• Introduction
  • About Ruby Red Republic
  • Contact
  • Blog

Ruby Red Republic

~ Thoughts on Red States and "Deplorables."

Ruby Red Republic

Category Archives: Uncategorized

Exposing the Paddy Caligula Clan – Finally

02 Friday Mar 2018

Posted by Jim Langcuster in American History, U.S. Politics, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Chappaquiddick, Edward Kennedy, Jim Langcuster, Kennedy Clan, Liberal Elite, Ruling Class

Hollywood will release Chappaquiddick, a movie Chronicling the sordid behavior of Massachusetts Sen. Edward “Ted” Kennedy, next month.

It’s long overdue.  The movie will only underscore why I and millions of other conservatives around the country harbor such as deep loathing for our liberal ruling class.

Think about this for a moment: Following the incident on the bridge, Paddy Caligula IV (following in the footsteps of Joe, Jack and Bob), “walked back to his motel, complained to the manager about a noisy party, took a shower, went to sleep, ordered newspapers when he woke up and spoke to a friend and two lawyers before finally calling the police.

As it turned out, Mary Jo Kopechne survived for hours due to an air pocked in the car and then presumably died of slow asphyxiation. If he had called for help immediately after the incident, she conceivably would still be alive today.

Yet, thanks to a combination of three things – Kennedy money, media complicity and the herd mentality among the rank-and-file left – Lascivious Ted lived out his life as the apotheosis of American progressive liberalism. He was lionized not only as the heir of Camelot but even posed a serious intra-party challenge to incumbent President Jimmy Carter in 1980.

Yes, his sexual predation apparently rivaled that of the notorious Harvey Weinstein, who inspired the #MeToo movement.  In fact, Kennedy’s lechery even exceeded his older siblings and his father, which is saying a lot.

And yet, the enlightened progressive voters of the Bay State overlooked all of this time and again.  A time or two in my life, I’ve been subjected to ribbing for coming from a state that idolized the likes of George Wallace and that even carried this adulation over to his ill-fated wife, Lurleen. Yet, it seems to have paled in comparison to the Kennedy cult of Massachusetts.

To be sure, there are certainly some very bad apples in conservative/Republican ranks, but I really would contend that they simply can’t get away with as much.

Honestly, if Ronald Reagan or one of the Bush siblings had run a woman off a bridge and waited hours to inform police, they not only would have been indicted but also would have faced utterly derailed political careers.

They would not be lionized to the ends of their lives as paragons of conservative virtue.

Under the circumstances, isn’t it just a little easier to grasp the rage that Richard Nixon, American political history’s classic underdog, felt for the Kennedy siblings – all of whom essentially were entitled, spoiled brats who carried on the philandering, exploitative lifestyle of their father, Bootleggin’ Joe?

Southern-Style Self-Flagellation

07 Thursday Dec 2017

Posted by Jim Langcuster in American Federalism, Southern History, U.S. Politics, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

2017 Alabama Senate Race, Alabama, Alabama History, Jim Goad, Jim Langcuster, Southern History, Wayne Flynt

Alabama-Capitol

Alabama Capitol, Montgomery

Wayne Flynt, Auburn University emeritus professor of history,  has cultivated a reputation as Alabama’s progressive conscience. He is a prodigious writer who has published some 13 books on the history of Alabama and the South.

Predictably, he has weighed in on the upcoming Alabama Senate election, offering less than a savory view of Republican nominee Roy Moore.

Moore, Flynt contends, “represents the old Alabama of Robert E. Lee Ewell, of lynching and the sexual abuse of women.”

“Law to Moore is merely an instrument of exclusion and oppression, whether of women, teenage girls, African Americans, immigrants, Jews, Muslims, or homosexuals,” he contends.

I’m not surprised that Flynt regards Moore as the worst threat to Alabama’s reputation since Eugene “Bull” Conner.  But I do find it slightly irritating whenever Flynt raises these issues as an excuse to engage in another round of self-flagellation over what he perceives to be Alabama’s wretched political and cultural legacy, one for which Alabamians are obligated to atone.

