In his 2006 book, America Alone: The End of the World As We Know It , author and columnist scared the daylights out us with his portrayal of a Europe that is in steep decline, with the inevitable result the the United States will soon be left alone in the world to deal with the barbarians. Last year Steyn unleashed the sequel, After America: Get Ready for Armageddon, which he may as well have titled using the inscription at the entrance to Hell in Dante's Divine Comedy; "Abandon hope all ye who enter here." This book is meant to remove any doubt for anyone who thought that an "America alone" could survive.
The problem is not that armed adversaries are waiting to bomb out cities to oblivion, though it may come to that. Nor is it that our Navy and Air Force can't destroy the likes of the People's Republic of China's Navy (PLAN), though they are getting stronger relative to us. No, most of our wounds are self-inflicted. On the surface our problem is fiscal, but the root of it is moral and cultural.
A book that simply laid out the facts would be useful but so horribly depressing as to be almost unreadable. But Steyn is one of the most clever and witty authors around. Many passages are laugh-out-loud funny, and many more will evoke a giggle or snicker. Even when you're shaking your head at the insanity of our world and the (perhaps) inevitable decline and end of America as we know it, the reader can't but chuckle at the writing.
]]>
Book Summary
Our Current State of Broke
It's not that the west is going broke; we are broke, we just haven't faced up to it yet because the full consequences are not yet upon us.
As of this writing, the national debt is some 15.6 trillion dollars. When Steyn wrote his book last year, it was just over 13 trillion; the number he mentions. By the time you read this the figure will be higher, so click on the link to see where are are today. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has admitted to the Senate that Obama's budget proposals set an "unsustainable" course for entitlement spending, but nothing the president or any other politically possible proposal pretends to make much of a dent in it. Even Rep Paul Ryan's plan, which I support, wouldn't balance the budget for 20 or 30 years. And that's just to stop the bleeding, to say nothing of paying down the existing debt.
Obama and the liberals point out that George W Bush, and in fact all Republican presidents going back 50 years or so, also engaged in deficit spending. This is like saying that taking change off someone else's kitchen counter when they're not looking is like robbing a bank with a machine gun. Barack Obama has taken deficit spending to new levels. He's George W Bush on steroids. Obama complained about the Bush deficits and then proceeded to double and triple them with no end in sight.
Just as you can't keep running up your credit card forever, at some point deficit spending will have to stop. The problem is that since we can't seem to get our house in order, the "stop" will be forced on us, and it will be excruciatingly painful.
And it's not the military, or lack of tax revenue, that is causing the problem. As I've outlined numerous times here, by any domestic measure military spending is headed nowhere but down. We already have the highest corporate tax rate in the world, and increasing personal taxes, even on the evil wealthy, wouldn't make any significant difference.
The Root Cause is Moral
As Steyn pointed out in a recent article in the print edition of National Review, there's something wrong with a country in which a Georgetown law school student, who can expect a starting salary of $160,000 or more upon graduation, goes before congress to whine that she can't afford birth control, and is not laughed off the national stage. Sandra Fluke is headed towards lucrative job prospects paying big salaries by any definition, and she can't understand why the government won't pay to keep her entertained while she studies.
It's this that fiscal conservatives miss when they fixate on the dollars and cents and say that the "social issues" are getting in the way. Ok, if they mean gay marriage and abortion, maybe. But if they mean the larger cultural and moral issue, they're wrong. We're broke not because we can't add a column of numbers, or because a government program or two grew faster than anticipated; we're broke because we've created a culture of entitlement that extends from the poor to the wealthy (or soon-to-be-wealthy).
More than this, we shouldn't continue most or many of our current programs even if we did have a balanced budget. The programs themselves have a debilitating effect on people that is rotting us at the core. See Sandra Fluke above. The citizen who lives a cradle to grave resistance all financially guaranteed by the state is not a citizen at all but a subject. Far from encouraging responsible behaviors, it infantilizes.
