brave new world

[cmotherofpirl]

Brave new world


by Patrick Buchanan

© 2006 Creators Syndicate Inc.

Writing in that fateful year, 1939, T.S. Eliot, intellectual and Christian, admonished his contemporaries who had placed their faith in the triumph of democracy. Democracy is not enough, Eliot wrote.

''As political philosophy derives its sanction from ethics, and ethics from the truth of religion, it is only by returning to the eternal source of truth that we can hope for any social organization which will not, to its ultimate destruction, ignore some essential aspect of reality.

''The term 'democracy,' as I have said again and again, does not contain enough positive content to stand alone against the forces you dislike – it can easily be transformed by them. If you will not have God (and He is a jealous God), you should pay your respects to Hitler and Stalin.''


When Eliot wrote, the world had before it a textbook example of how democracy can be exploited by its enemies: the Third Reich.

After his failed Beer Hall Putsch in 1923, Hitler decided to take the longer road to power, the democracy road.

Named chancellor of Germany as leader of the largest minority party in the Reichstag in 1933, Hitler used plebiscites to enable the German people to participate in his rule and ratify his policies. After the reoccupation of the Rhineland and the Anschluss with Austria, national referenda were held. Up to 99 percent of all Germans endorsed his actions. By Munich, he was the most popular political leader in Europe.

This, then, is the point. Democracy is but a process by which people participate in choosing and confirming their rulers. But if the peoples of Europe have lost their belief in the truths of Christianity – the faith that made Europe – and the morality and ethics derived from those truths, they can wind up with a hell on earth.

Which brings us to Holland, a nation that can rightfully claim to be in the avant-garde of post-Christian Europe.

In Amsterdam, in the Red Light District, there are brothels, sex shops and sex museums. Women advertise their charms in storefronts. Window prostitution has been legalized, as has possession of marijuana and hashish, which are sold over the counter in coffee shops. Drugs are done openly. Pornography is pervasive.

Amsterdam has a ''liberal and tolerant attitude,'' runs a web ad. ''Instead of criminalizing everything, this upfront city wears its heart on its sleeve.'' Not to be outdone, Utrecht has a canal-based red light district. Rotterdam has sex clubs and private houses for the legalized enjoyment of the pleasures of the flesh.

Holland also leads Europe in the ''liberal and tolerant'' stance it has taken toward suicide. In April 2002, a Dutch law took effect permitting physicians to assist in euthanasia and suicides so long as the procedure is carried out in a medically appropriate fashion.

Anyone 16 or over has a right to suicide. If you are between 12 and 16, you have to get your guardian's approval to kill yourself. In World War II, the Dutch doctors who resisted the Nazi euthanasia program were heroes. Apparently, those doctors were just behind the times.

The latest news from Holland is that a new party is about to be formed, the Charity, Freedom and Diversity Party. Principal platform plank: reduction of the legal age for sex from 16 to 12 years old.

''We are going to shake The Hague awake!'' say the pedophiles of Holland, for whom dropping the age for sex to 12 is but the beginning. They wish to eradicate all prohibitions on sex with children and with animals.

This, of course, would cheer the late Dr. Alfred Kinsey, the American sexologist whose ''researchers'' either abused scores of children and infants, or who used the testimony of child-molesters to make the case that adult-child sex can be beneficial to both.

Which brings us back to Eliot's point. If one rejects Christianity, and the morality and ethics that proceed from it, on what ground does one stand to outlaw drugs, prostitution, euthanasia, assisted suicide and sex with children or dogs?

Holland today, and America – with its toll of aborted babies now nearing the 50 million mark since Roe v. Wade – raise profound questions for conservatives and traditionalists.

What if the free society chooses to become a decadent and depraved society? Do we still owe it allegiance and loyalty? Does a community have the right to impose its values, if those values are rooted in religion, on a minority that disbelieves in those values? We certainly did that during the civil rights era of the 1960s.

At what point does a regime, even if democratically elected, become illegitimate, as surely Hitler's was by the time Eliot wrote?

