- The American Conservative - http://www.theamericanconservative.com -

The Eternal Lure of Nationalism

In a surprise overtime victory in the finals of the Olympics men’s hockey tournament, Russia defeated Germany 4-3.

The Russians were not permitted to have their national anthem played or flag raised due to a past doping scandal. So the team ignored the prohibition and sang out the Russian anthem over the sounds of the Olympic anthem.

One recalls the scene in Casablanca when French patrons of Rick’s saloon stood and loudly sang “La Marseillaise” to drown out the “Die Wacht am Rhein” being sung by a table of German officers.

When the unified North-South Korean Olympic team entered the stadium, Vice President Mike Pence remained seated and silent. But tens of thousands of Koreans stood and cheered.

change_me

America may provide a defensive shield for the South, but Koreans on both sides of the DMZ see themselves as one people. And—no fool—Kim Jong-un is exploiting the deep tribal ties he knows are there.

Watching the Russians defiantly belt out their anthem, one recalls also the 1968 summer Olympics in Mexico City where sprinters Tommie Smith and John Carlos stood on the podium, black-gloved fists thrust skyward in a Black Power salute, asserting their separate racial identity.

Western elites may deplore the return of nationalism. But they had best not dismiss it, for assertions of national and tribal identity appear to be what the future is going to be all about.

Some attendees at the CPAC conclave last week were appalled that Britain’s Nigel Farage and France’s Marion Le Pen were present.

But Farage was the man most responsible for Brexit, the historic British decision to leave the EU. Le Pen is perhaps the most popular figure in a National Front party that secured 35 percent of the vote in the runoff election ultimately won by President Emmanuel Macron.

And the most unifying stand of the NF appears to be “Let France be France!” The French people do not want their country invaded by unassimilable millions of migrants from Africa and the Islamic world.

They want France to remain what she has been. Is this wrong?

Is preservation of one’s country, the national family one grew up in, not conservative?

In Hungary and Poland, ethnonationalism, the belief that nation-states are created and best suited to protect and defend a separate and unique people with their separate and unique histories and cultures is already ascendant.

Globalists may see the UN, EU, NAFTA, and TPP as stepping stones to a “universal nation” of all races, tribes, cultures, and creeds. But growing numbers in every country, on every continent, reject this vision. And they are seeking to restore what their parents and grandparents had, a nation-state that is all their own.

Nationalists like Farage, who seek to pull their countries out of socialist superstates like the EU, and peoples seeking to secede and set up new nations like Scotland, Catalonia, Corsica, and Veneto today (and Quebec yesterday), are no more anti-conservative than the American patriots of Lexington and Concord who also wanted a country of their own.

Why are European peoples who wish to halt mass migration from across the Med, to preserve who and what they are, decried as racists?

Did not the peoples of African and Middle Eastern countries half a century ago expel the European settlers who helped to build those nations?

Looking back over this 21st century, the transnational elite that envisions the endless erosion of national sovereignty and the coming of a new world order of open borders, free trade, and global custody of mankind’s destiny, has triggered a counter-revolution.

Does anyone think Angela Merkel is the future?

Consider the largest countries on earth. In China, ethnonationalism, not the ruling Communist Party, unites and inspires 1.4 billion people to try to displace the Americans as the world’s superpower.

Nationalism sustains Vladimir Putin. Nationalism and its unique identity as a Hindu nation unites and powers India.

Here, today, it is “America First” nationalism.

Indeed, now that George W. Bush’s crusade for democracy has ended up like Peter the Hermit’s Children’s Crusade, what is the vision? What is the historic goal our elites offer to inspire and enlist our people?

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever. To find out more about Patrick Buchanan and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators website at www.creators.com.

42 Comments (Open | Close)

42 Comments To "The Eternal Lure of Nationalism"

#1 Comment By romegas On February 27, 2018 @ 2:57 am

“But Farage was the man most responsible for Brexit”.

This is incorrect, had it not been for the gaffes of Farage and that buffoon Boris Johnson, the vote for Brexit would have been a landslide. Whatever he thinks of himself Farage was not an asset but a liability in the campaign.

