Quote of the Day – More Mark Steyn

From a little earlier in the book than yesterday’s, and a bit longer:

In 1945, Hugh MacLennan wrote a novel set in Montreal whose title came to sum up the relationship between the English and the French in Canada:  Two Solitudes.  They live in the same nation, sometimes in the same town, sometimes share the same workspace.  But they inhabit different psychologies.  In 2008, David Warren, a columnist with The Ottawa Citizen, argued that the concept has headed south:

In the United States, especially in the present election, we get glimpses of two political solitudes that have been created not by any plausible socio-economic division within society, nor by any deep division between different ethnic tribes, but tautologically by the notion of “two solitudes” itself.  The nation is divided, roughly half-and-half, between people who instinctively resent the Nanny State, and those who instinctively long for its ministrations.

John Edwards, yesterday’s coming man, had an oft retailed stump speech about “the two Americas,” a Disraelian portrait of Dickensian gloom conjured in the mawkish drool of a Depression-era sob-sister:  one America was a wasteland of shuttered mills and shivering “coatless girls,” while in the other America Dick Cheney and his Halliburton fat cats were sitting ’round the pool swigging crude straight from the well and toasting their war profits all day long.  Edwards was right about the “two Americas,” but not about the division:  in one America, those who subscribe to the ruling ideology can access a world of tenured security lubricated by government and without creating a dime of wealth for the overall economy; in the other America, millions of people go to work every day to try to support their families and build up businesses and improve themselves, and the harder they work the more they’re penalized to support the government class in its privileges.  Traditionally, he who paid the piper called the tune.  But not anymore.  Flownover Country pays the piper, very generously, in salaries, benefits, pensions, and perks.  But Conformicrat America calls the tune, the same unending single-note dirge.  David Warren regards these as “two basically irreconcilable views of reality”:  “Only in America are they so equally balanced.  Elsewhere in the west, the true believers in the Nanny State have long since prevailed.”

Increasingly, America’s divide is about the nature of the state itself — about the American idea. And in that case why go on sharing the same real estate?  As someone once said, “A house divided against itself cannot stand.”  The Flownover Country’s champion ought, in theory, to be the Republican Party.  But, even in less fractious times, this is a loveless marriage.  Much of the GOP establishment is either seduced by the Conformicrats, or terrified by them, to the point where they insist on allowing he liberals to set the parameters of the debate — on health care, immigration, education, Social Security — and then wonder why elections are always fought on the Democrats’ terms.  If you let the left make the rules, the right winds up being represented by the likes of Bob Dole and John McCain, decent old sticks who know how to give dignified concession speeches.  If you want to prevent Big Government driving America off a cliff, it’s insufficient.

The Conformicrats need Flownover Country to fund them.  It’s less clear why Flownover Country needs the Conformicrats — and a house divided against itself cannot stand without the guy who keeps up the mortgage payments.

This excerpt echos much of what I’ve written here over the last several years. I attribute the “Two Solitudes” to the differing principles explored by Thomas Sowell in his book A Conflict of Visions, which I wrote about at length in What We Got Here is…Failure to Communicate – two basically irreconcilable fundamentally opposed worldviews in conflict. The “American idea”? I wrote about that in That Sumbitch ain’t been BORN!

Steyn indicates here that the solution is to stop paying the mortgage, at least until we can seize control of the checkbook back – and the only way to do that is to stop direct-depositing into the joint account. Currently the Congress is making Kabuki-theater of “budget cuts” that anyone with any familiarity with Washington knows aren’t going to happen. But the possibility that they might frightens the almighty hell out of the Conformicrats on both sides of the aisle. Nothing else explains the visceral hatred for the Tea Party movement – it’s a bone-deep fear of losing that tenured security and its generous salaries, benefits, pensions, and perks.

I predict that the 2012 election season will be the ugliest, dirtiest, nastiest thing anyone living has ever seen.

Quote of the Day – Mark Steyn Edition

This is why there are professional pundits.  From Mark Steyn’s most recent jeremiad, After America:  Get Ready for Armageddon

Once the state swells to a certain size, the people available to fill the ever expanding number of government jobs will be statists — sometimes hard-core Marxist statists, sometimes social-engineering multiculti statists, sometimes fluffily “compassionate” statists, sometimes patrician noblesse oblige statists, but always statists. The short history of the post-war western democracies is that you don’t need a president-for-life if you’ve got a bureaucracy-for-life: the people can elect “conservatives,” as from time to time the Germans and British have done, and the left is mostly relaxed about it all because, in all but exceptional cases (Thatcher), they fulfill the same function in the system as the first-year boys at wintry English boarding schools who for tuppence-ha’penny would agree to go and take the chill off the toilet seat in the unheated lavatories until the prefects were ready to stroll in and assume their rightful place. Republicans have gotten good at keeping the seat warm.

Ain’t that the truth?

I’m only about 100 pages into it, but so far the entire book is filled with bits like this.

Footnoted.

“Get Ready for Armageddon” indeed.