''What makes you think the West is worth saving?'' the priest asked Whittaker Chambers when he visited him in that hospital room in the 1950s. Good question then. Better question now.

Perhaps the Muslims, who may well be a majority in Amsterdam, Rotterdam and The Hague in 10 years, will moot the issue for us all.

[MichaelF]

Although I agree with the premise and Buchanan is right to bring the goings on in Europe to our attention, this editorial is so jam-packed with logical fallacies and straw men that it's value is nil.

Buchanan strangles his own argument.

Edited June 3, 2006 by MichaelF

[toledo_jesus]

I agree with Buchanan's assessment. I also think that I wouldn't mind the muslims taking over Holland.

[Socrates]

[quote name='MichaelF' post='995675' date='Jun 2 2006, 06:06 PM']
Although I agree with the premise and Buchanan is right to bring the goings on in Europe to our attention, this editorial is so jam-packed with logical fallacies and straw men that it's value is nil.

Buchanan strangles his own argument.
[/quote]
Well Buchanan employs rhetoric as usual, but I happen to agree with him. He raises valid points - I don't see any fallacies here.

[MichaelF]

[quote name='Socrates' post='996270' date='Jun 3 2006, 06:21 PM']
Well Buchanan employs rhetoric as usual, but I happen to agree with him. He raises valid points - I don't see any fallacies here.
[/quote]

Strawman: Nazis were elected, ergo sometimes (when you don't agree with them) democratically elected governments are illegitimate.
Fallacy: Since there were no elections, post 1933, under the illegal Führerprizip, the Nazi government cannot be logically equated with a government (regardless of its social policies) which continues to enjoy popular mandate via regular elections.

False Dichotomy: if the Netherlands ditch Christianity, rioting, murder and beastiality shall ensue.
Fallacy: Arguably, much of Europe has -already- ditched Christianity. Many nations do not run on ethical or legal principles stemming from Christianity, yet maintain the social contract. The Church is neccessary for Salvation, not for maintaining a functional Society (does help, though).

Red Herring: The Dutch legalized Euthanasia, ergo mass-suicides shall likely ensue.
Fallacy: Suicide is an emotional act, -most often- unpremeditated. Most suicides will likely remain in the form of overdoses, jumping and gross bodily injury.

[quote]National suicide rates sometimes tend to be stable. For example, the 1975 rates for Australia, Denmark, England, France, Norway, and Switzerland, were within 3.0 per 100,000 of population from the 1875 rates (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1983; Lester, Patterns, 1996, p. 21). The rates in 1910-14 and in 1960 differed less than 2.5 per 100,000 of population in Australia, Belgium, Denmark, England & Wales, Ireland, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Scotland, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, and The Netherlands (Lester, Patterns, 1996, p. 22).[/quote]

I agree with the premise of Buchanans editorial. Extremely negative social trends are occuring in Europe (not only there, though). The way in which he supports that premise, OTOH, is extremely poor.

Edited June 4, 2006 by MichaelF

[Socrates]

MichaelF, the problem here is you are putting words in Buchanan's mouth that he does not say. That is a strawman itself.

[quote name='MichaelF' post='996310' date='Jun 3 2006, 07:26 PM']
Strawman: Nazis were elected, ergo sometimes (when you don't agree with them) democratically elected governments are illegitimate.
Fallacy: Since there were no elections, post 1933, under the illegal Führerprizip, the Nazi government cannot be logically equated with a government (regardless of its social policies) which continues to enjoy popular mandate via regular elections.[/quote]
Buchanan does not anywhere say democratically-elected governments are illegitimate. He is simply making the point that a democracy and popular elections in themselves (without the backing of morality) do not necessarily lead to what is good.
While it is true the Nazis did not govern democratically, they came to power through democratic elections.

