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

Macron: The Last Multilateralist

“Together,” President Macron instructed President Trump, “we can resist the rise of aggressive nationalisms that deny our history and divide the world.”

In an address before Congress on Wednesday, France’s Macron denounced “extreme nationalism,” invoked the UN, NATO, WTO, and Paris climate accord, and implored Trump’s America to come home to the New World Order.

“The United States is the one who invented this multilateralism,” Macron went on, “you are the one now who has to help preserve and reinvent it.”

His visit was hailed and his views cheered, but on reflection, the ideas of Emmanuel Macron seem to be less about tomorrow than yesterday.

For the world he celebrates is receding into history.

The America of 2018 is coming to see NATO as having evolved into an endless U.S. commitment to go to war with Russia on behalf of a rich Europe that resolutely refuses to provide for its own defense.

Since the WTO was created in the mid-90s, the U.S. has run $12 trillion in trade deficits, and among the organization’s biggest beneficiaries—the EU.

Under the Paris climate accord, environmental restrictions are put upon the United States from which China is exempt.

As for the UN, is that sinkhole of anti-Americanism, the General Assembly, really worth the scores of billions we have plunged into it?

“Aggressive nationalism” is a term that might well fit Napoleon Bonaparte, whose Arc de Triomphe sits on the Champs-Elysees. But does it really fit the Hungarians, Poles, Brits, Scots, Catalans, and other indigenous peoples of Europe who are now using democratic methods and means to preserve their national homes?

And the United States would seem an odd place to go about venting on “aggressive nationalisms that deny our history.”

Did Macron not learn at the Lycee Henri IV in Paris or the Ecole Nationale d’Administration how the Americans acquired all that land?

General Washington, at whose Mount Vernon home Macron dined, was a nationalist who fought for six years to sever America’s ties to the nation under which he was born.

How does Macron think Andrew Jackson acquired Florida from Spain, Sam Houston acquired Texas from Mexico, and Winfield Scott and Zachary Taylor acquired the Southwest? By bartering?

Aggressive nationalism is a good synonym for the Manifest Destiny of a republic that went about relieving Spain of Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines.

How does Macron think the “New World” was conquered and colonized if not by aggressive British, French, and Spanish nationalists determined to impose their rule upon weaker indigenous tribes?

Was it not nationalism that broke up the USSR into 15 nations?

Was not the Zionist movement that resurrected Israel in 1948, and in 1967 captured the West Bank and then annexed East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, a manifestation of aggressive nationalism?

Macron is an echo of George H.W. Bush who in Kiev in 1991 warned Ukrainians against the “suicidal nationalism” of declaring independence from the Russian Federation.

“Aggressive nationalisms…divide the world,” warns Macron.

Well, yes, they do, which is why we have now 194 members of the U.N., rather than the original 50. Is this a problem?

“Together,” said Macron, “we will build a new, strong multilateralism that defends pluralism and democracy in the face of ill winds.”

Macron belongs to a political class that sees open borders and free trade thickening and tightening the ties of dependency, and eventually creating a One Europe whose destiny his crowd will forever control.

But if his idea of pluralism is multiracial, multiethnic, and multicultural nations, with a multilateral EU overlord, he is describing a future that tens of millions of Europeans believe means the deaths of the nations that give meaning to their lives.

And they will not go gently into that good night.

In America, too, millions have come to recognize that there is a method to the seeming madness of open borders. Name of the game: dispossessing the deplorables of the country they love.

With open borders and mass migration of over a million people a year into the USA, almost all of them from third-world countries that vote 70 to 90 percent Democratic, the left is foreclosing the future. They’re converting the greatest country of the West into what Teddy Roosevelt called a “polyglot boarding house for the world.” And in that boarding house the left will have a lock on the presidency.

With the collaboration of co-conspirators in the media, progressives throw a cloak of altruism over the cynical seizure of permanent power.

For, as the millions of immigrants here legally and illegally register, and the vote is extended to prison inmates, ex-cons, and 16-year-olds, the political complexion of America will come to resemble San Francisco.

End goal: ensure that what happened in 2016, when the nation rose up and threw out a despised establishment, never happens again.

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.

23 Comments (Open | Close)

23 Comments To "Macron: The Last Multilateralist"

#1 Comment By georgina davenport On April 27, 2018 @ 12:29 am

Let’s remember, it was nationalism that led German, Japan and Italy into the two world wars. Like everything, nationalism is not absolutely good or absolutely bad.

European nationalism that led them to colonize other weaker countries was not a good thing. Nationalism that led the colonized countries to fight for independence was a good thing.

The current rising of nationalism is not a good thing because it is often bound up with white nationalism, a belief that the non-whites are inferior people undeserving of care and happiness.

While I understand the anxiety of White people for losing their power of dominance, multiculturalism is a future that can’t be rolled back no matter how much they long for the past white homogeneity. Because technology that made our world smaller and flatter can’t be uninvented.

I agree the West can’t absorb all the immigrants who want to find new life in the West. The solution is not to shun the immigrants and pretend they don’t exist. The solution is to acknowledge their suffering and their need for a stable home and help them build that at their home countries.

Biologically, it is known that our genes get stronger with more diversity, that community gets weaker with too much in breeding. So is our strength as a people, culturally, philosophically, spiritually and creatively.

