“Death of the West” by Patrick Buchanan. Where are all the kids?

Patrick Buchanan's Book “The death of the West: the extinction of the population and the strengthening of immigration threaten our country and civilization”Can be considered a real bible of the modern conservative movement in both trampist America and right-wing Europe.

It states the biological dying of the white West in connection with the disintegration of the family and the cessation of childbirth. The phenomenon of “cultural war”, which is being conducted against the traditions of Western Christian society by left anti-systemic forces, is characterized and the ideological source of this war, the theory of the “Frankfurt school” of Marxism, is indicated. Lists the main fronts on which the war against America is being waged - the migration of the country, racial relations, historical memory, de-Christianization, the imposition of “minority rights” and frantic feminism, and the path of resistance.

In the book of a remarkable speaker and publicist, there are many vivid quotes, images and aphorisms, and it is practically a model of modern conservative discourse, which problem do not take. It is impossible to deny that most of the problems faced by America threaten Russia to one degree or another. Some - directly, as migration, others - by means of America infected by them, as the violence of feminism and LGBT. Therefore, familiarity with this book for any thinking person is simply a must. For the most lazy, I will make a cycle of posts in which, with my comments, I will outline the main ideas of this work.

Richard Nixon and Patrick Buchanan

Buchanan largely determined the ideological face of the US Republican Party in 1970-80-ies, when he was an adviser to Presidents Nixon, Ford and Reagan. Then he was pushed aside by the neoconvors who had seized power in the party, who did not care about American values ​​and who were interested only in America’s imperial power.

During this period, “Pat” began to be considered “paleoconservative. He twice tried to run for the presidency of the US Republican Party - in 1992 and 1996 year, and for the second time made the liberal elites pretty nervous, winning the primaries in New Hampshire, and caucuses in Alaska and Louisiana, but then he got only Michigan, - faceless Robert Dole went to the polls, predictably losing to Clinton.

Ronald Reagan and Patrick Buchanan

After that, Buchanan was squeezed out of the Republican Party, pushed aside by the side of American politics, and seemed like a lot of crazy old men doing indecent things (for example, criticizing Israel, that if the US is allowed, then only leftists). However, in this capacity, he remained the most popular columnist, writer, co-founder of the magazine “The American Conservarive”.

However, the arrival of a populist wave led by Donald Trump suddenly changed everything. The ideas and prophecies of Pat have become the new republican mainstream.

There is nothing that Trump has promised to America and the world on the day of inauguration and that after a year and a half he began to perform, it seems, that would not have been somehow indicated in the books of Buchanan. There is a painful migration issue, and the protection of simple America as opposed to the globalist elites, and the rejection of aggressive imperial intervention throughout the world, and the rupture of liberal-globalist trade partnerships, and exit from globalist international organizations, and generally betting on the “right” in Western block in the absence of any fear of trolling the liberals.

It is logical that Buchanan has become a fairly consistent trampist and tries to give advice to the new administration, in particular, in the matter of the so-called “Russian trace” investigated by Special Prosecutor Muller. Obviously, for the ideas and for Buchanan himself, the hour of triumph has arrived. At the same time, however, the ideologist of the Old Conservatives does not hesitate to criticize Trump every time he follows the true path, in particular, he allows the generals to pursue a hegemonic-aggressive policy common for the USA.

Buchanan’s most striking feature as an American ideologue is his consistent isolationism and anti-imperialism. He is a solid Western civilization nationalist who does not accept wars like the NATO aggression against Yugoslavia in 1999. Buchanan wants the West to have good health and long life not to terrorize everyone else, but to bring himself to live in prosperity and, following his tradition, bring something good to the world.

The actual conclusions from the Buchanan anti-imperialism are precisely those that would allow the United States to find one hundred percent mutual understanding with Russia. Yes, and the very emotional assessment of the Clinton Kosovo war to us is more than understandable.

“Resist any expansion of NATO. Once this unit was a military alliance of free states, designed to protect Western Europe from the Stalinist threat, but today NATO has become a neo-imperialist bloc, which has assumed the right to attack, in the name of democracy and human rights, at small states like Serbia.

