Posted on 01/06/2002 3:23:03 PM PST by IM2Phat4U
An interesting review from Amazon.com gives new insight into Pat's new book.:
From Booklist
Maverick presidential candidate Buchanan decries the end of Western civilization portended by declining birth rates, out-of-control immigration, and loss of Christian and Jewish faith in Europe and non-Hispanic North America.
Indeed, the UN estimates on which he bases his first contention, which project large declines in the indigenous populations of Germany, Britain, Italy, Russia, and westernized Japan, in particular, are alarming in terms of the social services required by burgeoning numbers of elderly. Unless trends change, immigration must fuel growth in workforces and, hence, tax bases.
That's happening, so what's the problem? Well, those immigrants come from very different cultures at a time when Western elites discourage Western enculturation.
Buchanan traces those elites' attitudes to "Four Who Made a Revolution," the Marxist theorists Lukacs, Gramsci, Adorno, and Marcuse, who directed a "long march through the institutions" (Gramsci's phrase) of the arts, education, the media, and even the churches.
The Left's power has grown steadily since the 1930s, and now there is a leftist capitalism to go with leftist politics, hence the European Union and the many global free-trade schemes. At this point, Buchanan turns to the U.S and updates his familiar positions on schooling, the quarantining of religion, and the intimidation of opponents of the Left.
In the end, he counsels specific tactics for another Gramscian long march, this time animated by the soul of the West. This is a cry from the heart that hopes not to become a cry from the grave.
Did not Klintoon once praise Gramsci as a part of his failed Health Care takeover?
I actually think that was our first clue as to his and his wife's fascist tendancies.
CT
My memory bank reminds me that Clinton and his wife have commie tendencies.
Isn't that so true. We've been brow-beaten by the left for so long that we don't even call a commie a commie anymore; we think that we have to call them "fascists" as though "fascism" were the be all and end all of political insults.
The left has successfully gotten us to forget that fascism got its "fascist tendencies" by copying the tactics of the left and using it against them. But then, the left never did feel that turnabout was fair play, when they were the ones on the receiving end, for a change.
Made me reach for the hot sauce.
And transportation of pork would become so much cheaper if pigs could be taught to fly.
Have you actually read Republic, not and Empire, or are you relying upon what other people told you about it? If you actually read it, you would know that the above statement is completely false. Pat says, quite explicitly, that after Pearl Harbor, we had no choice but to go to war with Japan. But don't take my word for it. Go get a copy of the book and read the chapter on WW2 for yourself. Then we can talk.
The vast majority, 70%+ of Americans in the late 1930's, wanted to stay out of the war. It is nearly unanimously accepted by Historians that the US could easily have stayed out of the war if it had maintained policy of neutrality. Instead, FDR deliberately, and secretly defied the will of the people and engaged in policies explicitly designed, by his own admission, to provoke an Axis attack on the US: the oil embargo on Japan, US military aid to China, US destroyers firing unprovoked on German U-boats, etc. It is to these to policies of FDR, which I repeat, the vast majority of Americans opposed, that Pat objects.
There is zero evidence either Germany or Japan had any designs upon attacking the US. This notion that they would have come after us eventually is pure FDR propaganda.
Germany could not even mount a successful invasion of Britain, while Britian was all alone, with no allies (France had already fallen and Russia was still a German ally at the time). How in the world were they going to attack the US, especially after having fought an exhaustive war against Russia?
Also recall that the Soviets were just as evil, in fact more evil, than the Nazis. By helping the Soviets defeat the Nazis, we were simply trading one evil for another.
Japan knew that it stood a tiny chance of winning a war with the US. Internal documents prove it. That's why it went to extreme lengths to try to avoid it. Just weeks before Pearl harbor the Japanese even offered to withdraw from Dutch East Indies (I have to check this, it could be someplace else), if the US would just lift the oil embargo. FDR refused. Japan could not survive without oil. Ergo it had no choice but to risk a war. The point is that Japan did not want a fight with the US, and had no reason for such a fight (other than the oil embargo), and there is absolutely no reason to believe they would ever risk such a fight (except the oil embargo). There was nothing in it for them.
They attacked us because they hoped that we might not have the stomach for a long, drawn out war and would sue for peace, ceeding to them some territory with oil on it. They knew it was a long shot, but it was their only hope of preserving their empire.
If you want to make such statements without reading the book, you might find a more accurate source for propaganda. Now what the book actually reads, P 277 for the citation missing from your source, is:
Per Kissinger's book Diplomacy quotes Truman (NOTE NOT BUCHANAN) "If we see Germany is winning, we ought to help the Russians and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany and that way let them kill as many as possible...."
Pat is using the words of Truman to show the American's view of this war until Hitler declared war on us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.