As it is, we're a long way from a "what if we weren't running a deficit" scenario, so all the other scary prospects from our policies are worth exploring, and Steyn certainly takes the ball and runs with it. Among other things he points out that when money flows from one country to another, the power flows along with it. The United States is losing it's place as the preeminent world power ("hyperpower, as the French put it), which will have catastrophic effects for everyone, ourselves included.
Despite all this, Steyn does admit to an "on the other hand." In Europe they riot ("demonstrate" in the papers) because they want more government benefits; in the United States, the Tea Party demonstrates ("racist" in the papers), demanding less benefits. We still have a chance.
Advancement is Slowing
Steyn imagines a man from the 1890s who finds H.G. Well's fictional time machine and propels himself forward, first to 1950, and then to our current day. He is amazed by the world of 1950; the horseless carriage, telephone, television, radio, the various household appliances, medical advances, flight, and so on. But when he advances the time-travel dial on his machine again, he's much less impressed by the advances made between then and 2011. Cars or airplanes can't go any faster, the telephone is wireless but still the same concept. The appliances in the house are updated but again still the same, and in fact most of the changes seem the same. Except that in 2011 the adults dress like the children do.
Ouch on that last one.
And in a way technological advance does seem to have slowed down. When the movie 2001 was released in 1968 it was assumed that of course we would have moon bases, and that the plot involved a trip to the orbit of Jupiter surprised no one. Not only are we no closer to that today than we were then, we're no closer to a computer with the capabilities of HAL.
The traditional reasons advanced for our lack of serious space travel is that we no longer have the Soviet Union to compete with, and that there's no real scientific return on the investment. Perhaps. But maybe the primary reason is that we simply couldn't do it if we wanted to. Oh it's not the technology; that's the easy part. Rather we've gotten so bogged down in "entitlement" spending, we're so self-absorbed in hedonistic desires, so cynical, and so lacking in vision and foresight that as a nation and society we've lost the capability to do such things.
And don't bring up Obama's "Yes we can!" That was a call to more special spending and government dependency.
Do We (Still) Yearn to be Free?
In The Case for Democracy, Natan Sharansky said that people who live under tyranny seem to agree with it's governing ideology but in reality wanted liberty, and given half a chance would seize it. Seems logical, but in recent years but when put to the vote people have tended to choose less and not more freedom. In Gaza, Egypt, Libya, and likely Iraq (though the outcome there is not entirely clear) the people have been choosing the Muslim Brotherhood or it's equivalent over Western concepts of liberty. Ok, that's the Islamic world for you, but if it's a religious/cultural thing why are they doing it in Russia too? And most studies of China conclude that the people are more happy with a totalitarian system that brings about a better economy and keeps the societal stability than our Bill of Rights.
Ok again, those countries have always had tyranny. But if that's the excuse then why are they doing it in Europe and why is it starting here? The EU is less and less a democracy/republic as the decision makers and power brokers are more and more removed from the electoral process and thus responsiveness to the people, and thus less replaceable. Speech is limited in Europe when it comes to criticizing Islam, and American college campuses are notorious for their attempts to silence conservative professors, students, and visiting speakers. If liberals want me to throw in the Patriot Act, fine, but it's really small potatoes when you add up everything else that's going on.
Two Americas
in John Edwards fantasy, there are two Americas; the haves and the have-nots. It's the classic Dickensian vision of the rich, powerful, and uncaring, versus the noble poor. Edwards had it half-right; there are "two Americas," his problem was one of identification. The "two Americas" of today are those who pay taxes and those who live off of the government. Note that the latter are not necessarily "poor," as most are government workers or contractors who live off government contracts.
In Political Economy (1816), Thomas Jefferson wrote that "to take from one because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father's has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill,k is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association - 'the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it." Today such sentiments are laughed at or derided as "insensitive."
China for a Day
Just as gun control is not so much about controlling guns as it is just about controlling the citizenry, much regulation is not so much about the thing ostensibly being regulated as it is simply about the exercise of power.
