Posted on 04/13/2003 6:59:15 AM PDT by jalisco555
WASHINGTON, April 12 (UPI) -- Why do they hate us? This question has been asked incessantly since Sept. 11, 2001. Sometimes it is asked about Muslims in general; sometimes about the Arab world in particular.
However, it is worth considering the possibility that the root source of anti-Americanism in the world lies in the deep-rooted anti-modern tradition of Continental Europe.
Just as the Baathist movement lately of Iraq and still in power in Syria is a localized variant of European fascism, the broader anti-Americanism currently fashionable on all continents comes ultimately from what some have called the Industrial Counter-Revolution. This is a comprehensive category for the various reactions in Europe against the program of the Industrial and Democratic Revolutions, or liberalism in the classical sense -- individualism, free markets, and technological and social progress.
Scholars such as Alan Macfarlane have found that individualistic social patterns (such as a preference for nuclear over extended families) have been very deep-seated in England, going back at least to the 14th century, while the reverse has been true in Continental Europe up to the Industrial Revolution.
This might suggest that both fascism and communism emerged on the European continent as a search for the lost security (at the expense of individual independence) of the extended family under the patriarchal rule of the paterfamilias in the traditional Continental society shattered by the Industrial Revolution.
Another explanation, not mutually exclusive with the above, may lie in seeing the Holocaust not as an isolated instance of social madness, but the latter half of a great historical cycle beginning with the emancipation of Europe's Jews during the Napoleonic Wars.
Although the Anglosphere began the Industrial Revolution in the 17th century, the period roughly from 1830 through 1930 saw a very rapid expansion of that revolution in Western Europe, and most particularly in German-speaking Europe. This expansion resulted in the emergence of a brilliant and dynamic civilization.
Given the prominence of Jewish Europeans in that civilization, it must be asked whether one of its principal stimuli was not the excitement of mutual discovery, in which newly emancipated Jews brought their analytical skills honed by their tradition of scholarship and debate, while accessing the much wider world of Western science, literature, and scholarship from which they had previously been closed off?
How can we calculate how much more dynamism was added by the everyday interaction of people who had previously been kept in parallel and uncommunicative spheres? The Germanosphere, including not just the Second Reich, but Austria-Hungary, German Switzerland, and the German-speaking communities of Eastern Europe and the Americas, really might better be dubbed the Judaeo-Germanosphere during that period.
Continental European Jews, because they owed their very presence in the larger civilization to the values of liberalism and modernism, were one of the first and most obvious targets of the Industrial Counter-Revolution.
The collapse of globalization and consequent rise of totalitarianism set the stage for the end of the great Judaeo-German hybrid civilization of Europe and its French counterpart. Those European Jews who were left alive at the end of the war overwhelmingly desired to leave, and they left to two destinations: Israel, and the Anglosphere.
With this emigration, on top of the previous great Jewish emigration to London and New York in the late 19th century, much of the energy, creativity and contributions of European Jews were given to the Anglosphere rather than the Continent. The cost to the Continent, and the benefits to the Anglosphere has never, to my knowledge, been calculated. The cost might never be calculable, but it is real.
Continental Europeans, helped by the Marshall Plan and American investment, rebuilt their countries with vigor after 1945. Led by the last generations to mature in the environment of the hybrid Jewish-European civilization, Europe seemed to pick up where it left off in 1933.
Gradually, however, Europe seemed to run out of creativity, in everything from arts, to academia, to demographic vigor, to the will to political reform. Endless rehashing of elsewhere-discredited Marxism replaced creative political thought. Overt fascism and national chauvinism were banned, but a new Euro-chauvinism took its place, loudly proclaiming the superiority of European ways over crude American ones -- a new chauvinism on a wider scale, based like the old national chauvinism primarily on resentment.
It may be coincidence, but these new generations are the ones who grew up without the experience of studying, working and socializing with substantial numbers of Jews. Can this have no effect on politics?
Consider that the current war has seen the rapid re-emergence of the classical anti-Semitic themes in Europe, and coming from the same classes and types that supported the previous anti-globalization revolt of the 1920s and 1930s. The whitewashing of anti-Semitism as "anti-Zionism" grows more and more transparent by the day. French television has begun to adopt the terminology of the Vichy propagandists in reporting on the "Anglo-American attack" on Iraq. "Neo-con" serves the same code-word duty that "rootless cosmopolite" did in Stalin's anti-Jewish purges.