I’ve never liked this sackcloth-and-ashes approach and that goes for countless other Alabamians.

I am far from a scion of the old South.  I come from simple old yeoman Southern stock, particularly on my father’s side. My paternal line and much of my maternal one were among the thousands of lumbers – desperately poor whites – who poured into this impoverished region in the early 1800’s simply because they had no place else to go.

Alabama was not only encumbered with legions of struggling poor whites but also with a slave economy that maintained a predominant hold in the Southern half of the state – one that collapsed after the close of the Civil War. Essentially we are talking about a deeply bifurcated state, culturally, politically and economically, that has been digging itself out of poverty and relative backwardness – imposed, incidentally by the Yankee equivalent of the British Raj – since the end of the Civil War.

One of the only socially redeeming factors on the Alabama frontier was evangelical religion, which dragged so many of our forebears away from a life of gambling, drinking and bare-knuckle fighting. This old religion, largely imported from New England, carried a strong Calvinist hue, and it carved out a place in the hearts of many Alabamians, even among apostates like me. It is deeply embedded in our DNA – as much as Catholicism is in Irish cultural DNA.

It’s not surprising that many of us identify with Moore’s public avowal of religious faith and propriety.

Alabama, like every other state in this Union, evolved out of a unique set of circumstances. And our politics and culture reflect many effects of that development.

Personally, there are many aspects of New England society that I find appallingly irritating and abhorrent and that have adversely affected the course of this country, especially after these tawdry shits became the cultural and economic hegemons after the war. Yet, they have enjoyed a free pass, largely because they remain our national and cultural hegemons.

Southerners, on the other hand, remain a special focus of animus among these people and their spiritual and intellectual progeny on the Left Coast. That is not all that surprising: As the world’s first propositional nation, Americans have always required a focus of animus, which the South has supplied, however unwittingly, since this country’s founding.

Consequently, every other ethnic group and region is afforded a pass for bad behavior stemming from its cultural inheritance EXCEPT the South, despite our region’s having inherited a cultural legacy with both good and bad elements like every other ethnic group and region in this nation and throughout the entire planet.

And honestly, given the unfortunate set of circumstances that fate has meted out to this region beginning with its initial settlement, why should we expect anything to have turned out differently – really?

Writer Jim Goad has argued – convincingly, I would contend – that Southerner and other poor Back Country whites provide elite American whites with a basis for conveniently passing off their collective guilt and insecurities.

I’ve grown weary of  this – and, quite frankly, it explains why I insist on flying only an Alabama flag on my property. It’s hard to think of myself as an American when this region of the country is treated as the national hind teat and relegated to sitting on a stool of everlasting repentance.

Yes, Professor Flynt, you have every right to bemoan the legacy of his native state – that’s your First Amendment right – but I and tens of thousands of Alabamians are tired of it.

Many American Republics Instead of One?

25 Saturday Nov 2017

Posted by Jim Langcuster in American Federalism, American History, Devolution, Federalism, The Passing Scene, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Civil War 2017, Jim Langcuster, National Divisions, secession, Thomas Jefferson

Thomas-Jefferson2

Thomas Jefferson

The American Thinker recently painted a disturbing picture of the American future.  We are embroiled in a Civil War – for now, a cold one, though one that bears many hallmarks of one that eventually could run hot.

And from my perspective as a conservative, the left seems implacably opposed to compromise.  And why shouldn’t it be?  They control most of the institutions that define cultural hegemony:  the mainstream media, the arts, popular entertainment and higher education, not to mention, elements of the so-called Deep State.   As I have argued in this forum many times, a Democratic victory last year would have sealed its victory.

The rancorous divisions in this country have prompted some thoughts about an observation Jefferson offered throughout the post-revolutionary period of American history. He presumed that this continent was too big to encompass one American nation. He expected that settlers, as they spanned across broad American continent, would establish several republics, though all of them would share mutual affinities.