The founding fathers would be ashamed of the actions that Clinton and Allbright allowed themselves against the Serbs. This state did not attack the USA, did not threaten us in any way, did not try to drag it into military rivalry. Nevertheless, we bombarded Serbian cities, forcing the Serbs to recall the Nazi occupation, only because they refused to ensure freedom of movement on their territory to the separatists from Kosovo.

Support the complete withdrawal of US ground forces from Europe and Asia and demand a review of all the agreements of the Cold War era that ended ten years ago. Our allies, in particular South Korea, must spend their own money and ensure the protection of their territorial integrity on their own.

All the great empires of the last century disappeared for a very simple reason - they had too much territory and allowed themselves to be involved in wars that did not affect their national interests. Let's learn from history! ”(Ch. 10)

Let us hope that Trump’s negotiations with Putin will be held precisely in Buchanan’s logic, and the two powers will be able to achieve genuine mutual understanding, all the more so as Buchanan acts as a consistent opponent of the United States ’pushing with Russia on the Crimean issue.

“What are the important American interests in Crimea? They are not. From the time of Catherine the Great to Khrushchev, the peninsula belonged to Russia. The population of Crimea is 60 percent Russians. If Crimea votes for secession, by what moral right can we deny him that when the 78 days themselves bombed Serbia, fighting for the secession of Kosovo? ”- asked Buchanan in 2014 year.

And that's what he писал in the summer of 2017 on the eve of the previous meetings between Putin and Trump.

Are we unable to understand why the Russian people, who considered us friends in the early nineties, no longer think so, and why Putin, the first nationalist of Russia, has an 80-percent public support rating on the issue of protecting the interests of his own country?

Do we really lack crises and quarrels? We have few of the conflicts in which we are already involved? As one Buddhist dictum says, "do not live in the past ... try to concentrate your mind on the present moment."

Putin is not going to return the Crimea to Ukraine. Moreover, the annexation of the Crimea became his most popular act for the entire long period of his tenure as president of Russia.

But let's move on from the current foreign policy views of Buchanan to the political philosophy and ideology that he proclaims in his book and which, in my opinion, is equally important for the United States, for Europe and for Russia.

Buchanan begins by pointing out that the West is dying. Not in the complex metaphorical philosophical sense in which he spoke about “The Decline of the West” Oswald Spengler, but in the most direct, biological sense. The population of the West is declining and aging. No increase in life expectancy can compensate for the monstrously low birth rate. White Europeans have become an endangered species.

Hedonism as the highest life value, excluding efforts to raise children, the dying out of family needs, the increase in the number of abortions and the spread of contraception, led to children became unwelcome guests in the homes of white old people - instead of them in the neighboring streets, and even in the same houses migrants from the Third World were registered.

“In just one generation, we have moved from a society in which families with eight or even twelve children were the norm, to a society in which childless couples or couples with one child who are not too in a hurry to start the second have become the norm,” notes one Spanish sociologist.

Buchanan pays attention to the popular abbreviation DINK (Double Income, No Kids) - “double income, no children”, denoting couples who live together to have twice as much money and spend it solely on themselves.

“Why do I refuse to have children? I want to get enough sleep. I read a lot, but in order to take books, you need to get enough sleep, ”says Gabriella Tannhäuser, thirty-four years old, a Berlin businessman living in a civil marriage.

A general consolation on the general background is a section on the demography of Russia, which the American conservative undoubtedly refers to the West.

“The birth rate in Russia dropped to 1,17 - lower than in Italy. The population has declined to 145 million people, a forecast for 2016 a year gives a figure of 123 million people ” - wrote Buchanan in 2002 year. The forecast for 2016 has not been justified since the implementation of the demographic program began with 2006, which allowed the population to be maintained and the birth rate to be increased to 1,5 children per woman. However, such a birth rate threatens us in the medium term with the contraction of up to 100 millions.

In other words, Buchanan states the death of the West not in the cultural, not in the philosophical, but in the most concrete biological and political sense of the word.