#2 Comment By Alex Cairns On February 27, 2018 @ 6:04 am

I agree with romegas. Farage pushed the EU debate (such as it was) into unpleasant territory, trying to whip up fear of immigrants to the UK. This appealed to some, but certainly not all. There was, and is, a positive case for the UK outside the EU, but Farage was not one of its proponents. I do think he made it more difficult for people to vote leave as they did not want to be associated with that point of view; he made it easier for the opposition to call leave voters xenophobes and rascists.

He played a part, certainly, but I think history will judge his contribution as more minor, more of a man who was fortunate enough to be in the right place at the right time as the UK woke up to what the EU had become, and is becoming.

It is fascinating to see Farage appear on US television: he gets much more respect there than he gets here in the UK, or that he deserves. You are welcome to him!

#3 Comment By John S On February 27, 2018 @ 6:26 am

If Mr. Buchanan were truly interested in nationalism as a force to be reckoned with, Ukraine would be on his list. I wonder why it’s not.

#4 Comment By Kam Phlodius On February 27, 2018 @ 6:28 am

Alex Cairns and romegas are being dishonest. Farage is a brilliant extemporaneous speaker, with great self-discipline. American politics has no equal. And American politics has no counterpart to the great one, Marion Marechal-Le Pen.

Both of these super-talented, appealing Europeans pose a danger to the members of the American ruling class, who, seething with anger in their luxurious swamps, are unable to recover from the humiliation of Trump’s election. How dare those smelly hillbillies not elect who we told them to! they repeat over and over…

There is trouble ahead. The swamp monsters want blood.

#5 Comment By The Scientist 880 On February 27, 2018 @ 7:28 am

“Watching the Russians defiantly belt out their anthem, one recalls also the 1968 summer Olympics in Mexico City where sprinters Tommie Smith and John Carlos stood on the podium, black-gloved fists thrust skyward in a Black Power salute, asserting their separate racial identity.”

That isn’t what they were doing at all. They were protesting racism is America. You can’t expect Pat to be a straight shooter here though.

#6 Comment By Eddie Mack On February 27, 2018 @ 8:32 am

“Did not the peoples of African and Middle Eastern countries half a century ago expel the European settlers who helped to build those nations?”

By “build” do you mean conquer? Half the problems in the Middle East are because Western countries divided the region amongst themselves along arbitrary lines.

Destabilize and move in. Cause problems and sell the solutions, blame the populace when it doesn’t work, this is the legacy of the West.

#7 Comment By Liam On February 27, 2018 @ 8:53 am

George Orwell: “Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism.”

But it too often is.

#8 Comment By Alex Cairns On February 27, 2018 @ 9:16 am

Hi Kam Phlodius, I am surprised you think I am
‘dishonest’. Disagree with me by all means but my view on Mr Farage is honestly held and is based on my perception of his behaviour during our EU referendum campaign and since.

I do not deny he has some skill and has managed to carve a niche for himself as a commentator. I have acknowledged that he played a part. I do think however, that the perception many have that he was chiefly responsible for Brexit is an exagerrated one. He was one voice among many, though admittedly his was a louder and more confrontational voice than most. It is overly simplistic to believe that one man galvanised the masses etc. The only one who believes that may be Mr Farage himself! The narrow vote to leave the EU had many roots.

Enjoy his rhetoric if you like, but I think you give him more credit for Brexit than he deserves.

#9 Comment By Room 237 On February 27, 2018 @ 9:42 am

The only surprise in the game was that it went to overtime. Most people (myself included) figured the Russians would win easily.

#10 Comment By Hector_St_Clare On February 27, 2018 @ 9:44 am

I agree with romegas. Farage pushed the EU debate (such as it was) into unpleasant territory, trying to whip up fear of immigrants to the UK. This appealed to some, but certainly not all.