The widespread anti-Americanism in the world, of which Continental Europe is the ultimate source, has almost nothing to do with the character of President George W. Bush or the current administration, or other such cosmetic issues.
The modern world was first carried forward by two great civilizations. The Anglosphere was one. The dynamic industrializing culture of 19th century Continental Europe, to which the spark of the Judaeo-Christian encounter was so important, was the other. That culture committed suicide in the '30s. Perhaps its successor is not the revival of that culture, but rather its zombie.
In considering the Holocaust, most attention has been given to its direct victims, as is appropriate. However, we must also consider that it was a form of self-administered lobotomy for Continental European culture.
It would not be surprising if the twin anti-modernist themes of anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism, now rapidly coalescing into a single nasty mess visible in many of the pro-Saddam demonstrations of the past year, become once again the predominant political-cultural theme in Western Continental Europe, overwhelming the decent and positive forces there that had previously prevailed.
And we should not be surprised if such people hate us.
I read it slightly different. When the enlightenment and industrial revolution came, it was necessitated by a tolerance that allowed Jews to become active in society. Because Jews had developed separately with a high level of they were in a good position to rise to prominence at that point.
The rejection of the Jews brings disaster, not because it rejects the Jews, but because it is an indicator of a way of thinking that is inimical to a thriving society. Treatment of Jews is a signal, not because of anything inherent to the Jews, but because it signals a shift in mindset.
Look at the nation of Israel. It is one of the most socialist countries on the planet. It's only technological innovations come in the area of defense.
And agriculture. Especially with regard to irrigation and dealing with harsh environments.
Imminent destruction does seem to sharpen the mind.
I'd say imminent destruction sharpens the mind along those lines that have to do with survival.
John Adams wrote: "I study war and politics in order to give my children an opportunity to study economics and commerce and that will enable their children to study music and art." Israel has never had the opportunity to get beyond that first sentence.
I believe this is unconstitutional. For example, it isn't a crime to vote for something patriots believe is unamerican. In fact, our government can be changed totally through constitutional amendments -- as well it should be able to do.
It's not that we haven't deported communists that has led us to the point where they dominate our universities and corrupt us through the arts.
It's that we gave them tenure, bought their musical recordings, went to their movies, and elected them to office. I believe we must face the responsibility for our own mistakes. I see it turning around, and it's happening without any thought police. (I think the thought police are the soccer moms and PC types.)
This gives me the chance to point out that it's people on the right these days who are the strongest defenders of liberty. They stand up for the second amendment. They stand up for freedom of speech. They offer their children as soldiers. They lead us to fight our enemies.
We can have freedom in this country and honor the Constitution at the same time.
The party ruling India is equivocating. I believe the main opposition party is more behind the U.S.
India has a big problem in that it has a significant Muslim population, some of which are in rebellion and much of which is on the verge of the same. They're also walking a knife edge with Pakistan, where they could fall into a nuclear abyss.
Their rulers are trying to hold everything together. I'm not sure they're ruling party is correct, but they believe that too strongly backing the U.S. could precipitate a worse civil war than there presently is. I'm not sure whether this is, at present, the right course for them. However, I strongly suspect that India will have stop equivocating before too long.
Interestingly, I've started to see the anti-Semites writing anti-Hindu hate that links Hinduism with Judaism and India with Israel. Likewise, I've been seeing the start of overtures between Hindu and Jewish groups. If more of the world starts seeing India as Hinjews that equivocation will have to stop all the sooner.
In any case, I'm willing to cut India a little slack right now. They could be the breakout country of the 21st century -- demographic predictions I've seen have India passing China in population shortly before 2050 -- and a major addition to the Anglosphere. But right now, it is a powder-keg over there.
Heh, I know I should be, too! But I feel like goading them into seeing what they're doing to us. We could use the moral support now. I don't think we need them strategically, but it wouldn't hurt.
I hope we don't get them after a bloody and/or irradiated war with Pakistan, or their own internal civil war. Whatever the case, I want them to see that their geopolitical interests would be served by joining with us. We're not colonists anymore, meaning the British anglos.
