11 October 2012

American Decline is Inevitable Only Under Obama

Under Obama, a continuing American decline is inevitable. The same would have been true under President Jimmy Carter, had he been re-elected to a second term in 1980, instead of Ronald Reagan. Certain leaders attract decline like iron to a magnet.

America has been the world leader for many decades, and is unlikely to surrender that status without internal treachery coming from the very top levels.
The basic strengths of America are real, but not immutable. American status does not maintain itself; the actions required to reduce or counteract the risks of decline are numerous and complex. The most critical areas of concern include debt, the deficit, and entitlements, along with health-care and tax reforms, as well as changes in immigration policy and measures to lessen dependence on imported oil...

In the same Gallup survey that found the United States by far the most popular destination for would-be foreign migrants, respondents in more than one hundred countries expressed much higher approval of US leadership than for six other major powers, including, in order, Germany, France, Japan, the UK, China, and Russia.

The American role remains—in the oft-used word—indispensable. With its hard-power resources, it is the ultimate guarantor against aggressive and nihilistic movements and regimes.

...The society’s resilience and adaptability are unusual for a large country, as are its economic competitiveness and entrepreneurship. The United States, thanks to its unmatched research universities, enrolls a higher proportion of the world’s international students than any other country, with some two-thirds of graduate students who study abroad doing so in the United States.

Democracy, the rule of law, liberty, and popular sovereignty constitute fundamental strengths. There is no doubt that the democratic process is often messy and raucous, but it makes the political system responsive to a huge and heterogeneous public. It is well to keep in mind that America’s main peer competitor, China, lacks these vital features. There, the gap between rulers and the ruled could become increasingly untenable for a wealthier, more educated population with access to information and social media and increasingly aware of its own lack of political and civil liberties, not to mention the absence of accountability on the part of those who control political power. Indeed, China may be experiencing as many as one hundred and eighty thousand political, civil, or labor disturbances per year, and without major changes, which the current leadership is unlikely to countenance, social unrest will only continue to grow.

...Beyond the major areas of health-care and entitlement reform, other challenges loom. For the economy as a whole, reducing uncertainty and fostering a climate conducive to investment and economic growth are vital. This is especially relevant for tax reform and rationalization of the corporate tax. The United States has the second-highest corporate taxes in the world, after Taiwan, but because of the complexity of the tax structure and loopholes in the law, some corporations pay little or no tax, while for others the tax structure creates incentives for investment abroad rather than at home.

Excessive bureaucracy and government regulation are closely connected. Some degree of regulation is desirable and necessary in a modern economy, but excesses in bureaucratic structures, tedious permitting processes, arbitrary application of labor, employment, and environmental law, and overlapping federal, state, and local jurisdictions have become legendary.

...Complete energy independence may not be necessary or possible for the US, but the reduction of America’s dependence on imported oil and its vulnerability to oil price and supply disruptions is essential. What is required is a diverse, robust energy mix that includes better efficiency at home coupled with substantially increased domestic energy production, especially of oil and natural gas, along with the safe use of nuclear power. Renewable energy resources, such as wind and solar power, have a useful place in this energy mix, but compared with the vast quantities of energy required to sustain modern American life, their overall impact will remain modest, at least for the medium term. The challenge is to focus on what is practical and effective, rather than on what is fashionable or politically expedient.

...Crisis can be a stimulus to change as well as a warning sign of potential failure, and it is often the case that major problems are not grappled with effectively until they become acute. The debt, deficit, and entitlement issues that currently cloud the American future could well fit this pattern. These problems are by no means insurmountable, despite the formidable political obstacles standing in the way of their resolution. In foreign affairs, the dangers from nuclear proliferation and terrorism are serious, and the rise of regional powers makes it more difficult for the United States to gain agreement on approaches to common problems. Other than China, however, there is no real peer competitor on the horizon.

Our staying power is in our own hands. Whether we maintain it is not a matter of large historical forces beyond our control, but a question of choices, policies, and resolve. _American Decline a Matter of Choice

National decline is a matter of choice. Actually, it is a matter of a large number of choices, many of them made in childhood, adolescence, and early adulthood, at a subconscious level. For a relatively strong and resilient nation such as the US to undergo sustained decline, there must be a collusion of sorts between the national leadership, the nation's institutions, and the population at large.