It wasn't always this way. Tocqueville wrote that although the kings of old theoretically had almost unlimited power, "almost never did it happen that they made use of it." More, "the details of social life and of individual existence ordinarily escaped his control."
Today we have democracy but the government controls more and more of your everyday existence, while in days of old you had no say in your government but except for religious matters it more or less left you alone.
New York Times columnist let the liberal cat out of the bag when he fantasized "what if we could just be China for a day.... Where we could, you know, authorize the right solutions?" It is this sort of thinking that has led to things like "gay marriage" being imposed by unelected judges on states where the people reject it at the ballot box.
It's the Demographics, Stupid
In America Alone, Steyn spent much time on demographic statistics because they were central to his theories about the decline of Europe. What would a sequel be without a reprise?
The short version is this: Westerners are having fewer and fewer babies, and will in a short time lead to seriously declining populations. The effect is masked by the baby boom generation, but will become starkly apparent when they start to die in mass numbers twenty years hence.
This might be survivable except that we've voted into place all sorts of benefits programs, especially for the retired. People are also living longer, and in Europe the retirement age where you can collect full benefits is far less than in the U.S. The financing for these programs requires more and more young people paying into them. Add more retirees and take away the young people, and you don't have to be an accounting genius to see where things are headed. The problem is worse in Europe than it is in the U.S. but only by degree, not kind.
Greece has one of the lowest fertility rates on the planet, coming in at 1.3 children per woman. The replacement rate required to keep a population at the same size, is 2.1. Russia, Japan, and South Korea are at about 1.4, and the average in Europe is only about 1.7. The U.S. is at 2.1, but that only due to immigration.
The financial disaster is obvious, but as outlined above there's a moral rot as well. We don't blame the Greeks for voting those benefits into place because it seemed like the thing to do at the time and no one objected. We also wouldn't blame them for simply being upset at their current fix. No, what sticks in the craw is that they are in self-denial to the point where they riot and demand ever more benefits and refuse to work more days and hours.
But you don't have to go to Greece to see the problem, because it's right here at home in California. The state government is broke but the public-sector workers don't care. Don't ask them to give up anything.
The Europeanization of America
Liberals generally see the Europeanization of America as a good thing. No guns, impotent military, huge government where decision-making is as far removed from the vote as possible, and cradle-to-grave benefits programs. What's not to like?
Plenty, Steyn says. The economic argument is the easy one. The other, more insidious and destructive, is the moral one.
The government that takes care of your every need and protects you from everything also "disconnects you from the primary impulses of life." Receiving benefits that you didn't directly earn leads to unhappiness for most people. Having the government guarantee your every needs leads to a loss of self-worth. "it drains too much of the life from life," as Charles Murray said.
Sure, Europeans have much more free time than do Americans. But what they do with it is or should be distressing. There is much less civic activism than in the United States. Fewer organizations like the 4-H, Girl and Boy Scouts, even youth sports leagues. Why form a charitable organization when the government does it all for you? And church? Forget it. Hedonism is the order of the day. How sad.
What would you die for? Civil liberties? I sincerely congratulate you. King and country in a war you don't necessarily agree with? You get my highest honors. And if you want to lie down in the road to stop a logging truck, risking death that way, I will think your politics are all whacked out but I will admire you for commitment to your cause.
Post-Christian, post-modern Europe has no answer to the question of "what is worth dying for," or even "what is life for and what gives it meaning?"
It's as of the citizens of Europe (and some in America) are on Soma, that Valium-type drug that induces pleasure but leaves one lethargic to do anything in life. Rome, London, Paris, and Berlin were once centers of greatness, contributing to the political, economic, intellectual and cultural life of the world. Now they're quickly becoming backwaters, great places to visit but irrelevant to the future of the world.
Additional Observations
Obama is not anti-American, he's post-American. He's beyond that patriotism thing. In fact, he's beyond being president. In his view, the job is too small for a man of his imagined self-worth.