Farage himself might be a liability (you’re probably correct about that), but immigration certainly wasn’t. Drastic immigration restrictionism, in England, is (slightly) more popular than Brexit was. For that matter, immigration restrictionism is more popular in France than the FN is, more popular in Poland than Law and Justice is, more popular in Denmark than the DF is, and in general more popular all over Europe than any of the ethnic nationalist parties individually. Immigration restrictionism is almost entirely the reason why parties like the DF, the National Front, the Freedom Party, Okamura’s party, and so on are as popular as they are, and if migration issues were put to a referendum they’d win easily in every European country. (For the record, as someone quite sympathetic to ethnically based polities and tribal identities in principle, I don’t consider that a bad thing).

I remember speaking to a girl who voted Remain when I was in England last fall, and even she agreed with tough migration restrictions (she voted remain b/c she liked the perks of visa free travel and such).

The United States and Canada are different of course: unlike in Europe, tough migration policies are a minority taste here, although that minority is quite large and favoured by Electoral College demography.

#11 Comment By Michael Kenny On February 27, 2018 @ 10:03 am

The usual anti-EU propaganda which we have come to associate with Mr Buchanan over many years. Of course, one might ask why Americans who claim not to be “globalists” pay so much attention to how we in Europe run our countries. The vast majority of ordinary Americans don’t care a hoot what we do in Europe for the obvious, common sense reason that they (correctly) don’t see how that affects them, one way or the other. The common sense of the common people! Logically also, one would expect the “non-interventionist” camp in the US to want to see a strong EU, even a European federal state, including the European heartland of the Russian Federation, so that the US could disengage from Europe’s defence. In addition, the supporters of “white nationalism” in the US postulate that all white people constitute a single ethnic group. Logically, therefore, they must also postulate that all white Europeans (and we are, after all, the original whites) constitute a single ethnic group and that, therefore, in accordance with the normal principles of nationalism, we should come together to form a single political entity, just as our American “cousins” gave done. However, the very same people who preach “anti-globalism”, “non-intervention” and “white nationalism” in the US also rail and rant against the EU! On the other hand, if you postulate that all the anti-EU ranting is just a propaganda scam on the part of people who actually believe in US global hegemony and see the EU as a threat to that hegemony, then, and only then, does the whole thing make sense.

#12 Comment By john On February 27, 2018 @ 10:05 am

Didn’t nationalism bring us some great big wars? What a great idea to go there again.

#13 Comment By K-Dog-One On February 27, 2018 @ 10:12 am

@john

“Didn’t nationalism bring us some great big wars? What a great idea to go there again.”

And internationalism *hasn’t* brought us some great big wars?

#14 Comment By Josh DeCuir On February 27, 2018 @ 10:22 am

I thought the criticisms from Tucker Carlson about the “elites” were ridiculous enough coming from someone ensconced in a multimillion dollar house in Georgetown & with a national TV show.

This is even more ridiculous. Pat Buchannan has lived in Washington DC nearly his entire life, holding senior positions in government, appearing on national television shows, & attending untold numbers of “Georgetown cocktail parties.” Mr. Buchannan: you ARE an elite. So as my Southern grandmother would say: remember when you’re pointing your finger in criticism at someone else, there are 4 pointing back at you!

This publication is becoming a laughingstock.

#15 Comment By Annette On February 27, 2018 @ 11:13 am

“But Farage was the man most responsible for Brexit”.

This is correct, but not in the way that most people will read it. Firstly, Farage built UKIP from a very low baseline to be a formidable force in European elections, however thanks to the first-past-the-post system in UK elections, UKIP had been unable to replicate this success on the national stage. In European elections, proportional representation allows more fringe parties to break through to the mainstream. In the UK, the public tends to choose between parties that won or came close to winning in the previous election. However, while UKIP was not getting close to winning UK constituencies, Conservative Party analysts were predicting that enough UKIP voters were ‘defecting’ to weaken the Conservatives’ chances of winning key marginals.

