come to power in domestic elections later in the future (not to be confused with this weekend's EU Parliamentary elections) and the world economy not improve, then we may see conservatives resort to their more classical nature (the one that Adam Smith fought against), that is, protectionist platforms and fear of globalization as a threat to cultural traditions. I'll let the reader determine the consequence of this. Obviously, this isn't a real worry as the right way out of this is less government spending and less taxes, but it's trend we should observe with a small degree of caution nonetheless.
In summation, President Hussein might be able to make a few Muslim hearts swoon but the world is marching to a different tune. Maybe RTP will pull a 180 and start to bitch about "how much better it is in Europe" where public signposts are in one language and you can buy a house without 45% of it's value assessed in a VAT........
(insert Matrix/Neo "whoa" here)
If you look at the BBC map of the election results in England, you can see it was absolute domination by the Tories, more than the BBC's story let on (any surprise?). Another interesting thing that they don't discuss at all is that the two counties that have significant Welsh/Gaelic in their genetic makeup (Cornwall and Lancashire) went with 'Other' parties. I would have guessed ethnic parties, but it doesn't look like that's true. Must be the English Democracy or Independent parties.
ReplyDeleteThat was funny and illuminating when I said "a lot of those Nationalists in Eastern Europe are Socialist rather than Conservative". I didn't even realize what I was saying.
ReplyDeleteBut wait! My teachers and the MSM told me that those National Socialists from World War II were evil Right Wingers, not people who were actually to the left of FDR. They couldn't have really been leftists! Could they?! Oh no, my worldview of the glorious good war being fought against evil right wingers rather than good leftists is shattering!
Demographic trends in Europe are disasterous. But, trends are trends, not certainties. At some point the Europeans will wake up and see the calamity they are creating. The only question is will it be too late when they do. Maybe they are now. But, Nationalists have to be careful at this point, lest they offend too greatly the sensitivity most Eurowusses have towards the harsh realities of life on Earth.
I don't know how long the liberals had control of Europe and I don't know how socialist they are. Are they voting in real conservatives? Or just liberal conservative? In America both political parties are at the core very similar, both believe in a bigger role of government in America by providing for the people. So I assume the same there
ReplyDeleteThe liberals have had power for quite a while now in Europe and have implemented a lot of government programs and a big government. I don't know how easy it will be to dismantle the government and reduce its size and bring about a conservative government. If this is a long term trend and the people have woke up from the socialist coma, then the people only woke up after things got fairly bad and after the socialist and the government have become entrenched, but not after the point of no return. My point is that most of the socialist programs won't be gotten rid of anytime soon and that Europe has been forever changed by socialism.
America starting creeping towards socialism during the Wilson presidency. America during the Great Depression was very close to becoming a socialist/fascist country. The government used the crisis to gain control and change the nature and size and scope of government forever. Much of what has happened during the Great Depression remains with us--government ownership of utilities, social security etc, and overall a bigger more intrusive government with expanded powers.
My point is that there has been times when conservative had control of the American government, like wise for the liberals. But over the long term and overall America has been moving towards socialism or some form of centrally planned government, although maybe abated a little with republicans at times, but still under both parties America has been moving towards socialism etc, look at President Bush. I was trying to draw a parallel between the course of America and that of Europe, and to state that what is happening in Europe could not mean an end or a stop of the progression of a socialist government in Europe.
Reverting back to protectionism would be a disaster for the world economy. Just look at the Great Depression. Interesting to see what happens.
Lets hope it is a long term resurgence of conservatism in Europe and America wakes up soon. A sign of hope, maybe.
What you're talking about Jeff is bureaucratic inertia, the longer programs exist the bigger they get and the more difficult it is to remove them. You're on the money that this doesn't actually mean conservatives will be able to dismantle the entire Euro-Socialist apparatus anytime soon (nor should they be able to, if political parties could utterly destroy everything that was built by a previous administration, our world would be smoking ruin) it's the small things they do to slow, shrink, or increase the movement of programs.
ReplyDeleteYou're right that the gov't has been centralizing more powers unto it's self for a while now. This, however, is not a symptom of a Socialist design. Republicans have expanded the power of the Central Gov't just as Democrats have (just to a lesser degree) but for other ends. This is a symptom of government in general. What conservatives should focus on is the brightline between a centralized gov't that improves the efficiency of producing a public good (streamlined transaction costs, costs, obstacles to entry, etc) and one that hinders that (and limits individual liberties).
Big vs Small Gov't aside, the point of this was to show that even Euro-Pussies will react. We can hope for the same 2010.
I don't think it is some big grand scheme that is causing America to be heading towards bigger government/socialist; although, the socialist have tried and are trying to bring about a socialist America; included in this socialist group is the politicians who only care about getting and maintaining power for themselves; they do this by pandering to the worst in us. The government turns human nature against us to destroy us. They set up a bureaucracy or government program that provides for a basic human need. So people will vote to maintain the size and powers of government
ReplyDeleteThey divide people into groups and pit them against each other. Then a politician or a party sets themselves up as a unifier and promises to make things even and address past wrongs, look at the video I posted. The civil rights movement was hijacked by the big government democratic party. They promised to make amends for a very real problem, but the government solution comes with a catch; the government solves it by making the black community a welfare community which makes the black community dependent on the government. The government destroys the black families. It is all done under the guise of making things right and even, but the real goal is creating a voter base for the democrats. This is achieved by using the flaws in human nature. When they champion some human rights, gays, racial etc, they are only using it to divide and destroy us.