The election of Barack Obama was an unserious act by an unserious America. The idea that he has any qualifications for the job is laughable. If that were all there were too it, we would survive. But the Russians, Chi-coms, and ayatollah's have their own vision of the world, and are seizing the moment to implement it.
When he was senator, Obama was asked whether he believed in sin. "Yes," he replied. Ok, said the questioner, the religion correspondent for the Chicago Sun-Times. "What is sin?" "Being out of alignment with my values," he replied.
There are so many things wrong with that answer.
Great Britain accepted it's decline after World War II, and we saw it's empire slowly dissolve away. They'd done their job though of ensuring that English law, liberties, culture, trade, and the language were implanted abroad. And countries such as India have their stability and economic progress to thank for that. But one important reason why their exports stayed is that America took over where they left off. When America leaves, no one friendly will take over.
The New 1984 in the UK
To get an idea of what's wrong with Britain, consider that the country (ok, "UK") is the home of one third of the world's CCTVs (Closed Circuit TVs. I.E. wired private cameras and monitor TVs). They're used by the police, not so much to prevent crime, which they don't, but to annoy people over things such as discarding litter. Many of the cameras have loudspeakers on them whereby the monitoring officer can shout at the perpetrator to "pick up your trash!"
It gets worse. In 2009, the British Office of the Secretary of State for Children said that 20,000 "problem children" would be put under 24x7 surveillance by CCTVs installed in their homes. The monitoring would be to make sure that they did things like got up on time, left for school on time, did their homework, ate proper meals, and went to bed on time.
From Permanent Revolution to Permanent Liberal Statism
Leon Trotsky spoke about "permanent revolution," but today's left has turned that on it's head. Today it's all about creating a permanent voting bloc to keep the left in power. And it's all done with your tax dollars.
The trick is to get as many people as dependent on government as possible. Not through welfare checks, mind you, that's far too primitive. No, they do it by creating as many government jobs as possible, and ensnaring as many contractors whose businesses depend on government work. The military-industrial complex was an amateurish concoction of yesteryear compared to what the teachers unions alone have put together.
The collapse of the traditional family also plays a large role. The biggest supporters of big government are single moms. They want the free day care, year-round school and all-day kindergarten (day care by another name), on and on. LBJ had no idea his Great Society programs would be so "successful."
Dissolve the People and Elect Another
Elites in Europe and the U.S. have been pushing for more immigration, both legal and illegal (the "wink wink" let's-pretend-we-don't-know-what's-going-on version). In Europe this has led to massive numbers of Muslims who, far from adopting Western ways, are getting the West to adopt to theirs. In the United States, it has resulted in a Hispanic population who take far more out of our system than they put in, and have a tremendous out-of-wedlock birth problem to boot.
The World After America
We are already beginning to see what the world after America will look like. It will be a place where the crazy nations have the run of things, or at least their region, with no effective counter to stop them. Nations will seek their "peace" with Islam. No one will want to upset China, so she will get her way. The result is that the West's sphere of influence will shrink. Tyranny and oppression, not liberty, will be spreading around the world.
Far from there being any sort of "new world order," the world will be chaotic. The poorest nations will have the most powerful militaries, which as often as not will include nuclear weapons. The wealthy nations will be weak by comparison and unable to defend their own territories (especially against incoming missiles), let alone project power anywhere.
Iran will get nuclear weapons, and in time learn to mount on them on long-range missiles. If they do not attack Israel with them, the "realists" will say they have been vindicated and Iran can be "contained" with a (much smaller) American "nuclear umbrella." Problem is, Iran will use it's new power in other ways, such as controlling the supply and price of Gulf oil, insisting that Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Qatar close American bases, and being even more bold in exporting terrorism. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Turkey will begin their own nuclear weapons programs, and Jordan and Syria might too. Iranian missiles will threaten Europe, and Russia will offer "protection," in exchange for long-term contracts on Russian gas.
America will become the new Israel. The Jewish state is besieged from all sides, not only physically but diplomatically as well. People will talk about America the way they talk about Israel today, and their leaders will treat us as they treat Israel today.