That was not to be.  As it turned out, our forebears essentially hewed a kind of middle way between the ideals of Jefferson and his arch ideological rival, Alexander Hamilton. We have tended to place great emphasis on the Jeffersonian fixation with individual liberties, while tacking more closely to the Hamiltonian ideal of a centralized federal union.

And I wonder: Could the case be made that this push toward centralization has simply prolonged the inevitable? Isn’t it natural for a country this big to develop distinct regional identities, even fissiparous ones? Would we be getting along better on this sprawling continent if we had been allowed to develop several polities, albeit with strong shared mutual affinities?

A Fishing Expedition, a Fire Bell in the Night

02 Thursday Nov 2017

Posted by Jim Langcuster in The Passing Scene, U.S. Politics, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Donald Trump, Fishing Expedition, Jim Langcuster, Robert Mueller, Russia Collusion

fishing-hook

Photo: Wikipedia Commons

Conservative commentators are already characterizing the Mueller indictments as a nothing burger in terms of how this investigation ultimately will pan out for Trump.

Investigators will turn up no significant evidence of collusion, many contend, and much of what’s discovered ultimately will portend serious consequences for the Clintons, whose allies, the Podestas, seem to be deeply invested in their own version of Russian collusion.

But as millions of deplorables see it, this investigation has amounted to a fishing expedition from the very beginning. And that is precisely why I’ve always regarded it with considerable amount of apprehension from the start.  Mueller is likely only getting started, and in time, he may end up nailing Trump on something entirely unrelated to Russia collusion: his business dealings.

Frankly, I’ve never doubted for a moment that Trump is a shady business dealer. I imagine that most New York real estate moguls are.  Likewise, I presume that most of his supporters have drawn the same conclusion. But when have rank-and-file Trumpistas ever been interested in his moral or ethical probity, at least, insofar as his past business dealings are concerned?

As I see it, most deplorables understand that we live in singular, if not desperate, times.  Many have come to draw a distinction between people who get rich from rather specious market deals (i.e., the Trumps) and those who apparently cash in on government service (i.e., the Clintons). For millions Trump supporters,  it simply boiled down to finding a mean, tough avaricious SOB to go mano a mano against all the mean tough, avaricious SOBs who run the swamp in Washington.

To paraphrase an old saying, Trump’s an SOB, but he’s our SOB.

So, what happens if the Mueller investigation turns up little, if any, Russian collusion and nails Trump instead on shady business dealings? I am reminded of Jefferson’s fire bell in the night.  This could turn out to be 21st century America’s version of the ill-fated Missouri compromise of 1820, the implications of which sparked Jefferson’s troubling late-night epiphany. Like the Missouri Compromise, a Mueller indictment of Trump on unanticipated grounds could have long-term consequences for American unity.  It could set off a train of events that ultimately could lead this country into a deep, dark abyss, much as the Missouri Compromise ultimately did.

Tens of millions of rank-and-file Trump supporters are going to perceive the Mueller investigation simply as what it arguably is: a fishing expedition undertaken by the ruling class to depose Trump – and the election results – so that it can get back to the old business of spreading more lilies and alligators throughout the Swamp.

What will follow?   Right-wing retrenchment?  Perpetual government gridlock?  A wrenching and protracted upheaval of American political structure?  Widespread social unrest?

We can be virtually certain of one thing: tens of Americans, certainly in the sprawling red hinterland, will likely emerge from all of this angrier and more cynical than ever.

A Different View of Patriotism

01 Wednesday Nov 2017

Posted by Jim Langcuster in American Federalism, Federalism, The Passing Scene, U.S. Politics, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

American identity, Civil War, General John Kelly, Jim Langcuster, President Trump, Robert E. Lee, States Rights

john-kelly

Gen. John Kelly

Gen. John Kelly has predictably ignited a media firestorm for summoning the temerity to state that Gen. Robert E. Lee was behaving like most Americans of his time by choosing state over national allegiance.