Quote of the Day – Mark Steyn Edition

I picked up a copy of Mark Steyn’s After America the other day.  I haven’t had time to read it yet, but it’s next on my list.  (That stack never seems to get any shorter – stuff just keeps getting piled on top.)

Anyway, I found an interview of Steyn by John Hawkins of Right Wing News that contains today’s QotD:

Yes, this is a 50/50 nation. This is a House divided and as I said in the book, it’s a House divided in really the most fundamental way of all because it’s not about rich versus poor, it’s not about black versus white, it’s not about any of that. It’s about the division about the nature of the state itself which is, I think, the most irreconcilable in a way. One side has to win and one side has to lose. We can’t compromise on this. They are two incompatible visions. One vision is broadly consonant with the American idea as it has existed since its founding. The other, which is that we can live as a large Sweden is an utter delusion. So one of these sides has to win and one has to lose. It’s not clear which is going to come out on top in that 51/49 battle.

But that’s the good news, that there is still something to play for. That puts us ahead of Portugal and Greece and a lot of these other places. The bad news is that if the wrong side wins, it will be a totally different scale of disaster from anything that’s likely to happen to Portugal or Iceland. So in other words, if we win, we win big, but if we lose, we lose big.

Here’s the kicker, though:

I noticed Bermuda already has had a lot of wealthy Americans coming in and buying up old estates and things. But, there is not going to be any place to flee. In the end, they’ll come for Bermuda, in the end they’ll come for Monte Carlo, and in the end you’ll be in Switzerland and they’ll come for you there because America is the order maker on the planet and when America goes, eventually as agreeable as Bermuda is, it slides in, and it takes Bermuda down in its wake. So this is the hill to die on.

One of the greatest lines I get told by so-called moderate Republicans about almost anything you talk about is always, “This isn’t the hill to die on. This isn’t the hill to die on, this isn’t the hill to die on.” You have this conversation with them for two hours and you realize you’re already 15 hills back from where you were. This, America, is the hill to die on. If you cannot defend and save a half millennium of western liberty and progress and prosperity on this hill, there is no other hill to die on anywhere on the planet.

Echos from the depths of 1985:

Most of the American politicians, media, and educational system trains another generation of people who think they are living at the peacetime. False. [The] United States is in a state of war: undeclared, total war against the basic principles and foundations of this system. And the initiator of this war is not Comrade Andropov, of course. It’s the system. However ridiculous it may sound, [it is] the world Communist system (or the world Communist conspiracy). Whether I scare some people or not, I don’t give a hoot. If you are not scared by now, nothing can scare you.

But you don’t have to be paranoid about it. What actually happens now [is] that unlike [me], you have literally several years to live on unless [the] United States [wakes] up. The time bomb is ticking: with every second [he snaps his fingers], the disaster is coming closer and closer. Unlike [me], you will have nowhere to defect to. Unless you want to live in Antarctica with penguins. This is it. This is the last country of freedom and possibility. — Yuri Bezmenov.

Yes, Bezmenov again. Just because he gave an interview to a Bircher does not mean that he was wrong about the endgame.

Quote of the Day

From a comment to Victor Davis Hanson’s Atlas is Sorta Shrugging:

I can tell you for a fact that major portions of the country – particularly urban areas on the coasts, but not just those – are diametrically opposed to absolutely every single thing you stand for. Their stance may be extremely hypocritical, unconstructive, contradictory and irrational, but they will not acknowledge it, even in the face of the most objective and logical arguments. In fact, they will look upon you as borderline criminal for rejecting their creed.

What the Obama presidency has revealed is that America is not whole anymore, but is fractured among at least two major fault lines of political, economic and social thought, and this president not only thrives on that rift, but has done everything in his awesome power to expand and deepen it.

This is not the same america I was born into over 4 decades ago. You must prepare yourselves for the real possibility that, if a great crisis breaks upon the nation, that it will not survive intact.

And don’t count on either dominant political party to rectify the situation. Both have proven without any doubt that they are concerned only and specifically with what is in their short term interest as a party and as individual politicians, and they will sacrifice EVERYTHING, no matter how sacred, to pursue their goals, protect their status and enhance their position.

As I said, there will be no repeat of the war-between-the-states, but our major cities may very well burn.

I’ve Already Addressed This Question

Dan Miller at PJ Tatler asks Will the United States have another Civil War?  I addressed this question several years ago, and more than once.  In that first piece my response was:

Jefferson suggested a small armed rebellion every 20 years or so. We didn’t take his advice. Our last one ended in 1865, and it was so devastating I think it put us off rebellion entirely too long.

Government isn’t “us” and hasn’t been for a long, long time. It represents the people who run the Democrat and Republican Parties, and those who pay them the most. Government-run education has ensured that the end product coming out of our schools is uniformly ignorant of how the system is supposed to work, and it’s done a damned good job of indoctrinating our children in the “from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs” philosophy, and the “if it feels good, do it” philosophy. Fifty-plus years of this has produced a very large, very ignorant, very apathetic population.