In other words, Obama cannot be given the total blame for America's ongoing decline. Without the huge and bloated government bureaucracies, government employee unions, a thoroughly corrupted media and academia, and a dumbed down electorate, Obama would have never been given the power to enact his program of indoctrination, so thoroughly ingrained into his young mind in childhood and adolescence.

But Americans do have a choice. Theoretically -- unlike in nations such as China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, North Korea etc. -- in America, elections are relatively reliable (plus or minus 10 to 15%), and elections have consequences.

Under Obama, American decline is inevitable. If Americans choose Obama (plus or minus 10 to 15%), it will be a sign that they are feeling very lucky indeed.


Bookmark and Share


Blogger MnMark said...

If we are going to be honest about the causes of American decline and the chances of avoiding it, we have to acknowledge that the primary factor involved is the racial composition of the country.

America was built by Anglo-Saxons. The continent was conquered by Anglo-Saxons, the government was founded by Anglo-Saxons, and the ideology of liberty, property rights, and free markets is an Anglo-Saxon ideology. The Anglo-Saxon population had the necessary level of average intelligence and the personality traits (such as self-discipline and planning) necessary to make it work.

Blacks and Latins have not demonstrated the ability to maintain such a society, much less create it in the first place. Asians, while having higher average intelligence, are more tightly bunched around the average and thus have fewer geniuses, and in addition seem to be extremely conformist by nature and unlikely to innovate.

"The United States of America" is a political entity created by Anglo-Saxons to further their purposes as a people. If that political entity comes under the control of non-Anglo-Saxons, it will turn into something very different than its founders created. It will become a more or less black, Latino, or Asian country, depending on the population mix.

As long as the demographic trends are towards a smaller and smaller white proportion of the population, you will see "decline". If the white proportion were to begin to grow again you would see a reversal of "decline." It is mostly about the racial composition of the country.

If the country were to split into four countries - into white, black, Latino, and Asian "Americas", each would quickly begin to look like other countries in the world with those racial makeups. The black America would degenerate into poverty and corruption, Africa-style. The Latino country would get poorer and more corrupt, Mexico-style. The Asian country would be safer and have higher average test scores, but would be stagnant in terms of innovation. And the new white America would see explosive increases in per capita GDP and test scores, much lower crime rates, and a movement away from the suburbs and back into the central cities which would once again be safe to raise a family in.

This is really primarily about race, because the civilizational abilities of a population are closely tied to the race of that population.

Thursday, 11 October, 2012  
Blogger al fin said...

Not quite.

Looking at Europe, one sees several nations that are in palpable decline. It is difficult to blame most of Europe's problems on MENA and SSA immigrants. Rather, Europe's problems are largely due to dysfunctional ideologies and each country's unique style of corruption.

Bad immigration policy is part of Europe's dysfunction to be sure, and will likely lead to much greater violence, unrest, and economic difficulties in the future. But for now, that is just one part of a much greater dysfunctional whole.

Obama is not a problem because his father was black. Obama is a problem because he has taken an assortment of some of the worst possible ideological dysfunctions from around the world, and has created the most dysfunctional and declinist executive branch of the US known to history.

If you can compare the huge differences in economic outcome and quality of living between the former East Germany and West Germany, or between North Korea and South Korea, and blame the differences on racial differences between the east and west, or north and south, you are probably overlooking a far more significant factor.

The US is not likely to be divided into pieces on the basis of race. That is not to say that the US will not eventually be divided into pieces. Another Obama term will continue to deepen divisions and worsen overall conditions to the point that the whole may not be able to hold together.

Thursday, 11 October, 2012  
Blogger MnMark said...

Yes it's true that political ideology can be the cause of a nation's decline as well. If I gave the impression that I think that only race can explain a nation's decline, then I didn't explain myself very well.

Obviously, collectivist ideology explains the difference between North and South Korea or East and West Germany.

And even all-white nations that have relatively free-market economies are going to go through cycles, short and long, of economic decline and renewal.

My point is that a black country will never achieve what an all-white country will achieve, all other things being equal. Same for a Latino country.

Turn the United States into a mixed-race country like Brazil, and all other things being equal, it will never perform as well as a relatively all-white country like those in northern Europe. Because of race.