“I would tell you that Robert E. Lee was an honorable man,” Kelly said in an interview with Fox News commentator Laura Ingraham. “He was a man that gave up his country to fight for his state, which 150 years ago was more important than country. It was always loyalty to state first back in those days. Now it’s different today. But the lack of an ability to compromise led to the Civil War, and men and women of good faith on both sides made their stand where their conscience had them make their stand.”

Sorry if I offend some of you, but I proudly and zealously place state and region over country. I happen to believe that the federal government is a constitutional republic conceived with sharply delineated powers and commissioned by the people of initially 11 (later 13) republics to operate as their common agent.

Modern Americans may even find it astonishing to learn early 19th century students at West Point, including the future Gen. Lee,  studied a constitutional textbook written by  attorney and legal scholar William Rawle and titled “A Constitutional View of the United States” that acknowledge the right of secession.

Of course, many of the nation’s premiere historians are weighing in on these intemperate statements, wondering how a man of Kelly’s immense accomplishments and responsibilities could harbor such antiquarian views.

“This is profound ignorance, that’s what one has to say first, at least of pretty basic things about the American historical narrative,” said David Blight, a Yale history professor. “I mean, it’s one thing to hear it from Trump, who, let’s be honest, just really doesn’t know any history and has demonstrated it over and over and over. But General Kelly has a long history in the American military.”

As for the views of these historians, I call on all of you to consider how all facets of American education, for better or worse, have been transformed within the last 60-plus years, largely as a result of the infusion of federal money and the expansion of federal patronage that has followed.

This has been accompanied by what I have come to call a miasmic orthodoxy that has settled on all levels of American education. Under the circumstances, can you see how pluralistic thinking among scholars, especially within the humanities, has been undermined?

 

Reinventing Oxbridge and the Ivy League

01 Wednesday Nov 2017

Posted by Jim Langcuster in American Education, The Passing Scene, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Cambridge, Elite Education, Higher Education, Ivy League, Jim Langcuster, Liberal Arts Colleges, Oxbridge, Oxford, Research I Universities

Oxford

The Merton College Mob Quad at Oxford.  Photo: Courtesy of DWR. 

I may be a deplorable, but I don’t deplore the immense strides that the West, particularly the United States and Britain, have made in higher education within the last couple of centuries.

Oxbridge detractors are calling on Britain’s two elite institutions – Oxford and Cambridge – to scrap undergraduate education altogether and to function exclusively as graduate institutions. This, they contend, would eliminate much of the rank and privilege that are bound up in these ancient institutions and that have allowed its graduates to vault to the very highest reaches of polite society.

I personally perceive this as egalitarian sentiment run amok.

As much a I detest the present-day American ruling class, our civilization has derived immense material advantages from elite educational systems, such as Oxbridge and the Ivy League, that have afforded the most intellectually gifted among us not only an exposure to some of the greatest thinkers of our present day but also a critical means of networking. To put it another way, great benefits have been derived from concentrating our cognitive elites in relatively confined locations. And if undergraduate education were scrapped at Oxbridge and, ultimately, at the Ivy League, we would accomplish nothing aside from dispersing this talent across a wider scale and depriving them of these unusually condensed learning and networking opportunities.

Even so, it’s worth pointing out that many of the this country’s Nobel laureates in Medicine and Chemistry no longer come from the Ivy League. An increasing number come from public Research I universities and, in a few cases, from solid liberal arts colleges – a remarkable fact that author Malcolm Gladwell raises in his book Outliers.The Story of Success. These institutions include Antioch College, DePauw University, Holy Cross College, Hunter College and the University of Illinois.

While I am no academic – only a mere laymen who finds these sorts of discussions fascinating – my hunch is that many Research I universities and quite few of our well-regarded liberal arts colleges ultimately will ascend to levels comparable to the Ivy League.