In order to head this threat off, Cameron included the offer of a referendum in the Conservative Manifesto. I think there is a subtlety in this decision that escapes us. It was a smudge, a compromise sort of rouse aimed more at shoring up his base and keeping his party together. I don’t really think he ever expected to have to keep it: I remember seeing odds of greater than 15:1 that the Conservatives would win an absolute majority. But also, I don’t think that he thought that there was the remotest possibility of a referendum being lost: the marshalled armies of the major political parties, the totally partial BBC, and the globalist overlords would never allow it after all. But more than that, I think there was still a little of the old Thatcherite sceptic in Cameron. He is not the sold out pro-European sycophant that some of the politicians are. Not quite.

The die were therefore cast. Farage’s influence was in making the impossible, improbable. But on 23 June 2016 the improbable suddenly became conceivable, if not quite inevitable. Soros and his puppets still contrive to force a freed lion back into a globalist cage. Permanent vigilance and courage to stand alone are as ever the only option for freedom-loving peoples across the world.

#16 Comment By john On February 27, 2018 @ 11:19 am

Internationalism has brought us a lot of small wars. Statistically speaking a human today is far less likely to die in war than a human of 100 years ago.

#17 Comment By Chris in Appalachia On February 27, 2018 @ 11:32 am

Josh DeCuir, are you at all aware of the hardships the elite have hurled at Mr. Buchanan for the firm stances he has taken over the last 25 years? Were you there when MSNBC fired him? Or the insults he faced when running for president, or when he publishes inconvenient and unpleasant truths? Pat may have been at some DC cocktail parties, but he has stood his ground for what he believes, even when it has been uncomfortable for him. To lump him in with the Bushes, Clintons, Neoncons, and think tank crowds is inappropriate.

#18 Comment By Lenny On February 27, 2018 @ 11:37 am

Why do “America first” crowd feel compelled to defend Russian autocracy and its continuous attacks on Western Democracies , just like ours?
Le Pen had to borrow money from Russian banks ( I wonder what she offered for collateral) to run her campaign and the “Nationalists” in America think this is a cause for celebration?
So what did Trump offer in return for Russian meddling in our Democracy?
What a bunch of traitors. Where is the love for America that you profess? This is akin with wanting America to stand on the sidelines while Hitler rolled over Europe and enslaved its population. But I forgot that Mr. Buchanan thought that was OK as well

#19 Comment By M. Orban On February 27, 2018 @ 12:19 pm

“Didn’t nationalism bring us some great big wars? What a great idea to go there again. ”

This time it will be different. Or will it?

#20 Comment By Will Harrington On February 27, 2018 @ 1:28 pm

The Scientist 880. I hate to tell you, but you are wrong. The black power salute was not merely a protest against racism. It was a symbol of a black nationalist movement known as the Black Panthers (a name postdating the great Stan Lee and Jack Kirby’s introduction of the super hero of the same name.. There methods and goals were not merely about protesting racism. Martin Luther King Jr. was not a Black Panther and he is the exemplar of protest. The Black Panthers had a ten point program and advocated armed resistance.
We want freedom. We want power to determine the destiny of our Black Community.
We want full employment for our people.
We want an end to the robbery by the Capitalists of our Black Community.
We want decent housing, fit for shelter of human beings.
We want education for our people that exposes the true nature of this decadent American society. We want education that teaches us our true history and our role in the present day society.
We want all Black men to be exempt from military service.
We want an immediate end to POLICE BRUTALITY and MURDER of Black people.
We want freedom for all Black men held in federal, state, county and city prisons and jails.
We want all Black people when brought to trial to be tried in court by a jury of their peer group or people from their Black Communities, as defined by the Constitution of the United States.
We want land, bread, housing, education, clothing, justice and peace.

Over time, the Black Panthers embraced more than just Black Nationalism (internationalism and Marxism), but that is certainly where they started. I think you are being disingenuous of the meaning behind the black power salute for the sake of scoring a point. Of course, a poor education (history is barely taught anymore) could be the explanation. The Black panthers probably only get a paragraph in most history text books and they probably have to share that paragraph with Malcolm X.