Problem is, outside of country music, there are damned few non-leftists recording music. Maybe there are some non-left-wingers among the Electric Celt/Acid Croft/Celtic Stone/AfroCelt sort of music I like, but they're keeping quiet about it.
That may be the initial attraction. But, no one invloved in the movement beleives this to be true.
That's very insightful but do you think that applies to strictly "Christian" nations or others.... Others meaning Islamic since I'm not aware of Jews gaining any footholds in any other nations outside of predominately Christian or Islamic are you? (Israel notwhithstanding) I think the best countries to study the rise and fall and rise and fall and so forth of Jewish minorites are Hungary, Russia, and Poland. It has been a rough ride in those nations and many Jews made the mistake of hitching their wagon to the wrong horse. Do you think it's coincidence that Jews have fared better in Anglo nations including of course here? I don't. I did not mention the modern Jewish experience in Muslim nations which has been disastrous recently with the exceptions of Turkey and Morroco...which are both shining examples of tolerance only in comparison to their tribal neighbors. Germany...that is a case study all by itself. Regards.
That may be the initial attraction. But, no one invloved in the movement beleives this to be true.
That was BeAllYouCanBe's comment.
The ages when tolerant Muslims ruled Spain were generally considered a golden age for both Jews and Muslims. When more fanatical Muslims came to power in the mid-12th century and started persecuting non-Muslims (both Christians and Jews), Islam started losing its grip on Spain.
More recently, I believe there were thriving Jewish communities in Iran, until the fall of the Shah, and Iraq, until the rise of the Ba'athists. I'd have to check things in more detail for the rest of the Muslim world, but that much I'm at least vaguely familiar with.
There was a thriving Jewish community in China for several centuries, but they disappeared, mainly through assimilation, about a generation before Marco Polo showed up. There are still small Jewish communities in India that date back more than a thousand years.
And no... I don't think it's any coincidence that Jews have done well in the Anglo nations, as the Anglo nations have thrived. Again, though, I'm not sure how much that is anything divine, as much as the nature of the Anglo nations. They have thrived on trade and open markets. It's hard to have an open market, when certain groups of people are excluded from it.
Obviously you're not very familiar with the foundations of our civilization, the Arts and the Sciences. The names of Jews who achieved true greatness could fill an entire book.
There are two main causes for the rise of anti-Americanism in Europe:
First, the collapse of communism in the 80's turned Europe's "intellectual left" into an ideological orphan. These people had totally identified their whole being with their ideology. In order to regain their identity they were able to salvage the only ideological element that could be salvaged: anti-Americanism, which had always been an integral part of leftist ideology.
The second reason is anti-Semitism, which is quite alive and well in Europe. Much of Europe's anti-Americanism is actually anti-Semitism in disguise. It's much more politically and socially correct to be anti-American than anti-Jew.
I agree. I was always against Quebec separatism. I know better now. The problem is they won't leave! All the want is to threaten.
Subtract Jews, Marxism, etc. etc. from the equation and the rest of the world would still hate us, because they're jealous of us, and resent our power. The intellectual elites of the world just don't want to believe that, is the problem. To admit that is to admit that there is NO SOLUTION to the problem, other than giving up our wealth and power allowing America to be kicked around like a stray dog until the rest of the world is satisfied that we're *incapable* of forcing our will on anyone else.
And in case you haven't noticed, the latter is *exactly* the objective of the Left both in this country and abroad. That is *why* they want to destroy this country as a global power. The Left in this country (as elsewhere) is largely composed of losers and misfits, who want to see what they view as the "power structure" in this country brought down, as a result of their own petty jealousies and vindictiveness, and the rest of the world -to whose equally petty jealousies the Left in other countries give voice - is of the same infantile, self-centered nature.
As I've said over and over, America has earned its stature in the world by expending blood and treasure cleaning up the messes that the degenerate and corrupt regimes and civilizations of the rest of the world create for themselves, and we now possess the dominant global Empire as a result. From a historical perspective, this is going to produce eternal jealousy and hatred on the part of small-minded nations and individuals who will occasionally have to be whacked like the infants they are, and we may as well get used to the idea.
And most of them, as recent events have demonstrated, will end up thanking us for it...
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.