“The death of the West is not a prediction, not a description of what may happen in some future; This is a diagnosis, a statement of what is happening at the moment. The nations of the "first world" are dying out. They were in a deep crisis - not because something happened to the third world, but because something did not happen to themselves, in their own homes. The birth rate in Western countries has been declining over the years ... Not a single European nation is able to provide an adequate level of reproduction. And the farther, the more pronounced the decline in the birth rate becomes, in many European countries the elderly die faster than babies are born. There is no sign of a change in the situation for the better: the number of Europeans is declining in absolute terms.

So we are not talking about prophecy, not about fortune-telling on the coffee grounds, but about mathematics. The greater the height and the longer the fall, the harder it is to get out of the peak. The “First World” urgently needs to reverse the situation, otherwise the Third World, which is five times larger than its rival today, will overcome it, and by the year 2050 already tenfold! The opportunity to get out of the peak decreases every year. Not a hint of an increase in the birth rate, on the contrary, more and more Western women refuse to have children "for ideological reasons."

“Where did these children go?” Asked Buchanan in the second chapter. And he answers - the Western nations themselves abolished their future, refusing to reproduce for ideological reasons, using the means of modern medicine for suicide.

In 1968, Pope Paul VI (I recall that Buchanan is a Catholic traditionalist) in his encyclical "Humanae Vitae" predicted four consequences of the use of contraceptives by mankind: 1) widespread infidelity and a general decline of morality; 2) the loss by the woman of the status of a “respected and beloved girlfriend” of a man and her transformation into a “tool of carnal pleasure”; 3) awarding “dangerous weapons to politicians who will not pay attention to moral considerations”; 4) attitude to men and women as objects, and to unborn children - “as a disease”, as a result of which there will be a general dehumanization of humanity. Obviously, today all 4 predictions have come true. Especially concrete was the attitude towards children as a disease:

“Once historians call birth control pills pills that destroyed America. These pills went on sale in 1960 year. Three years later, 6 percent of Americans used the invention of Dr. Roca; by the year 1970, “on the tablets” sat 43 percent. ”

However, after the pills came abortion.

“By 1966, 6000 abortions were officially done every year in the country. By 1970, this number had grown to 200 000, since the governors of the states of New York and California, John Rockefeller and Ronald Reagan, respectively, had signed very liberal abortion laws. By the 1973 in the country, 600 000 abortions were done annually. In the same year, the Supreme Court, to which three of the four opponents of President Nixon appealed, declared that the right of a woman to an abortion was enshrined in the constitution. Over the next ten years, the number of abortions increased to 1,5 million per year; moreover, abortions have taken away the superiority of tonsillectomy as the most common surgical operation in America. From the moment Judge Blackman made his historic decision, 40 has made millions of abortions in the United States. Thirty percent of all pregnancies currently end on the surgical table. ”

“Pills” opened the door for abortions, the number of which steadily continued to grow in the United States until 1990, and then began to decline due to the success of the so-called. “Family planning”. The number of abortions is also declining in Russia, alas, also not from concern for life and demography, but for the same medical reasons. However, to this day, Russia, with half the population, is ahead of the United States in the absolute number of abortions - in 2014, we had 930 thousands of abortions, and in the USA - 652 thousands. Since then, the number of abortions has decreased both in us and the Americans. but it didn’t improve demography, as an alternative to abortion is, alas, not childbirth, but improved contraception. Children are killed not by abortion as a medical procedure, and not by the desire of mothers to contact motherhood, but by fathers with paternity.

From 1945 to 1965, the “golden age of family life” lasted a year in America - non-working housewives, conservative family morality, large families, and then blew away like the wind. The generation of “baby boomers” considered the family and children the most uninteresting thing in the world, it wanted to make love and political protests, and not war and not raising children.

Buchanan connects this moral decline with the corrupting influence that television had on this generation.

“Parents who survived the Depression and the war continued to believe that“ their children should not experience anything like that. ” Therefore, children of the baby boomer generation were brought up differently: they spent almost as much time in front of the TV as at school. By the middle of 1950, television successfully fought with parents for children's attention, acted as a witty and far from boring ally of adolescents in the age-old conflict of fathers and children - and as a refuge in which it was possible to hide from parental claims. The guys vividly absorbed information from television screens, especially advertising.