#21 Comment By Hector_St_Clare On February 27, 2018 @ 2:35 pm

We want freedom. We want power to determine the destiny of our Black Community.
We want full employment for our people.
We want an end to the robbery by the Capitalists of our Black Community.
We want decent housing, fit for shelter of human beings.
We want education for our people that exposes the true nature of this decadent American society. We want education that teaches us our true history and our role in the present day society.
We want all Black men to be exempt from military service.
We want an immediate end to POLICE BRUTALITY and MURDER of Black people.
We want freedom for all Black men held in federal, state, county and city prisons and jails.
We want all Black people when brought to trial to be tried in court by a jury of their peer group or people from their Black Communities, as defined by the Constitution of the United States.
We want land, bread, housing, education, clothing, justice and peace.

None of that is “Black Nationalist” in any way, shape or form, and most of it is anodyne proposals that would go over well within the Democratic Party. You’re confusing the Black Panthers with the Nation of Islam.

#22 Comment By Hector_St_Clare On February 27, 2018 @ 2:43 pm

Didn’t nationalism bring us some great big wars?

Um, no, not really. It’s only possible to maintain what you said above by conflating two very different things under the label ‘nationalism’. There’s expansionary nationalism, the kind that wants to defend the interests of the tribe by conquering and incorporating other tribe, and then there’s exclusionary nationalism, that wants to defend the interests of the tribe by walling itself off from other tribes, drawing lines of separation, etc.. These two things are separate phenomena united only by the fact that they both are concerned with the interests of the ethnic nation-state. They can go together (the Nazis were famously interested in both eliminating ethnic minorities and in territorial expansion), but they don’t have to. Most great wars, historically, have been caused by the expansionary aspect of nationalism (and a lot of the great colonial empires weren’t ethnic nation-states to begin with). Insofar as what’s referred to as ‘nationalism’ today is almost entirely about insularity and policing the boundaries against outsiders, not about territorial expansion, I’d like to know your reasoning for believing that this is going to get us into “some great big wars”.

Internationalism has brought us a lot of small wars. Statistically speaking a human today is far less likely to die in war than a human of 100 years ago.

We probably have more ethnically defined nation-states today than we did a hundred years ago (certainly in Europe and Asia), so I don’t think that’s a great argument for your point of view.

#23 Comment By William Foster On February 27, 2018 @ 2:59 pm

“Did not the peoples of African and Middle Eastern countries half a century ago expel the European settlers who helped to build those nations?”

Buchanan never fails to appall. His fawning over oppressive governments in Russia and China, while they would have sickened the Buchanan of, say, 1972, are pretty much par for his course these days. But today he confesses his nostalgia for the era of brutally exploitative colonialism.

Move over, Putin. Make room in the Buchanan pantheon for King Leopold of Belgium.

#24 Comment By bacon On February 27, 2018 @ 3:40 pm

The Marion Le Pen who spoke at CPAC did not receive 35% of the vote in the French presidential election; indeed she did not run in that election. It was her aunt, also named Marion, but known as Marine, Le Pen. Mr. Buchanan’s researchers should get a slap on the wrist.

#25 Comment By Hector_St_Clare On February 27, 2018 @ 3:49 pm

The Scientist 880. I hate to tell you, but you are wrong. The black power salute was not merely a protest against racism. It was a symbol of a black nationalist movement known as the Black Panthers (a name postdating the great Stan Lee and Jack Kirby’s introduction of the super hero of the same name.

Both the Scientist and I know quite well who the Black Panthers are, probably quite a bit better than you do.

#26 Comment By Hector_St_Clare On February 27, 2018 @ 3:51 pm

As for great wars, it’s imperialism that leads to great wars, much more than ethnic tribalism. One can be imperialist on behalf of a universalizing religion, on behalf of a liberal ideal or a Marxist ideal, just as much as one can be imperialist on behalf of an ethnic tribe. Plenty of countries have done exactly that (in fact, most of the great conquering empires throughout history were explicitly multinational and multiethnic in character, and as the saying goes, they “multiplied great evils on the earth.”_

#27 Comment By One Guy On February 27, 2018 @ 3:53 pm

“America First” nationalism may be popular with the 35% that still support Trump, but that’s about it. Buchanan makes the common mistake of thinking that, because Trump won the Electoral College, that everything he says is popular. It’s not. Trump is the least popular president in history, and he simply parrots “America First” without any clue as to what it means.

