World At A Crossroads .

In his essay below, Victor Davis Hanson quotes the ancient historian Thucydides famous judgment of the state of the world two and a half millenia ago. "The strong do as they will, the weak suffer as they must." The world Thucydides described was a world with no policeman and no external limitations upon the ruling class beyond calculations of raw power. It is a reality kept at bay in the modern world since World War II by American engagement. But as that changes, Victor Davis Hanson, in a bleak essay, sees us returning to a world Thucydides would recognize.

This from Mr. Hanson, writing at the NY Post:

RUSSIA invades Georgia. China jails dissidents. China and India pollute at unimaginable levels. Gulf monar chies make trillions from jacked-up oil prices. Islamic terrorists keep car bombing. Meanwhile, Europe offers moral lectures, while Japan and South Korea shrug and watch - all in a globalized world that tunes into the Olympics each night from Beijing.

"Citizens of the world" were supposed to share, in relative harmony, our new "Planet Earth," which was to have followed from a system of free trade, electronic communications, diplomacy and shared consumer capitalism.

But was that ever quite true? In reality, to the extent globalism worked, it followed from three unspoken assumptions:

First, the US economy would keep importing goods from abroad to drive international economic growth.

Second, the US military would keep the sea-lanes open, and trade and travel protected. The Americans, as global sheriff, would deal with the occasional menace, like a Moammar al-Khadafy, Slobodan Milosevic, Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, Kim Jong-il or the Taliban.

Third, America would ignore ankle-biting allies and remain engaged with the world - like a nurturing mom who at times must put up with the petulance of dependent teenagers.

But there've been a number of signs recently that globalization may soon lose its US parent.

The United States may be the most free, stable and meritocratic nation, but its resources and patience are not unlimited. It pays more than a half trillion dollars a year to import $115-a-barrel oil that's often pumped at a cost of about $5.

The Chinese, Japanese and Europeans hold trillions of dollars in US bonds - the result of massive trade deficits. The American dollar is at historic lows. We are piling up staggering national debt. Over 12 million live here illegally and freely transfer more than $50 billion annually to Mexico and Latin America.

Our military, after deposing Milosevic, the Taliban and Saddam, is tired. And Americans are increasingly becoming more sensitive to the cheap criticism of global moralists. But as America turns ever so slightly inward, the new globalized world will revert to a far poorer (and more dangerous) place.

Liberals like Barack Obama speak out against new free-trade agreements and want existing accords like NAFTA readjusted. . . .

Meanwhile, the hypocrisy becomes harder to take. After all, it is easy for self-appointed moralists to complain that terrorists don't enjoy Miranda rights at Guantanamo, but it'd be hard to do much about the Russian military invading Georgia's democracy and bombing its cities.

Al Gore crisscrosses the country, pontificating about Americans' carbon footprints. But he could do far better to fly to China to convince them not to open 500 new coal-burning power plants.

. . . So, what a richer but more critical world has forgotten is that in large part America was the model, not the villain - and that postwar globalization was always a form of engaged Americanization that enriched and protected billions.

Yet globalization, in all its manifestations, will run out of steam the moment we tire of fueling it, as the world returns instead to the mindset of the 1930s - with protectionist tariffs; weak, disarmed democracies; an isolationist America; predatory dictatorships; and a demoralized gloom-and-doom Western elite.

If America adopts the protectionist trade policies of Japan or China, global profits plummet. If our armed forces follow the European lead of demilitarization and inaction, rogue states advance. If we were to treat the environment as do China and India, the world would become quickly a lost cause

If we flee Iraq and call off the War on Terror, jihadists will regroup, not disband. When the Russians attack the next democracy, they won't listen to the United Nations, the European Union or Michael Moore.

We may be on our way back to an old world, where the strong do as they will, and the weak suffer as they must

Read the entire article. I have long thought that we are a nation at a cross-roads. In the short term, our nation will survive. But if we follow down the post modern road, then sooner rather than later, we as a nation will suffer horrendously. The choices really could not be any more stark, nor the forseeable consequences more costly.

Read More...

Summary only...

Adam Smith & The EU's Global Warming Arrogance

The socialists at the EU really are an arrogant bunch. Knowing as they do what is best for Europe without need of consulting their electorate, they of course know what is best for the rest of the world also, including the U.S. For example, the EU partially fund the ABA to conduct its propaganda offensive against the death penalty in the U.S. Does that seem like a gross imposition into our internal affairs?

And indeed, just within the past year we have witnessed the unelected EU President send a letter to the popularly elected Texas governor instructing the governor that the it is a settled issue that the death penalty is not a deterrent and should be eradicated. It must be nice to go through life without having to examine any facts that challenge one’s deeply held belief. Such is the modern left.

The European socialists in Brussels see no problem with their attempt to make an end run around the electorate in Texas – the same people who could easily vote for a candidate who wishes to abolish the death penalty should they desire. But "democracy" has no worth as a concept in Brussels; its only use is as an Orwellian label. The EU is making sure that their own electorate have no say in the creation of the EU socialist super-state that, with the "Reform Treaty" of Lisbon, has just come into being. Indeed, to complain about the lack of democratic vote is to "show contempt for dignity of Parliament." This gives you some flavor of the incredible hubris of the EU.

But all of that pales in comparison to the damage the EU socialists, in their arrogance, are poised to inflict both internally and on the world.

The EU, which has taken global warming out of the realm of science and debate and made it a shibboleth of their constitutional law, is gearing "up to produce its much-heralded strategy on "climate change" – expected on 23 January." According to EU Referendum:

The core of this strategy will be the 20 percent reduction in emissions by 2020 and the 10 percent biofuel quota, the combination of which – with the other measures the commission is considering – will have a profound effect on our economy, our own personal lifestyles and global politics in general.

This is a program that will take billions out of the EU economy while making no contribution to efficiency, only adding to the cost of the production of goods and services. So as the EU shackles the economies of its member provinces with changes to combat global warming, how will the EU remain competitive in the global market?

It was completely predictable to anyone who watches the EU that their first thought would be to transfer their economic costs and use taxation as a type of global social policy to enforce EU beliefs on the global heretics. Thus it is no surprise at all that this today should appear in The Times:

A row has erupted in Brussels over proposals to introduce a carbon tax on goods entering the European Union from countries that fail to take measures to curb carbon dioxide emissions.

The tax would hit powerful emerging market exporters, such as China, which do not comply with the Kyoto treaty on climate change. The proposal is opposed by Peter Mandelson, the EU Trade Commissioner, who fears that it would fall foul of World Trade Organisation rules.

Sources at Mr Mandelson’s office said the proposal was "dead", while a spokesman for Stavros Dimas, the Environment Commissioner, said several drafts of the proposal were being discussed and debated. "It’s at the beginning of the process," he said.

The Trade Commissioner’s spokesman argued that the proposed tax was "too complicated" and would create problems with the United States, which has not signed the Kyoto treaty. . .

Do read the entire article. One does not need a PhD in economics to see that such taxes would have a depressive effect on the world economy and would, if imposed, likely set off a trade war. But such is the arrogance and the insanity to be found amongst our friendly, unelected socialist allies. It’s the Goracle versus Adam Smith. Smith will win in the end, but the Goracle and his EU acolytes can do incredible damage in the short run.

Read More...

Summary only...