I think that “pressing the reset button” is going to happen, but all it’s going to get some of us is a tighter collar and a heavier chain.

In the second piece I wrote:

What prevents another Civil War here isn’t the Army or the fact that we hold a higher loyalty to our Nation than to our State of residence, it’s ignorance and apathy.

Well, we seem to be overcoming the apathy problem, but ignorance? Not so much.

In the third piece I returned to my original position:

I cannot help but wonder: Are we going to war again, against each other? And what form would that take?

I think the answer might very well be “YES,” and the form will be that of domestic terrorism.

Dan Miller, in a longer piece at his own blog expands on his take on the subject:

Although the persistent atrophy of states’ rights is among the causes of many problems from which discontent arises, that atrophy does not itself seem to concern great numbers of citizens. It is also a reason why a civil war is unlikely: states now are much weaker than were those that seceded in 1861. Then, the states were considered far more than now as sovereign countries. Before and during the war, many of the South considered “United States” to be a plural expression. Hence, it was often said that the United States “are,” rather than “is.” When the country was viewed as a consortium of separate and sovereign entities, the plural usage was grammatically correct. The plural form has fallen into disuse; I still use it as a reminder that the states retain the authority not delegated to the federal government even though they have forfeited much of the power to exercise it.

I’ve said the same myself. What we have isn’t people in different states clamoring to be released from the Federal yoke, it’s people in large cities wanting Federally-provided welfare versus suburban and rural populations that generally want benign neglect when it comes to Federal interference.

The States aren’t “red” or “blue,” they’re differing shades of purple, but the cities are “blue” and outside the cities are, on the whole, varying shades of “red.”

You’ll note, all of the rioting going on isn’t occurring in places like Lizard Lick or Henley-in-Arden or Arma, Greece.  It’s occurring in Philadelphia, London and Athens.

So no, we’re not going to see another iteration of “The War Between the States.”  But we very well might see our major cities burn.

Quote of the Day – British Riots Edition

Phil B., expat Brit and current resident of Middle Earth emails a link to Counting Cats in Zanzibar from which comes the QotD:

One thing that is quite interesting though is that this demonstrates how weak the authorities’ grasp on power really is. Numerous commentators throughout history have noted that even the cruelest dictator rules by consent; if the people do form a mass against him, he cannot prevail. A lot of people are saying, “why are the police letting this happen?” and while we’re all I’m sure going to play armchair quarterback with this for many happy internet-arguing weeks to come, there does seem to be that lesson here that mass resistance- or rather, a kind of mass ignoring of the hypothetical “social contract”- leaves government/governance reeling, especially in a nominally liberal polity. It makes you realise just how compliant we are; ten million smokers or whatever the number is, all dutifully trooping outside to have a ciggie. The authorities rule by the presumption and acceptance of power, and when people just ignore them they lose control very quickly.

This scares the snot out of those presumptively in power, and you know what to expect of frightened animals.

Billy Beck has been preaching civil disobedience as the tool to wrest back our liberty – not, as Counting Cats says, “run(ing) outside and set(ting) fire to World Of Carpets and steal(ing) mobile phones”, but simple refusal to comply – stop paying taxes. Stop feeding the Beast. Unfortunately, for this to be effective it must also be widespread.  Pillaging and burning has the advantage of being (mostly) anonymous and, if you’re so inclined, fun.  Refusing to pay your taxes?  They have your number – literally.

So expect to see looting and arson, but principled civil disobedience?  Not so much.

Too Little, Too Late?

Well, THIS is interesting, from Amazon.com.uk:

I guess a bunch of people over in Ol’ Blighty have figured out that they are responsible for their own protection first, regardless of what their government tells them.

Either that, or American baseball has developed a tremendous following.

Odd about the lack of glove and ball purchases though…

Quote of the Day – Endgame Edition

This column is so right that it’s very difficult to pull just one piece out of it for a quote of the day, but Janet Daley’s UK Telegraph op-ed If we are to survive the looming catastrophe, we need to face the truth is today’s must-read:

We have arrived at the endgame of what was an untenable doctrine: to pay for the kind of entitlements that populations have been led to expect by their politicians, the wealth-creating sector has to be taxed to a degree that makes it almost impossible for it to create the wealth that is needed to pay for the entitlements that populations have been led to expect, etc, etc.

The only way that state benefit programmes could be extended in the ways that are forecast for Europe’s ageing population would be by government seizing all the levers of the economy and producing as much (externally) worthless currency as was needed – in the manner of the old Soviet Union.

That is the problem. So profound is its challenge to the received wisdom of postwar Western democratic life that it is unutterable in the EU circles in which the crucial decisions are being made – or rather, not being made.

The solution that is being offered to the political side of the dilemma is benign oligarchy.

Yes, that’s what’s being offered, but it’s not what will be delivered.

Read the whole piece.  Twice.  At the time of this writing there are nearly 800 comments.  One of them was this:

…this article is the most important one I have ever read in the mainstream media.

I concur.