Posted on 01/04/2002 5:02:25 AM PST by Who is George Salt?
This phrase "the parallels are uncanny" should be banished from the English language.
I should modify this to read that he is bashing Christianity in general, not just Catholicism.
Gee...where have I heard that before...it looks like a number of people here are the intellectual heirs of National Socialism.
Apparently, I'm in good company
Since Jefferson was a well known slave owner should we reasonably draw other parallels?
Buchanan's deterioration has been gaining momentum recently, hasn't it?
Wife asked me if she should order the book. I thought not, but I am ordering tonight to see what Pat really says.
My last book was "The Clash of Civilizations."
An academic might make the same points as a rough and tumble Irishman, but with more structure and background. I dunno until I read Pat's
Race difference has become the issue "which shall not be spoken of." Justifiably so, to this point, as the issue has been co-opted by bigots.
Race is a part of culture and culture is a part of civilizations. Huntington's analysis of the 21st century conflicts being around civilizational lines sounds right to me.
Not yet sure how Pat figures in this. I am ordering the book.
The point is simply that white people have become selfish in their sexuality. Most whites expect a life of multiple sex partners but no (or very few) children. This worldly sentiment is new and anti-God but most Protestant denominations and Catholic individuals accept it to varying degrees.
If the rubber breaks or the pill fails, then abortion provides the fail-safe backup. Pope Paul VI accurately predicted in 1968 that contraceptive societies would become abortive societies.
Don't call Pat a NAZI just because you had your manhood snipped.
-- and those who don't. Abe Lincoln did, the Confederates didn't.
You're so full of BS it's comical.
Abraham Lincoln, as cited in "The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln," Roy Basler, ed. 1953 New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press:
"I will say, then, that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races -- that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races from living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An address by Abraham Lincoln at Springfield, Illinois, on June 26, 1857 [Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, Vol II, pp 408-9, Basler, ed.]:
"A separation of the races is the only perfect preventive of amalgamation, but as immediate separation is impossible the next best thing is to keep them apart where they are not already together. Such separation, if ever affected at all, must be effected by colonization The enterprise is a difficult one, but 'where there is a will there is a way:' and what colonization needs now is a hearty will. Will springs from the two elements of moral and self-interest. Let us be brought to believe it is morally right, and at the same time, favorable to, or at least not against our interest, to transfer the African to his native clime, and we shall find a way to do it, however great the task may be."
Now put the name Buchanan in your thread and a coven descends on you crying "Nazi! Nazi!" Surely people, Pat Buchanan, included should be allowed to discuss such things without your yelling that they want to throw people into gas chambers. You can find such discussions of birth rate differentials in Europe, in Russia, in Japan, in Israel. Are they all Nazis?
For what it's worth, most people won't disagree with you that all people are entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But that those living in other countries all have a right to be in this country is a matter for dispute. If you believe that they do, then I suspect -- and hope -- you're very much in the minority.
Pronatalist policies don't seem to work, but it really is a cheap and nasty and stupid jab to call them Nazi.
But in fact the Nazis got credibility from a whole surrounding cluster of ethnic nationalist ideas and movements promoted by people who were no more Nazis than Buchanan is. In the speech you posted, the Walter Gross is appealing to that whole complex of widely diffused ideas to make Nazi race policy palatable to ordinary folk.
Pointing out that Buchanan has bought deeply into the whole ethnic nationalist mindset is not irresponsible. The key is the notion that American identity is ethnic not civic - that some kinds of people can't become real Americans because their blood is wrong. America is a civic nation, not an ethnic nation. American identity is a matter of loyalty to a civic life of ordered liberty, not of who your daddy was or where you came from.
If there is a problem about immigration, it's not that the "wrong sort" are coming here, but that we've lost the will to initiate immigrants into the tradition of American liberty in a vigorous way as part of the process of acquiring citizenship. People have always come here for a fast buck - but there was a time when we took a lot of care in making clear that citizenship meant commitment to freedom under law on the basis of the Declaration and Constitution.
You're also right that Calhoun was the fountainhead of ethnic nationalism (at the state level) in America. I've finished with the Neo-Confed wars, so I won't get started on that, but it's no accident that his biggest fans in contemporary America are left-wing group-rights advocates like Lani Guinier.
For all his virtues, TR went much further down this road than Buchanan has. Roosevelt was very much concerned about the low birthrates of educated, "old stock" Americans.
Well actually, no one was.
We, however, were just stupid enough to start paying for people not to be responsible for themselves.
So, while I understand your argument, I think that it points more towards something that we are doing wrong, rather than something that immigrants are doing wrong.
Immigrants still come for a chance at a better life, we are the ones GIVING them the $$$, if we stopped, they would still come.
That's the way it has always been.
The immigrants haven't changed, we as a nation have.
Merited repeating.
The fact is, much as I hate to admit it, we are a dying civilization. Birth control and abortion, as well as other social factors are to blame. I don't care who else said the same thing or why they did, the facts are the facts. I'm damn tired of self indulgent morons who have been brainwashed into believing that self preservation is equivalent to racism.
And if we have changed so as to make it harder for immigrants to assimilate successfully is that not also a sign that we should limit immigration? If it doesn't work any more, is the experiment worth continuing? It looks like it would be easier to limit immigration first, than to try to reshape our whole society to make assimilation work better. Certainly, it seems like having cheap immigrant labor to clean up after us is one factor -- though clearly not the only one -- in the decline of our character.
We give them work, medical care, free schooling for their kids, and a chance to get the hell out of Mexico.
Why WOULDN'T they come here?
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.