Despite what Obama sometimes says, the United States under his presidency is clearly in the process of abandoning Israel. The barbarian nations see this, and conclude that if America abandons Israel she will abandon everyone else as well. And if she will not defend Israel, she may not even defend herself, at least not in any meaningful way.
The United States itself faces breakup. Not formally, and not through a war, but a de facto breakoff, where for example the southwest becomes more an extension of Mexico than a part of the United States.
We will also celebrate a lot less diversity. Already we have the spectacle of Western leaders like Speaker Pelosi and Secretary of State Clinton covering their heads when visiting Muslim countries. It already happens in Europe, so look for it to come to a neighborhood near you. Internationally the Organization of Islamic Conference is pushing for anti-free speech measures, disguised as "resolutions against the defamation of Islam" at the United Nations. So far they have failed, but given current trends they'll eventually succeed.
In the world of political correctness Islam will soon trump homosexuality, feminism, black, and Hispanic as the new official victim group whose grievances are always to be honored and whose motives can never be questioned. Gays and women are finding this out the hard way in Europe.
Steyn's Suggestions
Mark Steyn offers no "solution" in that we may already be too far gone for anything to work. But he does have some ideas, a sort of plan, by which we might be able to reverse the process:
- De-Centralize: Move as much decision-making power and spending to as local as level as possible
- De-Governmentalize: Get the government out of as much as possible
- De-Regulate: Yes we need an EPA, OSHA, and the others, but yes also they are way too powerful and need to be scaled back.
- De-Monopolize: Whether it's education or health care, the government monopoly needs to be broken up.
- De-Complicate: Regulations and thing like the tax code are far too complicated.
- De-Credentialize: It's bad enough that all teachers need to get a government (read "NEA") license, but when hairstylists need to be certified, there's a problem.
- Dis-Entitle: The culture of entitlement must be put to an end.
- De-Normalize: Stop buying into the liberal-statist narrative and of when it's normal to talk about everything from "global warming" to "trillion dollar deficits" (or even any deficit as normal).
The official New Hampshire state motto is "Live Free or Die," but in a way it is, or was, the quintessential American motto. Progressives define "freedom" as "guaranteed government benefits," but as we have seen this is a recipe for disaster. Either we recapture the original meaning of the term, and quickly turn our country around, or our country, and our prosperity, will quickiy come to an end.
My Take
History is full of the rise and fall of empires and nation-states. In the past thousand years alone we have seen the Mongol, Aztec, Inca, Umayyad, Abbasid, Spanish, French, British, Zulu, German, Japanese, Soviet... and those are just the ones I can think of. Many don't exist anymore even as a home country, and those that do are not at all particularly powerful. Rome lasted two thousand years if you count the Eastern Empire, but even that declined and fell. So who's to say that we have to last forever, or that decline and even collapse won't happen in our lifetime?
On the other side, there's something in our nature that we like to imagine a coming Armageddon. Disaster movies have been popular from the 1950s on. If the 19th century saw a spate of Utopian writings, the dystopian has become the archetype since the Great War.
My only real criticism of the book is that at 349 pages (403 including endnotes) it's a bit too long. There were sections where I found myself skipping through paragraphs. Steyn could have made his points with a few less examples and less verbiage.
All in all, this is a must-read book for everyone. There is nothing that says that we can't be the generation that sees an American decline and a return to the nasty and brutish world we had hundreds or a thousand years ago. History and "progress" are not linear. Freedom and liberty, once established, do not always endure.
We in the West in general and America in particular are good at dealing with Pearl Harbor or 9-11 style threats and attacks; we can see them, identify, them, and go get them, and all in a defined timeframe. The decline Steyn describes is harder to get a handle on, especially since as long as the government benefits flow everything seems to be peaches and cream. If we continue along our current trajectory we are headed for a worse future. And it won't hit most people that something is wrong until it's too late. May we wake up long before then.
]]>