Common was the upbringing, cultivated by an abundance of freethinking - and an example of television: in childhood they all had a television nanny, with whom it was much more fun than with their parents. And this nanny, hiding under the guise of a television receiver, always has one answer to any requests: “If you want, take it!”

In fact, American families of this era have fallen into the trap of household appliances. Women perceived TV as another useful device that will help them in the household chores: a vacuum cleaner removes dirt, a washing machine copes with linen, gas and an electric stove help to cook, and a TV ... takes children so that they don’t get confused delicious cake. That TV not only entertains children, but also pumps them with ideas and behavioral attitudes, it became clear too late, and many have not realized to this day.

However, the demographic collapse had deeper demographic reasons that began to ripen earlier, from the moment when the economic model “Male-worker, wife-housewife, many children” began to decline.

“In the 1830s, on the eve of the American industrial revolution, the trade union of Philadelphia warned its members about the“ greed of the capitalists ”:“ Oppose the recruitment of your women to work with all the means at your disposal and all your strength! We should receive a decent reward for our work in order to support our wives, daughters and other domestic ... Capitalists want to make every man, woman and child work; We will not give in to their tricks and will not allow them to take our families away from us! ”

In 1848, the working newspaper “Ten Hour Lawyer” published the following: “We hope that the day is not far off when a man can support his wife and family without forcing a woman to work in inhuman conditions at the cotton spinning mill” ... According to Alan Karlson, the author of the study “ Family in America ", not so long ago in the United States there was a tacit agreement under which a worker was supposed to receive a kind of" family rent "that allowed him to support his wife and children. A similar practice was considered one of the foundations of a safe life. society. This idea received the blessing of the Vatican in the pope of Pope Leo the Thirteenth, entitled "Rerum Novarum" (1891).

“For a person from 2000, the most surprising thing about this system would be that it was accepted and supported by the general public. In opinion polls, most Americans (over 85 percent), both men and women, agreed that men should earn money for the whole family, and that women should work except for their own pleasure. Such a division of responsibilities was considered the height of justice. ”

The system ceased to exist in the 1960-ies, when feminists managed to add to the Civil Rights Act (1964), which protected the rights of African Americans, a number of provisions on the equality of men and women, including the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of sex. This provision has turned the Equal Opportunities Commission (EECC) into an instrument against “family rent”. Announcements of hiring men were found to be discriminatory and, as a result, illegal. The “ethical contract” has been replaced by gender equality. Individual rights are now more important than family requirements. Women's salaries have risen sharply, and as women mastered professions that were previously considered purely masculine — went into medicine, law, journalism, academic science, management, business — families began to disintegrate.

Between 1973 and 1996 for years, says Dr. Carlson, "the real average income of men over fifteen full-time children has decreased by 24 percent, from 37200 to 30000 dollars." Marching under the banner of feminism — equal pay for equal work, equal pay for comparable jobs — women entered into a direct contest with men.

In purely economic logic, Buchanan shows how the economic alignment of women and men led to the complete elimination of children. With the release of women in the male professions, competition is increasing and male incomes are falling. That is, a man can no longer contain a disabled wife with children and a woman must enter the labor market. At the same time, in order to participate in competition, a woman should not focus on children - not to give birth, to give birth to less, to give birth later. Consequently, such a career-oriented woman loses any intelligible motivation for marriage. As well as a man loses all motivation to marry such women. Well, why actually limit yourself to one if the children are not supposed, and the housekeeper will be cheaper?

In fact, the only justified way out of the situation will ultimately be a single father who has given birth to a child for himself. Everything seems to go to this ...

Along with the economic shock, Buchanan draws attention to the psychological trap into which the West was caught with the theory of a “population bomb”. Serious scientists argued that uncontrolled population growth will soon exhaust the resources of the planet and it is desirable for people to immediately stop breeding, and it is better to shrink.