Indeed, I think that one already can make the case that the honors programs at many Research I universities already are producing students with knowledge and expertise equal to or, perhaps in some cases, even surpassing those of their Ivy League counterparts. And in time, perhaps, these institutions will evolve the dense networking attributes that still tend to distinguish the Ivy League from other institutions.

While many institutions in this country and the West arguably are going to hell in the proverbial hand basket, America and Britain, in particular, have developed one of the most remarkably effective – not to mention, adaptive – institutions the world has ever known: higher education.

Instead of dismantling the best of the best of these higher educational institutions, I would like to see governments and other major sources of funding and endowments working to ensure that the advantages of elite education are extended to more remote parts of the United States.

 

Our Malignant Ruling Class (and Its Enablers)

27 Friday Oct 2017

Posted by Jim Langcuster in American Federalism, Localism, The Passing Scene, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Bigotry, Elites, Jim Langcuster, John Stossel, Old Aristocracy, Ruling Class

plutocratsMy Facebook Memories reminded me today that I shared this piece by John Stossel exactly a year ago.  Given what’s transpired over the past year, it’s worth revisiting.

Stossel observes that America has historically been bereft of the “old aristocracy” of Europe, but this hasn’t stopped many self-anointed meritocrats – at least, those who pass as such – from upbraiding the rest of us about our moral, ethical and social failings.

This script plays out day after day, not only among elites but also among those of the countless millions of ordinary Americans who are influenced to one degree or another by this imposed ethos.

I’m reminded of an especially annoying account shared with me a few years ago by a very talented former co-worker.  A native Alabamian with a palpable but cultivated Southern drawl, he enrolled in one of New York’s highly regarded Research I universities to complete a second graduate degree in his field. The course of study was an applied curriculum and he frequently was called upon to prepare projects to present to one of the classes.

The professor prefaced one of his presentations with the denigrating remark, “Let’s hear what Billy Bob has to say.”

Now, imagine the sh*t storm that would have erupted if this professor had prefaced a Muslim student’s presentation with something like “Let’s hear what Muhammad has to say” or an Indian Hindu student with “Let’s hear what Apu has to say.”

Granted, this professor technically can’t be defined as a member of the ruling class – he just rates as an enabler –  but this kind of brazen elitist contempt for people in so-called Flyover Country and particularly the South certainly reflects the cultural legacy of our ruling class.

We Southerners have shared these accounts among ourselves for years. A relative related to me a few months about about how her daughter-in-law, who developed rather flat General American accent in the course of growing up as an army brat, always feels compelled to intercede on behalf of high school teacher who conducts an annual student tour of New York City.  The teacher possesses a pronounced Appalachian twang, which frequently invokes the contemptuous obstinance of museum directors, tour guides and head waiters.

Granted, museum directors and tour guides do not rate as ruling class members, but their expressions of palpable aversion to this hapless educator and others speaks volumes about how successfully our self-anointed elites have sewn contempt for Southerners and other perceived bumpkins over the course of generations.

As I’ve said before, folks, I’m no Trump partisan, but I certainly understand and sympathize with the anger that has given rise to the Trump phenomenon.

Perhaps the serious blows dealt recently to Big Entertainment via the Harvey Weinstein revelations and to Big Media following new discoveries about DNC connections with the Trump Dossier will go a long way toward changing this dynamic.

Maybe the day is fast approaching when all or most of the facets of the Establishment left will be held to thedame level of contempt as Harvey Weinstein.

Yes, things may be changing – one can hope, at least – but for now, though, the ruling class still occupies the driver’s seat.  As Stossel stresses, it still decides “which ideas are acceptable, which scientific theories to believe, what speech is permitted.”

Pushed into a Corner

26 Thursday Oct 2017

Posted by Jim Langcuster in Mainstream Media, The Passing Scene, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Demographics, Douglas Murray, Elites, immigration, Jim Langcuster, Red States, Sasha_Polakow-Suransky, The Strange Death of Europe, Tucker Carlson

tucker-carlson“You get a volatile society when you change it overnight, and you don’t give people a chance to weigh-in on whether they like it or not.”