Is it a big plan? I don't know, but it could just be human nature manifesting itself out, and the government setting itself up to profit off of the vices and flaws of human nature. People get power and then they want more. People get a hand out or there is a government program that provides security and meets a basic human need. People get these things then it is hard to wean them off of it, and the people will fight to maintain their hand out or government program. This is why people need to be moral and willing to restrain their passions and have some kind of moral code. Without this a free society will destroy itself.
It is a inherit flaw within a government; or, as I think, it is an inherit flaw in human nature that leads to bigger government and the enslavement of a people. My point was to illustrate the cause and the fact of the long term trend of American and Europe heading towards a socialist/communist/fascist government--just human nature not so much a plan of the socialist; although they nudge it along and support it and profit off of it.
People need to restrain their desire for getting a free ride through life--not voting for some political group who will take something from a minority and give to the themselves.
Change does come by small, little steps that over time cover a great distance. I think the real indicator to watch out for is a change within the minds and moral code of a people that will lead to a long term change in the direction of Europe or America. Will people decide to take responsibility for themselves? Will people stop looking towards government to solve all of their problems? etc. Or are they just feed up with having no jobs and money or the quality of life they want?
A bigger and more active government is opposite of conservative principles. Most Republican see that people want a government to provide and do more for themselves, so they are willing to pander to that flaw to gain power for themselves.
Most people can only learn by experience, so they will only turn against big government when they realize it destroys them. My question is, is it to late for the Europeans, or the world, to turn from their socialist/big government trends and cut the government down to size and have the European people decided all of a sudden that less government is the way to go?
No doubt the republicans will regain power eventually. But the real question will it lead to a smaller government and be a sign of a general change in the attitudes of people or a change from the direction we are heading
I think it's a combination of both. I suppose we all are in agreement. It skyrocketed during FDR's administration, didn't shrink under Eisenhauer or Kennedy, skyrocketed again under LBJ, and continued to grow under Nixon. Not sure about Carter, but the huge recession probably put a damper on it. Reagan was the only president since before FDR that was able to scale things back, and he didn't very much. Bush I, Clinton, Bush II it grew again, and now it's set to skyrocket again under Obama.
ReplyDeleteI think inertia + people getting something new and then realizing they can't live without it, so makes it very hard for anyone to cut, even if they wanted to.
It seems to me that if Republicans can manage to return to power though, it will be with a healthy attitude towards controlling spending. But that's a big IF.
If you ask me, I don't think the size of government will ever be down sized by a lot. Even Reagan didn't do it that much. Something catastrophic would have to happen and then some crazy revolution. I don't see any huge down sizing in our lifetimes.
ReplyDeleteBud-D, it seems like something huge is boiling in our world and its going to explode within the next couple decades or sooner. Has the world always had this much tension in your lifetime? The nineties seemed chill, but the 60's and 70's were kind of chaotic too with the cold war and what not. Do you think RTP's is just trippin out? Or are we on the cutting edge and a merging think tank that needs to be reckoned with!!!?
Well, I think your last sentence nails it for this blog! In fact, I think I'm going to add that as a subheading. But, we're certainly trippin' too.
ReplyDeleteA liken it to radar systems: radars have two attributes that to a certain extent are exclusive: Security & Reliability. A 100% Secure system will detect every threat it is meant to see. A 100% Reliable system will never generate a false alarm. It's impossible or tremendously expensive to begin to approach 100% for both at the same time. So there are tradeoffs. How many false alarms can you tolerate? How many missed threats can you tolerate?
RTP is designed for maximum threat detection, but, we generate our share of false alarms. But, it's more fun that way.
I think the world is a lot safer today than it was during either my parents' or most of my life. What's changed is our country and the West in general. We are less able to function as a society (ie families disintigrating, birthrates plummeting, moral values blowing away in the wind, a people raised and suckled at the teat of Federal Government) than we used to be. We are victims of our own success and have become 'effete pooves' (which is a term the French applied to the old leaders of the Ottoman Turks before Gamail Attaturk and his 'Young Turks' overthrew them in the early 20th century. I don't think any translation is required). And now, threats that would be trivial to past generations are major problems for us. We did this to ourselves. That's why the world was so scared of George Bush. He really was perceived as a return to the cowboy mentality. In otherwords, an ass-kickin' mofo. Which we, as a nation, used to be.
For a Western nation with backbone, terrorists are trivial. Illegal Immigrants are trivial. As are dirtbag third-world nations. The only threat is another Western nation. Americans are the biggest threat to America right now.
What is RTP?
ReplyDeleteRobinson Talking Points. Get with it
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBud-D, you should revise your second to last sentence to read, "The only threat is another country that has adopted western economic principles (and maybe add 'has used the accumulated wealth of such profits to build and modernize their military')." COUGH! china COUGH! COUGH!
ReplyDeletein other news, I spelled cough so much that I can't believe it's a word. I had to look it up in my dictionary as I couldn't trust my spellchecker. What a poorly spelled word. Like seriously, it's dumb.
I agree with your coughing, but I don't know how to edit comments. As in, Japan & Germany were legitimate threats to a real Western nation with balls. The Taliban and Iraq should have been/should be flies to be swatted, not major national agonies. And I mean swatted with extreme prejudice.
ReplyDeleteChina is a legitimate threat now that it is more capitalist than the US. Uhm, I may have contradicted past statements with this statement, but I'm not using it to mean Existential threat, but certainly a nation that is worthy of our competition.