The largest increase in the population of 60 for years has been the increase in the population of Asia and Africa, and the poorest. But is it fair to demand or force not to reproduce the poor and the colored ones, leaving this right to be rich and white? Of course not. Therefore, the entire anti-population program was aimed at developed countries, especially since only in them the population was responsible and conscious enough to take its principles into service and follow them.

As a result, the propaganda of the theory of population bombs had one result - a reduction in the white population of developed countries, an even greater increase in population in the Third World countries and, according to the principle of communicating vessels, the beginning of migration expansion to Europe and America.

Finally, the theory and ideology of feminism turned out to be the most violent enemy of the family.

Amazingly, in the 19th century women’s advocates were not for, but strongly against abortion. It is they who have achieved the legal criminalization of abortion as a procedure that cripples women for the sake of man’s lust and passions.

Modern feminism turned out to be completely different, it focuses on the destruction of marriage, the destruction of the model of a housewife, on the rejection of childbirth.

“In 1970, Robin Morgan called marriage“ a likeness of slavery. We will not be able to eliminate the inequality between a man and a woman until we destroy the marriage. ” In the same year, Miss Morgan released under her editors a collection of “Women - Sisters”, where, in particular, the article by Valerie Solans, President of the Society for Men’s Daring Men, was published: “Today it is technically possible to conceive without the help of males ... just as it is possible to give birth females. We must get down to business immediately. The male is a mistake of nature, biological focus. The male turns this world into a bunch of crap. " From these words it is clear how severe the lady is Miss Solans; she confirmed the seriousness of her intentions by attempting to shoot Andy Warhol. ”

Left: Valerie Solans. Right: Andy Warhol after Solans attack

In the July World Review magazine, February 2000, Sheila Cronin, in an article entitled “Now: in Defense of Women's Dignity,” said:

“Since marriage for a woman is a form of slavery, it is obvious that the women's movement should focus on attacking this institution. Freedom for women not to win as long as marriage exists. ”

The consequences of this sermon against marriage and the family were quite obvious. for the first time in American history, only one out of every four houses or apartments has a full (father, mother, child) family, and single Americans now make up 26 percent of the country's population.

The place of marriage and children took political homosexuality. From simple tolerance to this phenomenon, in the eyes of one generation, American society turned to aggressive imposition.

Hillary Clinton was the first spouse of US presidents to take part in a gay parade in New York. And what - did the New York Times, the respectable "old lady from Forty Third Street," ask myself, is it a question of whether the first lady should participate in the parade along with the plein-air queens and men in chains? Nothing like this! The Times correspondent Richard Burke told his colleagues about the reception in honor of the tenth anniversary of the National Association of Non-Traditional Journalists' Orientation: "Three quarters of people who decided to put our newspaper on the front page turned out to be pronounced homosexuals."

Nine months after participating in the gay parade, Mrs. Clinton refused to go to New York on St. Patrick's Day, which was once considered a duty for all politicians in the city without exception. The ancient order of the Iberians - a group of Catholics that organizes the parade - prohibited the Irish gays and lesbians from participating in it in an organized manner; therefore, Mrs. Clinton chose not to come, much less that the fighters for gay rights have already branded her for participating in the parade in honor of St. Patrick in 2000 year.

Apparently, old America is dead. There was a revolution in it. And since America has a key impact on the world — both with its aircraft carriers, with its dollar, and with its cinema, it is likely that we will have to control that the world revolution has occurred.

“America, in which many of us have grown up, has vanished forever. The cultural revolution has captured the minds of millions, no longer in the power of politicians to reverse it, even gather the courage to try. The nation was split in half. The party of Catholics belonging to the working class, almost 100 percent consists of fighters for the rights of gays. The party of the moral majority and Christian unity threw out the white flag, giving way to the care of the younger generation to the Ministry of Education, ”states Buchanan.

But what kind of revolution is it, who planned it, how did it happen, and what methods did revolutionaries use? This will be a continuation of this series of posts.

If you find it important that we publish such material, support the authors

Yegor Kholmogorov

Vespa on social networks

Materials that you will not find on the site