This was Tucker Carlson’s response last night to Sasha Polakow-Suransky, a journalist who contends that white nationalists David Duke and Richard Spencer constitute a bigger threat to democracy than Islamic Jihadism.

I’m no more of a Duke or Spencer fan or white supremacist (whatever the hell that means) than anyone else who values simple human fairness and decency.

Even so, within the last decade elites in America and Europe, often using extralegal means, have undertaken a rapid and virtually wholesale demographic transformation of the West. And this has been accompanied with a strategy of using official or quasi-official media sources to call out any dissent as rank expressions of racism and white supremacy.  Recall the widely reported account of Angela Merkel asking Mark Zuckerberg near an open microphone about what could be done to repress Facebook criticism of her immigration policies.

These elites have placed all of us firmly on terra incognita. To my knowledge, no demographic change in history has taken place this rapidly and on such a vast scale. We can scarcely predict the social and cultural upheaval that will follow this change, though it sure strikes me as excellent cover for the imposition of more soft authoritarianism on the part of our elites.

Equally disturbing, most of this has taken place with comparatively little public input or debate. And on the few occasions when dialogue has occurred, dissidents haven even been told to emigrate themselves if they do not find this demographic upheaval to their liking. (Read Douglas Murray’s “The Strange Death of Europe” for more details).

When people, especially free people in societies that purport to be democracies, are pushed into a corner, their natural response is to express anger and outrage. Yet, virtually all protest is countered by elites with allegations of racism and white supremacy.

Small wonder why the little people in Deplorablia are growing so restive.

The United States of Bananas

25 Wednesday Oct 2017

Posted by Jim Langcuster in The Passing Scene, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Banana Republic, Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, Fusion, Hillary Clinton, Jim Langcuster, Russia, Russiagate

Hillary-clinton3

Hillary Clinton

We really seem to be living in a banana republic – the United States of Bananas, as I’ve come to call it.

A friend has upbraided me constantly for voting for Trump, characterizing him as a pathological liar and a narcissistic vulgarian. Say what you will about Trump – he ultimately may prove to be the most morally and ethically challenged chief executive since U.S. Grant – but he pales alongside the Clintonian crime syndicate, especially in light of what has been revealed in the last couple of days.

A year ago, I was set on supporting the Libertarian Johnson/Weld ticket purely as a protest vote. But the realization eventually dawned on me: How could I, in good conscious, even contemplate a protest vote when American freedom, at least what remains of it, seemed to be hanging by a thin and perilously frayed thread?

And, frankly, I don’t understand how anybody can read the latest news and not conclude that this country has come to resemble more and more a Latin American-style Banana republic.

Yes, Trump’s juvenile public statements and Tweets trouble me as much as the next guy.  They have arguably eroded American public discourse – I’ll readily concede that. But the alternative was even more unpalatable: a gang of criminals that not only seemed hellbent on constructing an ideological echo chamber – using the mainstream media and, increasingly, the federal judiciary and elements of the Deep State to marginalize or even silence dissent – but also running the government as something resembling an organized crime syndicate.

If there is any silver lining to this, it’s the prospect that our malignant ruling class may be washing its hands of the pernicious Clintons, who may soon go the way of Harvey Weinstein.

One can hope.

The Great Western (and Liberal) Dilemma

25 Wednesday Oct 2017

Posted by Jim Langcuster in The Passing Scene, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Birthrates, Demographic Decline, Demographics, Derek Thompson, Douglas Murray, Fertility Rates, Immigrants, Jim Langcuster, The Atlantic, The Strange Death of Europe, Western Civilization

pro-immigration-demonstrators

Photo: Courtesy of Rhododendrites. 