I think the U.S. will eventually split one way or another because of race. White men are not going to tolerate being ruled by corrupt non-whites. Other than South Africa, where whites are such a tiny minority (5%) that they have little chance of regaining their political autonomy, whites have never submitted to being ruled by black or brown people. Whites will put it up with it to a certain extent out of political correctness or because they are liberals, but as the quality of life degenerates at a certain point whites will have nothing to lose. Then we end up with either an actual civil war and a split, or a defacto split where there are areas of the country where non-whites just don't travel for safety reasons. Latin-style corruption is another option, where whites rule through corrupt elections even though they are a minority.

Saturday, 13 October, 2012  
Blogger al fin said...

Race is not the problem. The problem arises from some of the statistical correlates of race.

The US has benefited immensely from the output of non-European immigrants from India, China, Japan, the Philippines, Korea, and more -- including Africa and South America.

We should not look at race too simplistically, or we will miss out on a huge number of very good people.

On the other hand, we should not blind ourselves to the very important statistical correlates of race, and the problems we will cause ourselves if we do not discriminate on the basis of ability, aptitude, ambition, and law abiding tendencies.

Civilisations on the ascendancy will focus on building on positive strengths and possibilities. Civilisations on the decline will embrace victimhood, helplessness, and incompetence. Such declining civilisations eventually succeed in enlarging victimhood to include everyone except the hated few. By 2050, at this rate the US will apply affirmative action preferences to almost 200 million people -- about half or more of the population.

Saturday, 13 October, 2012  
Blogger MnMark said...

I notice that your list of countries whose immigrants we have benefited from seems to be all Asian countries - and then you throw in Africa and South America at the end. Do tell - list off some of these Africans and South Americans we have benefited from. Someone other than musicians and sports stars, please. I am curious to see someone actually list some names of individuals from Africa who have emigrated here and improved our lives.

Now, I have no doubt you could find one or maybe two Africans or South Americans (not counting those of European ancestry) who have contributed something. But their net effect as a group is strongly negative on us. One or two useful individuals does not balance out hundreds of thousands or millions of low-IQ, volatile individuals.

Your analysis ignores the reality that human beings feel an emotional bond with others like themselves, and that this bond, whether you like it or not, is to a large extent racial and ethnic. Yes there are people who are exceptions but they are exceptions, not the rule. They are largely liberal whites and a few non-whites who want to ingratiate themselves with whites or who wish they were white.

The reality is that when your race becomes a minority in a country, it virtually always means your opportunities and your quality of life deteriorate. It is a bad thing to be a racial minority in a country. Ask the whites in South Africa, the Jews in Germany, the blacks and American Indians in the U.S., non-Asians in Asia, etc. Your analysis does not take this reality into account.

For now, the Asians who emigrate here are high-IQ individuals with skills who contribute, and the proportion of Asians in the population is so small that there is no sense that whites are at any risk from them. But if somehow the Chinese, for example, were to become the majority ethnic group in the U.S. you would see very different behavior from them. Asians have a strong authoritarian, conformist streak and it is unpleasant to by ruled by them. (Ask U.S. prisoners in Japanese POW camps.)

The root of our difference in opinion is that you don't think race is a significant factor in a person's identity or in a nation's composition. You think we can just look at the character of the individuals involved and make decisions on the basis of that. I believe that history shows that in the aggregate, race does matter - very much - and the character of individuals matters little.

I would prefer to live in a racially homogeneous nation of my own people, with all of the benefits of harmony and safety and brotherhood that that entails, than to gain some marginal economic benefits by allowing high-functioning aliens into the country in large enough numbers for them to form colonies and begin to take control of swaths of the country for their own kind. Even in small numbers the benefits are a mixed bag...I draw your attention to the number of Chinese who have turned out to be spies for the Chinese government.

This isn't a matter of looking at race "simplistically." The truth here is simple, as simple as the inborn bond within a family. The current vogue amoung white Western liberals is to assume that race is an unimportant characteristic that can be overcome with tolerance and social programs. The story of the coming decades is going to be the gradual, painful awakening of white liberals to the fact that race is much more important than they wanted to believe. White liberals in South Africa are much further along the path of discovering that. Leading white liberal South African authors who helped bring down apartheid have emigrated to Europe and to Australia to escape the violent shithole that their idealism helped birth. I hope we can learn from their experience without needing to duplicate it, because there won't be anyplace for us to emigrate to in order to escape.

Saturday, 13 October, 2012  

Post a Comment

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act” _George Orwell

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts