E Pluribus Discerpo?

Pat Buchanan has a provocative assessment of the current political climate posted over at World Net Daily in which he asserts that American may be coming apart.

Given the growing dicension and unrest, I would have to agree with him. And we should have expected it. For several generations, American attitudes have been shifting between those who give and those who take; those who reap the benefits of government and those who pay for them.

It’s an attitude of entitlement and that everything other than life, liberty and property is a “right.”

We’ve been warned about this already many many years ago by a Scot named Sir Alexander Fraser Tytler when he supposedly said:

A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.

I’m not certain that Tytler had our situation in mind when he made his famous statement given that we are actually a Constitutional Republic, but I would have to agree that once a certain number of the population realizes that they can vote themselves into dependence on the state, we have a real problem.

I can easily see the other portion of the population revolting and collectively shutting down funding of the entire system. Already some conservative celebrities have suggested they’re gonna stop paying taxes into the system probably through tax avoidance (not to be confused with tax evasion). Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe they will be blatant in their refusal to fund the federal government. Regardless, I get a sense that those who have been funding the system are a day short from refusing to pay any more. And why should we expect anything but that when we’ve already escalated our everyday financial vernacular to the use of the word “Trillion” with a capital “T?”

I hope I’m wrong about this but I have a terrible gut feeling that our economic political and social system is about to collapse under the weight of entitlement.

If or when that happens, life in America will be very different. A post-American senario has already been predicted by Russian political science professor, Igor Panarin, but I don’t give total credence to his disintigration of the US hypothesis. We may be weak but not to the point where other countries rapidly infiltrate and balkanize us into six separate nation states. But his assertion that we are overwhelmed with financial turmoil and to a certain degree, moral degredation, does worry many of us.

Back to Buchanan’s column where he says:

We are not only more divided than ever on politics, faith and morality, but along the lines of class and ethnicity. Those who opposed Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court and stood by Sgt. Crowley in the face-off with Harvard’s Henry Louis Gates were called racists. But this time they did not back down. They threw the same vile word right back in the face of their accusers, and Barack Obama.

Consider but a few issues on which Americans have lately been bitterly divided: school prayer, the Ten Commandments, evolution, the death penalty, abortion, homosexuality, assisted suicide, affirmative action, busing, the Confederate battle flag, the Duke rape case, Terri Schiavo, Iraq, amnesty, torture.

Now it is death panels, global warming, “birthers” and socialism. If a married couple disagreed as broadly and deeply as Americans do on such basic issues, they would have divorced and gone their separate ways long ago. What is it that still holds us together?

The European-Christian core of the country that once defined us is shrinking, as Christianity fades, the birth rate falls and Third World immigration surges. Globalism dissolves the economic bonds, while the cacophony of multiculturalism displaces the old American culture.

“E pluribus unum” – out of many, one – was the national motto the men of ’76 settled upon. One sees the pluribus. But where is the unum? One sees the diversity. But where is the unity?

Sounds to me like our motto may be changing to “E Pluribus Discerpo” but I pray I’m wrong, if praying is still allowed.


Comments

  1. The entitlement culture has just been excruciatingly illustrated by the ACORN scandal videos just revealed.

    Defend that Liberal bastions.

  2. It is my opinion that we are on an unalterable course. I think we can make small gains along the way but unless we can change the “character” of the people nothing can stop the decay. I really do envision an Atlas Shrugged outcome.

  3. Antifederalist says

    We’ve been warned over and over that entitlements (mandatory spending) will soon consume every dollar of tax revenue and that we’ll have to raise taxes just to fund discretionary spending. We’ve been warned that European tax rates will be our fate unless we cut spending. (See the movie IOUSA or read the book “Impostor”.) Locke is right: we have too many lemmings in this country, people like Government Butt-boy Untersturmfuhrer Klute and Todd, who EMBRACE government dependency to really avoid this outcome. To mix metaphors, we’re the frogs sitting in water nearing a boiling point and we refuse to listen to the warnings. We’ll soon wallow in the mud with all the other second and third world countries. The Left will REJOICE at the death of American exceptionalism and the squandering of the wealth that the free market has brought us.

    As I said, it’s a foregone conclusion that we’ll end up with European-style tax rates and socialism, replete with cameras on the streets and our government-controllers trying to control our every action with loud-speaker admonishments (this is already the case in England and we already have speed cameras all over Arizona highways). This dystopia is the Left’s utopia. The only question is HOW SOON will we look just like the European socialists? THIS is WHY I struggle so hard against the moderates. They’re complicit with the socialists in that they speed our descent into poverty and decay by compromising with the Left. Moderates do little to nothing to put the brakes on the Leftists’ plans. I’ve said it a million times, I’m absolutely correct, and I’ll say it again: the Republican party in this country needs to sit the moderates firmly in the back seat and take the wheel. Moderates need to be purged from power so conservatives can stave off the nation’s decline. (I don’t think I’m the only one who sees things this way. Why else would SO MANY incumbent Republicans across this nation face primary challenges from the right?) It was the free market and liberty that generated our wealth and power and the ONLY people dedicated to free markets and liberty are small-government conservatives, not the moderate neo-con trash. (It’s riotously funny to me that the Dims reserve their most vitriolic criticism for the Republicans that MOST closely resemble Dims…like Bush.)

    I’ll disagree with the Russian professor that our end will be one where the country breaks up, and if it does, I certainly hope we break up along county lines. There was a dimwitted Leftist “Letter to the Red States” that proposed breaking up along state lines. If we were to break up along county lines, the Dummycrats’ tune would be quite sour. Many of the things they crowed about in their letter would be untrue and would be in the hands of the small-government conservatives.

  4. Antifederalist is totally correct. The GOP needs to make a hard turn to the right. I like the idea of really pushing the idea that Bush was a moderate and that the recent problems the GOP has been having is because it is too moderate. Embrace Buchanan’s formulation that America needs to get back to venerating Robert E Lee over Martin Luther King. I am a little concerned about the push to talk about government surveillance since it might confuse people as to why conservatives have argued there is no right to privacy and have backed every effort to undermine peoples’ 4th amendment rights, but I am sure you can work that out.

  5. “Embrace Buchanan’s formulation that America needs to get back to venerating Robert E Lee over Martin Luther King.”

    And don’t forget, Pat Buchanan wants America to realize that Hitler was just misunderstood. He didn’t *really* want war.

    Oh, how I wish I was kidding.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/uc/20090901/cm_uc_crpbux/op_3311160

  6. Antifederalist says

    How stupid Leftists are is utterly amazing. Pat Buchanan HATES free markets and therefore believes in a command economy. He’s a protectionist. That Leftists believe he is a conservative shows their utter idiocy. One simply cannot be a protectionist AND a small-government conservative. Those two things are mutually exclusive. One cannot embrace the government controlling trade AND small government at the same time. To believe in small government NECESSITATES a belief in FREE markets. That Leftists cannot keep political and economic theories straight just goes to show exactly how benighted they really are. Remember, these are the idiots who brand Bush and his ilk “conservatives” and believe “neo-con” means ULTRA-conservative rather than NEW-conservative (aka Dems flooding the party after Reagan’s victories). What dolts.

    To quote Reagan, “There you go again.” Government Butt-boy Untersturmfuhrer Klute and Todd spouting inanities.

    Do Republicans troll as much on left-wing blogs as these clowns do on SA?

  7. Antifederalist,

    Neither todd nor The Klute referred to Pat Buchanan as a “small-government conservative.” They called him a conservative, just like he often refers to himself.

    I’m sure you and Mr. Buchanan have serious policy differences but your shared obsession with sodomy references might prove to be the bridge to bring you two love-birds back together.

    Best of luck with that!

  8. Rosco P Coltrane says

    I think we’d be much better off as a country if people focused on what the root-cause of these problems were, and then brainstormed real solutions that never trampled on our freedoms.

    But our rulers are not interested in getting down to solving what the REAL problems are. To do that would mean solutions that didn’t involve government or politicians, and then they would realize that they were fairly useless creatures.

    So we get 1000-page bills written by lawyers and lobbyists and pushed by members of both parties that pile more government bloat and power-grab on top of problems caused by government themselves.

    Few in power have ever asked questions like “why really is healthcare so expensive?” “Why do they want to attack us?” “are there other ways meet our critical objectives besides , especially ways that don’t involve government?”

  9. Rosco P Coltrane says

    “are there other ways meet our critical objectives besides (insert unpopular government policy here) , especially ways that don’t involve government?”

    I guess if you put words within greater-than and less-than symbols, they don’t show up.

  10. Rosco P Coltrane says

    By the way, Gerald Celente of Trends Research believes that we have already entered the Second American Revolution. It started with the first tea parties on Apr 15, followed by more tea parties July 4, growing with the healthcare townhalls. He says the media refuse to acknowledge that The People are just fed up with the federal government and that The People are finally going to do something about it. What and when remains to be seen. Gerald has a lot of mp3 interviews out on the web.

  11. Antifederalist,
    You did read DSW’s article which is a response to what Buchanan wrote in the conservative World Net Daily, right? I’m beginning to think that the only person Antifederalist would label a conservative is him or herself.

  12. Antifederalist says

    @Kenny,
    Not to sound like a 4-year old, but I’m returning Klute’s favor. He loves ad hominem attacks and couldn’t use logic and reason to find his way out of wet toilet paper wrappings. I’m just making sure that he knows he’ll get back EXACTLY what he dishes out. When he dials back the ad hominem, so will I. I’m more than willing to stop the ad hominem attacks on him the instant he agrees to do the same. He won’t tho. Liberals would shrivel up to nothingness without their vitriol. They NEED to be angry at their impotence. it’s what drives them.

    @Rosco,
    One could only hope we’re in the midst of a conservative revolution, but nothing will ever come of it. While Jefferson told us that, “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants,” no one in this country will ever do anything about it. Why? The lemmings have been too brainwashed into thinking that guns are bad and law enforcement is beyond reproach. If we loved our guns and held government in contempt, perhaps THEN we WOULD see the people forcing a roll-back of government.

    I’ll reiterate what I’ve said before. The dumb drones in this country will lie back and take it. No one will do anything about the rising cost of government (because no one has the cajones to tell special interests to go suck eggs and CUT spending) and we’ll accept a tax increase to pay for MORE government because tools like Todd and Government Butt-boy Untersturmfuhrer Klute LOVE government and thinks all it does is gold and government is the be-all, end-all solution and answer to EVERY question. The unthinking, unwashed masses more resemble these buffoons than our Founders anymore these days. Sad, but true.

  13. I am amused to see Antifederalist complain about others’ supposed ad hominem attacks. Soon he will be threatening to kill people and dump the bodies as s/he has before in this forum.

  14. To the point, you started referring to me with a Nazi title before this, and when I referred to you as a pro-business butt boy, that’s when your little feelings got hurt and you put on this new veneer of hurt and pain.

    I feel very sorry for you.

  15. The country is being torn apart, another Civil War indeed. In the first Civil War, which side talked about secession? Which side hated the sitting president? Which side wanted to cling to the past and preserve status quo?

    Which side won?

  16. x4mr – Are you suggesting that the party of Lincoln has ironically transformed itself into the part of John Wilkes Booth?

  17. Veritas Vincit says

    Some call it the War of Northern Aggression since, if the books are correct it was Lincoln who invaded a brother state of the Union with 75,000 troops.

    Klute might be a closet Nazi as I understand he likes to wear hob-nailed Doc Martins.

  18. “Some call it the War of Northern Aggression since, if the books are correct it was Lincoln who invaded a brother state of the Union with 75,000 troops.”

    Bitter Southerners who can’t face the reality that their great-great-grandparents were traitors call it that.

    “Klute might be a closet Nazi as I understand he likes to wear hob-nailed Doc Martins.”

    It’s “Martens”, not “Martins”.

  19. @Klute

    "Bitter Southerners who can’t face the reality that their great-great-grandparents were traitors call it that."

    It’s the Founders’ faults.  Amendments IX and X suggest they were trying to experiment with a concept of partial or limited sovereignty for the federal state, but such a concept is self-defeating.  Where individuals or states have the right to nullify laws through secession sovereignty does not exist.  By implicitly acknowledging the right of secession while creating a federal government that can trump the laws of member states the Founders were setting us up for the conflict that followed.  This was unwise.

    @Veritas

    “Klute might be a closet Nazi as I understand he likes to wear hob-nailed Doc Martins.”

    I know him.  The Nazi comments here are far from the mark.  He is occasionally intolerant of conservatives, however, and I suspect genuinely misses the points many conservatives try to make.

    @E Pluribus Discerpo

    I think that Pat Buchannon, Dmitry Orlov, Gerald Celente, and Igor Panarin need to temper their views with a little history.  Every time Americans have faced a crisis in the past (the Revolution, the Civil War, the Great Depression, etc.) the response has been an greater centralization of our government, not a contraction.  And collectivism is not state killer Ayn Rand portrayed or the USSR would not have lasted as long as it did.

    Americans are fully capable of coming out of these crises with a large centralized state that could inefficiently plod along for 70 years.  Those who object to this outcome need to start articulating why in terms left-leaning citizens can understand.  Sticking your head in the sand and muttering "it’ll all fail" or "the Founders wouldn’t like it" will have exactly zero effect on the debate IMHO.

Leave a Reply