.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

John Adams Blog

The blog of The Antient and Honourable John Adams Society, Minnesota's Conservative Debating Society www.johnadamssociety.org

Tuesday, September 12, 2006

Debate September 13


The John Adams Society
William G. Carpenter, Chairman
John Pope, Secretary
Larry Colson, Chief Whip
Roger Balfay, Chancellor

September 2006

EUROPE BY ITS OWN HAND IS RIPE FOR CONQUEST. Pervasive government regulation and a cacophony of mandates by entrenched political ninnies have dulled the fighting spirit, acclimating Europeans to the type of central control that will befall them in their inevitable theocratic Eurabia. While birth rates among non-immigrants are decreasing, public welfare systems are being overwhelmed by immigrants and their high birthrates. Incentives to economic success in Europe are inhibited by a general disdain for individualistic (American like) pushiness, high taxes, maximum workweeks and other mandates for economic security. As might be expected with such statism, economic growth is meager and unemployment is high. Of course, the economic security blanket of American tourism and the US military presence makes it easier to take the economy they have for granted.

Yes, the wishy-washy value-void push-over Western Europe presents an opportunity like a K-Mart blue-light-special to angry and driven immigrants. Given the similarities between European and US approaches to immigration, health care, transportation, and entitlements, Western Europe is a canary in our coal mine.

ON THE OTHER HAND, what better to wake tired Europe from its multicultural slumber than further exposure to the militancy that collectivist Europe ironically supports? Sometimes only through strife do people become introspective enough to seek the meaning of situations, leading them to define progress in more moral tones. As such, European heritage will persevere by merely sacrificing secular Europe.

Across Europe, people are expressing outrage about elitist politicians flagrantly pooh-poohing fears of soft conquest by immigration, and governments are finally taking measures to curtail illegal immigration. Last year, Germany booted its anti-American chancellor Gerhard Schröder, electing Christian Democratic opponent Angela Merkel who is pro-free market and pro-deregulation. And just last month, Great Britain’s Prime Minister Tony Blair diplomatically stated "[To] a presumed sense of grievance that can motivate people to divide against each other... our answer has to be a set of values strong enough to unite people with each other." (As for France… well, the conservatives there must still resort to giving out free condoms to woo voters, really).

Even should Eurabia emerge as the new Europe, circumstances may not be all that bad. Presumably a strict theocracy, there would be a social atmosphere just oppressive enough to snuff out smoldering thoughts of behavioral dereliction. Accordingly, the penalties for social deviance in Islamic states are severe, so crime rates are reportedly low.

The chairman, anxious for one last frolicsome jaunt about Europe, has called for a debate on the matter:


The Debate will be held on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 at the University Club, 420 Summit Avenue, in Saint Paul. The Chancellor will preside over drinks beginning at seven o'clock p.m. The debate will begin at half past seven. While there is no dress code for attendance, gentlemen who wish to speak must wear a tie; ladies should adhere to a similar sartorial standard. For those gentlemen who arrive tieless yet wish to speak, fret not: the Purveyor of Ties will keep on hand at least one of his quite remarkable ties for just such an eventuality. Questions about debate caucus procedures or about the John Adams Society itself may be directed to the Chairman at (612) 822-8941 or the Secretary at (952) 486-8059.


Blogger Ex Nihilo said...

Western Europe has an internal conflict: it wants to be paternalistic and seen as magnanimous while reaping the rewards of competitiveness and innovation.

Now, just try being an iconoclast the way that an entrepreneur must in a paternalistic culture. Shame will be upon you. No wonder there are stories of psychological fallout from American like ambition in Japan. It says a lot about the internal conflict of the controller expecting the free-thought producing results of the controlled. Unlike Western Europe, however, Japan doesn't convey the something for nothing message to immigrants.

In the managerial business cultures of both Western Europe and the Pacific Rim, it is commonly perceived that one is successful NOT by entrepreneurial works, but by the grace of institutions. That individuals should destabilize accepted planning models based on some idiosyncratic and unproven notion of opportunity is out of the question.

Accordingly, a 2004 Global Entrepreneurship Monitor survey of 29 industrial economies, found that only 5.5% of the EU’s GDP was due to entrepreneurial activity. Incidentally, Japan registered a mere 1.5% of GDP, making it last in rank. Asia/Oceania ranked lowest as a region with 3.4%. South America was the highest ranked region with 16.6%. The US had 11.3%, a percentage point below China interestingly enough.

With Western Europe’s traditions of social welfare and ubiquitous codes, entrepreneurs drown in the prevailing culture of dependency. As research shows, the greatest ambition of most Europeans is to retire. Maybe this goes back to receiving foreign aid with the Marshall Plan after WWII. Or, maybe it is a harkening to feudal times.

Apart from the noble intentions of caring for the needy and the aged, given that those over 65 are 17% of the population, Europe’s socialism seems rooted in a kind-of nostalgia for feudalism. Perhaps believing the world owes them for serfs lured away by capitalists, the European leftists promulgate that capitalism is just another form of feudalism. And because free will among common people is understood as providing fertile ground for capitalists, it is usually the unmentionable anathema of leftists, unless to deride it as an illusion perpetrated by media. Well, in a free society, the media can only try, and anyone can be the media.

Now, while Western European politicians may belittle the free will of individuals, they won't ignore the will of the consensus. In fact, rule by consensus is a useful ruse as long as the typical citizen relies on some sort of public welfare. It is practically futile for anyone to dispute the consensus, yet it is easy to dictate the consensus in a non-free society. The result is a collectivist state disposition that is, paradoxically and by definition, intolerant to opposing views, namely the individualistic ones. So, a stream of laws and programs continuously flows into an expanding pool on Europe’s feudal estates of bureaucracy.

If Western Europeans would champion individualism, as opposed to collectivism, and entrepreneurship, as opposed to a message of something for nothing, then immigrant complaints about disenfranchisement amidst European decadence would lose traction.

10:48 PM, September 14, 2006  

Post a Comment