In his new book, “The Strange Death of Europe,” British author, editor and political commentator Douglas Murray relates a remarkable account of Edward Pusey, an Anglican priest and a founder of the Oxford Movement,  who encountered for  the first time the works of Gottfried Eichhorn and other German scholars that challenged many of the historical accounts of the Bible. 

Not surprisingly, Pusey came away profoundly disquieted by these discoveries, observing later in life to his biographer that the British people were scarcely prepared their long-term implications: “I can remember the room in Gottingen in which I was sitting when the real condition of religious thought in Germany flashed upon me.  I said to myself, ‘This will come upon us in England; and how utterly unprepared for it we are!'”

His forebodings were confirmed over time.  Two centuries later, Britain and the rest of the continent of Europe are still recovering  from the psychic shock that settled in over time. And the effects have been felt here in America, too, though not as acutely.

Sometime thereafter, the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche would write about the “death of God” and its implications for Western civilization.

European demographic decline is one of the more tangible effects of this shock. One of the many advantages orthodox Christianity conferred on the continent and Western culture as a whole was a sort of civilizational confidence and sense of  focus and purpose. And as more than one scholar has observed, this sense of focus and purpose was reflected in Europe’s high fertility rates. Indeed, these high fertility rates were a major factor behind Europe’s conquest and colonization of much of the world and the Westernization that followed in its wake.

The case could be made that no civilization can be built or sustained without high fertility rates.

One rather remarkable effect that has followed the decline of orthodox Christianity is the rise of the consumer culture and the Western welfare state. Westerners seem to have concluded that if there is no afterlife, no effort or expense should be spared to enhance the choices and material quality of our mortal lives. But as we have learned over the last few decades, the material benefits and entitlements of this lifestyle simply can’t be sustained without adequate birthrates.

And one of the unintended effects of rising educational and income levels within the 70 years following the end of World War II has been a steady decline in replacement births.

This has presented the West with an acute threat, perhaps the greatest one it has faced since the Battle of Tours in 732: America, Europe and Japan all are dealing with “perfect demographic storms.” They either must find a way to compensate for this demographic decline or face a rollback of the material benefits that have distinguished these countries from much of the rest of the world.

With the exception of Japan, governments have fostered high rates of immigration within the last few decades to fill this gap. But increasingly, the demographic transformation of the West has sewn deep divisions as whites have begun to reflect on the long-term cultural, social and political implications associated with newcomers who share little cultural affinity with historic Western values.

As Derek Thompson, senior editor of The Atlantic, related recently,  these new realities present an especially acute challenge to liberalism, which has supplied the ideological foundations for Western consumerism and the welfare state over the last century.  Post-war liberalism, particularly as it has developed within the United States, has been expressed as pluralistic social democracy, resting on the twin pillars of diversity and equality.  Indeed, American and European political elites not only have affirmed that both values are essential to the West’s future but have also insisted that they be inculcated in emerging generations throughout primary, middle, secondary and even post-secondary education.

Recently, though, growing numbers of ordinary Westerners increasingly are calling these values into question.  Some even regard these two concepts as mutually antagonistic.  And this raises the question: If this post-war liberal fusionism is no longer tenable, what does this portend for the future of the West?  Equally important, what will ultimately emerge to replace it?

← Older posts
Newer posts →

Subscribe

  • Entries (RSS)
  • Comments (RSS)

Archives

  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • February 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • June 2018
  • March 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • February 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016

Categories

  • Alabama History
  • American Education
  • American Federalism
  • American History
  • Brexit
  • Censorship
  • Christianity
  • Conservatism
  • Devolution
  • Federalism
  • Geo-Politics
  • Imperial Decline
  • Localism
  • Mainstream Media
  • Nullification
  • oligarchy
  • Patriotism
  • Red-State Faith
  • secession
  • Secularism
  • Southern Athletics
  • Southern History
  • The Passing Scene
  • U.S. Politics
  • Uncategorized

Meta

  • Create account
  • Log in

Website Powered by WordPress.com.

  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Ruby Red Republic
    • Join 27 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Ruby Red Republic
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...