The America of the next generation will be completely unrecognizable from that of the current one, and that of the previous one. The same goes for Europe. Many of the distinctive qualities that make the West different will be diminished or enveloped by the surrounding factions looking for pieces of the former territories. To the extent that any of it survives will be the extent to which the people separate themselves out and survive within separate countries.
In some ways, we can also see this as an unforeseen consequence of technological progress, particularly in the field of weapons. The West kept climbing until it developed weapons which were so powerful that no leader wanted to risk using them. The typical correction mechanism for misgovernment is war — both civil and international, in the same way that bankruptcy clears out uneconomic firms from the marketplace. With war between Western states becoming mostly unfeasible, it became possible for thoroughly insane governments to take over enormous portions of the globe, with their growth only being checked in a limited fashion by economic failure.
In reflection, a good retort to the anti-war-slogan-question “War, what is it good for?” is “putting tyrannical governments into smoke.”
The growth in the market economy also fueled growth of bureaucratic states to levels which would have been impossible in leaner times.
In a spasmodic mixture of envy and self-loathing, the West is tearing itself down, replacing it with something that few have much of a motivation to sustain and grow. Even the people charged with paying the enormous social-security-and-medical-care bills show little love for the ‘racist’ and ‘bigoted’ societies that they are inheriting, and I really can’t blame them for that.
There is an alternative, put forth by Lawrence Auster (whom I’ve been linking to often over the last couple weeks), which may or may not prove feasible:
If genuine reforms are thought to be impossible because of opposition by minority groups, I would like the reader to consider how much more difficult all political decisions are going to be in the future when every issue will have to pass a minefield of ethnic and racial blocs. That is why it is vital that we act now while there is still time—if there is still time.
Action requires that the great mass of Americans, whatever their color, who care for this civilization and want it to be preserved, make their voices heard in a bloc, in the same way that highly motivated minority groups act when their interests are at stake.
It is not enough merely to express concerns about immigration. People are doing that all the time, and it accomplishes little in the way of waking the nation up from its hypnotic passivity on this issue. On the contrary, the mere venting of anxieties and resentments only strengthens the open-borders orthodoxy by enabling it to dismiss all those who are concerned about immigration as xenophobes. It is time, rather, for the American people to legitimize the idea of meaningful immigration reform and then to enact fair and substantive changes in the law along the lines I have suggested here. All that is lacking, as the result of a quarter-century of orchestrated guilt, is the conviction that it is morally right—and the will to do it. In any case, something must be done, and soon. The disdain felt by many Americans today for the 1920s nativists, for restricting immigration too tightly, will be nothing compared with the curses that future generations of Americans, mired in a divided and decaying society, will pile on our heads for erring too far in the opposite direction.The immigration issue is more important than smaller political issues because a completely foreign people will create a completely foreign nation — one more similar to that of the third world than the country which we inherited.