[quote]This, then, is the point. Democracy is but a process by which people participate in choosing and confirming their rulers. But if the peoples of Europe have lost their belief in the truths of Christianity – the faith that made Europe – and the morality and ethics derived from those truths, they can wind up with a hell on earth.[/quote]

[quote]False Dichotomy: if the Netherlands ditch Christianity, rioting, murder and beastiality shall ensue.
Fallacy: Arguably, much of Europe has -already- ditched Christianity. Many nations do not run on ethical or legal principles stemming from Christianity, yet maintain the social contract. The Church is neccessary for Salvation, not for maintaining a functional Society (does help, though). [/quote]
I think Buchanan would agree with you that the Netherlands has already effectively ditched Christianity. And already vice and debauchery of every kind (including unnatural vice) is already rampant. The fact that there is a serious party there promoting legalization of pedophilia and bestiality shows there is a problem.
And Buchanan does not mention rioting and murder (other than abortion and euthanasia) in this article.

[quote]Which brings us back to Eliot's point. If one rejects Christianity, and the morality and ethics that proceed from it, on what ground does one stand to outlaw drugs, prostitution, euthanasia, assisted suicide and sex with children or dogs?[/quote]

[quote]Red Herring: The Dutch legalized Euthanasia, ergo mass-suicides shall likely ensue.
Fallacy: Suicide is an emotional act, -most often- unpremeditated. Most suicides will likely remain in the form of overdoses, jumping and gross bodily injury.[/quote]
Buchanan does not mention mass suicides. He simply points out the lenient laws regarding "assisted suicide" in Holland. (Which should be profoundly disturbing in themselves.)

[quote]I agree with the premise of Buchanans editorial. Extremely negative social trends are occuring in Europe (not only there, though). The way in which he supports that premise, OTOH, is extremely poor.
[/quote]
It seems you did not read Buchanan's editorial (at least not with any amount of care), since you got most of what he said completely wrong.
It doesn't look good to criticize someone else for fallacious arguments, then make them yourself. You should carefully read what the article actually says, rather than assuming what you think it will say, then jumping all over it. The way in which you critique the article is extremely poor.

[Era Might]

Now I feel abandoned
Cuz Pat Buchanan says I'm greedy
You can take my taxes, send me to war
But can't feed me

--2Pac, "The Good Die Young"

Sorry, just happened to be listening to that song.

[MichaelF]

[quote name='Socrates' post='996666' date='Jun 4 2006, 06:54 PM']
You should carefully read what the article actually says, rather than assuming what you think it will say, then jumping all over it. The way in which you critique the article is extremely poor.
[/quote]

[quote]At what point does a regime, even if democratically elected, become illegitimate, as surely Hitler's was by the time Eliot wrote?
[/quote]

The above quote, to my reading, seems to be questioning the value of the democratic process.

Buchanan never specifies that an unconstitutional action (such as suspending elections) needs to take place, which he would have if he did not intend to infer that law-abiding governments may render themselves illegitimate merely by pursuing an immoral policy (however legal).

That is not the way it works. The US Government (Enthusiastically, under certain Administrations) views Roe Vs Wade as the Law of The Land. The government is legal (not having violated the letter of the Constitution), but morally wrong.

If President Bush "postpones" the 2008 elections without Congressional approval, -then- the Government would be illegitimate (regardless of morality).

That is the major flaw in Buchanans argument.

Also:[quote]Buchanan does not mention mass suicides. He simply points out the lenient laws regarding "assisted suicide" in Holland. (Which should be profoundly disturbing in themselves.)[/quote]

Yes, he does. [quote]Anyone 16 or over has a right to suicide. If you are between 12 and 16, you have to get your guardian's approval to kill yourself. In World War II, the Dutch doctors who resisted the Nazi euthanasia program were heroes. Apparently, those doctors were just behind the times.
[/quote] He suggests, by use of phrase, that the new laws regarding Euthanasia will result in more, and younger, suicides (My terminology was off. Should have said "masses of" suicides). The statistics just dont back that up.

