[annalex]

Patrick Buchanan's take:

Populism and Nationalism Versus Globalism

The new constitution is dead. New Europe has been rejected by the people in whose name it is being advanced. Repudiated, as well, were the political elites who campaigned for that constitution. But though Brussels is unloved and Jacques Chirac has lost France, this was no vote of affection for or confidence in Bush’s America.

This was a nationalist-populist protest demanding that France be France and Holland be Holland, and to blazes with the world. It was a vote against the free-trade globalism of George Bush and the Reagan-Thatcher economic model the European Left decries as “savage capitalism.”

It was a victory of the Old Right

[...]

But this Right-Left backlash against globalization and integration of Europe cannot save Europe. For the de-Christianized EU does not contain a single nation where the birth rate is sufficient to replace the population. Europe has begun to die.

[...]

In the rout and humiliation of a European establishment that is committed to open borders and free-trade globalism, by a Left-Right coalition, they may be staring at their own future. For that same Left-Right coalition is forming in the United States—against free-trade globalism, CAFTA, open-borders, amnesty for illegal aliens, Social Security reform and American empire.

[MACVSOG68]

As usual with any of Buchanan's writings, he is partially correct and partially wrong. France and the Netherlands still want security, but from what I understand, there is still a fear of assimilation that outweighs even the security concerns, as well as even greater concerns over a loss of culture.

I have seen nothing indicating a vote against the global economy as Buchanan says. After all, the votes for the Euro and the European Union pretty much blows that theory apart. Buchanan has always hated Bush and any of the economic agreements entered into by the US.

He is right on open borders and the need to curb illegal immigration. He will lose on the amnesty issues as well as social security and a host of others he opposes. Whether we like it or not, we have gone past the fail safe point in joining the world economic community. There is no turning back...we are totally committed.

But that is an issue for another thread. Suffice it to say that time has passed Buchanan by. He will continue to be simply a small fly in the ointment, and never again will he command the audience of any but the most strident of the right.

And his report of the death of Europe may be a bit premature. And if it happens (which it won't), it certainly cannot be attributed to a decline in Christianity. Throughout history, every great power has ultimately declined for a variety of reasons, some attributable to religion, many not.

If we are to look at the demise of Europe, we must also consider Assyria, Egypt, Rome, Greece, England, Spain, France, Germany, The Holy Roman Empire (the other attempt at unifying Europe), and others. The current state of Europe exists because of a multitude of issues. You and Buchanan are certain it's predominately a religious (or lack thereof) issue, most analysts believe it's far too complex for such simplicity, and in either case, far from a done deal.