#28 Comment By Ricardo On February 27, 2018 @ 4:24 pm

Pat Buchanan is a living legend and an American sage. I can’t believe he gets so much criticism in the comment section here. My man Pat Buchanan is ON POINT, as always. Humans are naturally tribal / nationalistic, and he is correct in discerning the return to nationalism that is surging across Europe and the U.S. Trump is a product, not a cause, of this movement. The liberal / secular / globalist “progression” of the West has run its course, and it has arrived at a dead end, characterized by people who are isolated, rootless, godless, genderless, childless, and lacking in tribes and traditions. There is a realization that what liberalism offers is worthless. We are returning to the faiths and the customs of our fathers, our fatherlands, and our tribes. Keep you globalism.

#29 Comment By The Scientist 880 On February 27, 2018 @ 4:47 pm

Will Harrington,

I live in Boston, Massachusetts. I drove by the high school that Luis Farrakhan went to growing up (English High School) I drive by the nation of Islam Masque on a regular basis and see them outside handing out pamphlets (they are located on blue hill avenue near Grove Hall. None of what you stated is particularly extreme. What is wrong with not wanting to be tried by an all white jury when we know that they have been biased against black defendants historically? What is wrong with wanting to be taught the true history in which you see the contributions people like you made to America? You don’t seem to know much about the black panthers. If you want, I’ll drive to their mosque this week and get a pamphlet and report back on what they say. The black panthers are mostly irrelevant today in the black community, certainly so in Boston but you just let me know if this interests you and I will be happy to provide the info. I doubt you’ll respond.

#30 Comment By serpeant On February 27, 2018 @ 6:41 pm

Of course people want to live and work with people like themselves. Multiculturalism is a failure. It always leads to a dysfunctional society. In fact instead of blaming guns for the increase in mass shootings it will be appropriate to note that as this country becomes more diverse the violence increases. Instead of a tapestry American is now a patchwork that id coming apart along racial, ethnic, and religious lines. A visual contrast is that of Italy where North Africans who are at a level of hunter gatherers are profiled against the backgrounds of ancient Roman and Renaissance art and architecture. No wonder far right parties will make a strong showing in the Italian elections. There is a reason why the West was on the moon while the rest of the world was just trying to catch up. When Western man becomes extinct the world will devolve into chaos and civilization will crumble. The idea that with time there will be more and more progress is nonsense.

#31 Comment By Sam Fuller On February 27, 2018 @ 9:06 pm

Hmm…Buchanan and Le Pen. What is it that connects two such disparate characters? Can’t quite put my finger on it.

#32 Comment By Wezz On February 27, 2018 @ 9:22 pm

“One can be imperialist on behalf of a universalizing religion, on behalf of a liberal ideal or a Marxist ideal, just as much as one can be imperialist on behalf of an ethnic tribe.”

You for got the biggest and the cause of much of our current misery, “being imperialist” by wanting to get your hands on other nations oil or to keep it from other nations hands.

#33 Comment By Ken T On February 27, 2018 @ 10:43 pm

I’m really having trouble understanding what Farage and LePen have to do with an “America First” mindset.

#34 Comment By Johann von Puyallup On February 28, 2018 @ 12:36 am

Commenters here often failing to read what Buchanan actually said. His thesis: Nationalism is a still a powerful force. Whether or not Buchanan likes Putin is immaterial to the point. And the party, FN, did get 35%, as Buchanan asserted. And Buchanan is not an internationalist elite. Ricardo gets it. Buchanan is, as usual, on point.

#35 Comment By Les Govment On February 28, 2018 @ 2:25 am

I’ve formerly posted at TAC as “A Libertarian Guy”

I thought Marion Le Pen’s speech at CPAC was quite impressive. I really liked her stance against surrogacy (surrogate motherhood).

It’s time to start pushing back against the globalist supremacists.

Marion Le Pen’s speech: [1]

— Les Govment [2]

.