Also, he suggests that ditching Christianity will, axiomatically, result in a general collapse of the State's ability to impose order.
[quote]If one rejects Christianity, and the morality and ethics that proceed from it, on what ground does one stand to outlaw drugs, prostitution, euthanasia, assisted suicide and sex with children or dogs? [/quote]

1) Sex with Children and Animals. Nonchristian (as in, never were Christian) don't seem to have a problem with legislating against such activities. Japan, Korea, India, and Turkey all outlaw these activities.
2) Drugs and Prostitution. Ditto.
3) Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide (Participatory Homicide, I prefer) are illegal in many nonChristian nations, too. Even some effectively atheistic societies, such as Japan.

Christianity (read: The Church) is best. Other systems, however, -do- function enough to keep things from collapsing.

[Socrates]

[quote name='MichaelF' post='997997' date='Jun 5 2006, 08:52 PM']
The above quote, to my reading, seems to be questioning the value of the democratic process.

Buchanan never specifies that an unconstitutional action (such as suspending elections) needs to take place, which he would have if he did not intend to infer that law-abiding governments may render themselves illegitimate merely by pursuing an immoral policy (however legal).

That is not the way it works. The US Government (Enthusiastically, under certain Administrations) views Roe Vs Wade as the Law of The Land. The government is legal (not having violated the letter of the Constitution), but morally wrong.

If President Bush "postpones" the 2008 elections without Congressional approval, -then- the Government would be illegitimate (regardless of morality).

That is the major flaw in Buchanans argument.[/quote]
Again, you're missing the point, and reading things into Buchanan's article which he does not say.
He is simply making the point that "Democracy" in and of itself is not enough to guarantee good just and moral government. He says that Christian morality is needed. The "will of the people" or democratic elections do not always lead to the good.
This should hardly be regarded as a radical or shocking statement, as this sentiment was shared by a number of the American Founding Fathers, notably John Adams.

To make this point is not the same as making a blanket statement that all democratically-elected governements are illegitimate.

[quote]Also:
[quote]Anyone 16 or over has a right to suicide. If you are between 12 and 16, you have to get your guardian's approval to kill yourself. In World War II, the Dutch doctors who resisted the Nazi euthanasia program were heroes. Apparently, those doctors were just behind the times.[/quote]
Yes, he does. He suggests, by use of phrase, that the new laws regarding Euthanasia will result in more, and younger, suicides (My terminology was off. Should have said "masses of" suicides). The statistics just dont back that up.[/quote]
Again you are putting words in Buchanan's mouth which he does not say. Read that again - he is simply telling what Holland's current assisted suicide laws are. If you do not see a serious problem with doctors being able to legally kill anyone who asks for it, there is indeed something wrong with your thinking.

[quote]Also, he suggests that ditching Christianity will, axiomatically, result in a general collapse of the State's ability to impose order.[/quote]
It already has! Look at the current state of the Netherlands! (And much of the rest of the West, including America, continues to slide further and further into godless immorality, and its sanctioning by the law).
This is not some questionable warning of some future problem, but current reality!

[quote]1) Sex with Children and Animals. Nonchristian (as in, never were Christian) don't seem to have a problem with legislating against such activities. Japan, Korea, India, and Turkey all outlaw these activities.
2) Drugs and Prostitution. Ditto.
3) Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide (Participatory Homicide, I prefer) are illegal in many nonChristian nations, too. Even some effectively atheistic societies, such as Japan.

Christianity (read: The Church) is best. Other systems, however, -do- function enough to keep things from collapsing.
[/quote]
While it is true that natural-law morality can be recognized by non-Christian societies, the fact is that these societies have moral foundations of their own. The problem with Europe is that is actively rejecting Christian morality, and (unless current birthrates cause Islam to supplant Christianity) there is no other traditional system of morality to replace it, only nihilism and hedonism.

And it should be noted that Islam (for all its falsehoods) is taken from Judaism and Christianity, and inherits much of the Judaeo-Christian morality, while the law in many Eastern countries (as India) is modeled and influenced by Western (Christian) forms of governance.

Edited June 6, 2006 by Socrates