#36 Comment By David On February 28, 2018 @ 3:40 am

I tried to find a video of the Russian ice hockey team singing their national anthem over the Olympic anthem. And I couldn’t find a single video of it. All the videos on YouTube just have someone reading text. I wonder if maybe it was banned by the Olympics people. For something as stirring as the scene from Casablanca, I thought I’d try to see it for myself, but no luck.
Maybe our propaganda blanket didn’t want it getting through.

#37 Comment By Luther Perez On February 28, 2018 @ 9:41 am

I get the feeling that “anti-globalist” is just another way of saying “right-wing globalist.”

#38 Comment By Edward Dougherty On February 28, 2018 @ 12:02 pm

Good afternoon, Mr. Buchanan and All

The charge that Tommie Smith and John Carlos were any kind of black nationalists or black power seekers is absurd and contradicted by their personal and professional histories, which are beyond reproach. As has been pointed out here by The Scientist 800,they were protesting racism and did so in a peaceful non-violent manner. Tommie Smith gave a further explanation of this when he was intereviewed by Howard Cosell about 24 hours after (and as recounted in Cosell’s first book, entitled COSELL) and explained they were protesting racism and that he was proud to be a black American (exact words as interviewed by Howard Cosell). I have not yet been able to find the interview on You Tube but I encourage all to seek it out.

Mr. Buchanan’s characterization is a gross distortion of their motives that I will be charitable and say that it simply springs from a lack of knowledge of these two patriots.

#39 Comment By Ivo Olavo Castro da Silva On February 28, 2018 @ 5:17 pm

Yes, why Ukraine is not on the list of peoples that deserve to have their own country. They were starved and massacred by the Russians and somehow they should be glad to be in the Russian “sphere of influence”, or that Russia has the right to oppress the Ukrainian people in order to have a “buffer zone”. Disgusting!

#40 Comment By Ken A On March 1, 2018 @ 9:27 am

Found this site a few minutes ago and wondering if it contains any information on the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, or Pledge or Allegiance – talking the United States here?

#41 Comment By EliteCommInc. On March 1, 2018 @ 11:40 am

“Russians and somehow they should be glad to be in the Russian “sphere of influence”, or that Russia has the right to oppress the Ukrainian people in order to have a “buffer zone”.”

I certainly think the Ukraine has every right to make its own choices and they do.

They chose to have another violent revolution when in fact, their democracy was working, not perfectly, but then democracy is a slow, irritating process. It was the second or third revolution in . And each one has managed to backpedal democratic processes back as many years as they entire system is reset.

If the EU was serious about getting Ukrainian business and building a relationship to entice them into EU polity, they should have offered a lower price for the oil they were selling.

That revolution was a mistake with regional consequences. And the disgrace if there is one is that the US actually helped instigate and support it.

#42 Comment By Dr. Diprospan On March 1, 2018 @ 2:48 pm

Mr. Buchanan may be inaccurate somewhere, erroneous in something.
It does not matter. The main thing in his polemic article is the question: What is the historic goal of our elites in the 21st century? Mr. Buchanan suggests that The Eternal Lure of Nationalism can claim the inspiration for the great masses of the people.
In the 20th century, the US national policy was formed under the influence of the USSR, which preached internationalism and universal equality. Ironically,
if people begin to experiment with equality, then the empire what the Soviets Union actually was, will fall apart, as it happens with a large drop of mercury, which can crumble into several small droplets. Peoples listen to the title nation with reverence if it dominates. Now, white people make up 15% of humanity…
We do not quite understand how the brain, word, faith, religion are related. How is the language that is decisive for the formation of a nation born and why does it die?
Even the most advanced elite, relying on the latest scientific achievements, does not understand how its own intellect works. How can you offer something new to people in such a situation? We are moving by trial and error and are preserving a successful experience. Christianity is an example of a successful experience.
Is this not what the German priest is thinking about so tensely, listening to Hitler’s mesmerizing speech at the height of glory?
[3]
With his articles and questions, Patrick Buchanan takes us on the path of enlightened conservatism and nationalism. He collects such different opinions to make a photo suitable for reality.