#2 Comment By Petrus On April 27, 2018 @ 3:55 am

Another nice notion on the mis/abuse of the world nationalism from Mr. Buchanan. From a Central European perspective, however Macron’s alleged multilateralism as presented in Washington is just a pretence peddled for the media – teaming up with Angela Merkel (more specifically, with Germany’s economic strength), Macron pretty much insists on reining in the rebellious Visegrad 4 politically, without the slightest interest in reaching a mutually beneficial compromise with them.

#3 Comment By Dan Green On April 27, 2018 @ 8:43 am

If only the deplorable’s had come to their senses, and elected Hillary, to carry on Hope and Change, we wouldn’t be having all this polarity.

#4 Comment By Kurt Gayle On April 27, 2018 @ 8:49 am

Pat points to Macron’s globalist trade babble to Congress answers:

“Since the WTO was created in the mid-90s, the U.S. has run $12 trillion in trade deficits, and among the organization’s biggest beneficiaries—the EU.”

President Trump’s economic nationalist/fair trade agenda can fix this problem.

#5 Comment By KD On April 27, 2018 @ 9:21 am

It strikes me that both France and Germany have large enough populations, economies and technical know-how to produce effective modern fighting forces. Second, given the size of EU, it is clear that the EU, if it could get its act together, would be capable of projecting force in the world on an equal playing field with the United States.

The European Leaders appeals to Trump to pursue European interests in American foreign policy are simply pathetic. If Europe has foreign interests, they will only be able to protect and insure them if they retake their sovereignty and independence on the world stage.

Europe can, and I suspect Europe will, because their problem is not just Trump and whether he is impeached or re-elected, it is that European interests are being held hostage to the American Electorate, which can and will return a Cowboy to the Presidency long after Trump is gone.

I don’t see how, given the developments with the Iran Deal, as well as other frictions, that the NATO alliance can remain standing. None of the above reflections are particularly ideological, and it seems impossible that Merkel and Macron couldn’t entertain such thoughts.

Europe can, and inevitably will, declare independence from the Americans, and I see NATO unraveling and a new dawn of European “multilateralism” taking its place.

#6 Comment By Michael Kenny On April 27, 2018 @ 11:07 am

Mr Buchanan’s habitual anti-EU obsession. The virulence of the article suggests that he believes that the US anti-EU campaign is failing. The rest is just the usual nonsense.

#7 Comment By Emil Bogdan On April 27, 2018 @ 11:11 am

Nationalism and Multiculturalism cannot coexist separately, they’re in tendsion as we all try to balance the scales.

Without the benefit of nationalism, the Koreas would not have done what they just did. My own “ethnic people” are the minority of 1.2 million Hungarians who live in Romania, who have lived there for centuries and will not leave their homeland… except many of them do, like my parents did, and many of my other relatives and friends–the number was 1.5 million not too long ago, and I was estimating 1.8, but man, we are dwindling. Only 1.2 million! That shocks me. Nationalism keeps us alive. But if that’s all we had, then the Romanians would be totally nationalistic too, and they will forcefully seek to curtail minority rights, language, culture, and slowly choke us out. That’s the nationalist philosophy on minorities.

That’s your philosophy, and you’re saying what will happen here is liberals will slowly turn the country into San Francisco. You make the same error as my friend in another thread. You cannot compare a city and its politics to a province or a country, or to any territory that contains vast farmlands.

Pat, you are saying that it’s possible for the entire Byzantine Empire to take on the precise political complexion of the walled city of Constantinople. That city cannot feed itself, it’s not a self-contained social or political entity.

The roiling cities of San Francisco/Bay Area and glorious Constantinople are and were completely and totally dependent on the countryside, and thus, on the politics the rurals tend to practice. The rurals need to feel the effects of city politics too.

No city anywhere is self-contained, and most cities are more liberal than their hinterlands, so should we do away with cities?

You can see it as symbiotic or some kind of yin and yang tension, however you prefer. But one is good and the other is evil? I don’t buy that.

#8 Comment By Emil Bogdan On April 27, 2018 @ 11:26 am

I’m pretty sure I should say ALL cities are more liberal then the surrounding countrysides which feed them. After all, the city is really just the most commonly known major local market, which the villages eventually form organically. One village in particular stands out, and the neighbors start flocking more and more to its market, some decide to move there and contribute even more to the good energy, and voila, the first city is soon born.

Then it takes on pride, and starts thinking it’s superior to the “rubes.” It isn’t. I was lucky enough to get my foundations in a village, I know its incredible efficiency and _conservative_ values and lifestyle, but trust me, there’s plenty of drunkenness and scandal, even among the sainted rubes who raised me.

Keep slapping down the cities, Pat, but don’t exaggerate the threat, no self-supporting society on Earth could live the way those freaks live in San Francisco, or Constantinople, that’s a fact.

#9 Comment By Emil Bogdan On April 27, 2018 @ 12:12 pm

My apologies, I know I go on a little long sometimes:

I am an American now, and America is my “us,” I don’t have mixed political allegiances, just cultural ones. I don’t live in my original homeland anymore. The choice to leave wasn’t mine, though.

If I had a choice to leave my country of origin, the land I was raised in and find familiar–and I have been in America since age twelve, so I do see it as home and very familiar–I would be daunted. Speaking as an average American adult, I know that moving to another English-speaking and equally advanced country is complicated enough for the average American. Imagine uprooting and going to a foreign land whose language you don’t know yet, where everything is a lot more expensive. Try getting a job there. Let’s say you have no college degree. Try it. I wouldn’t want to.

Immigrants are tough as nails, I’m sorry to say. You have no chance against them, actually. You cannot even conceive of the willpower and trials by fire. Most people quite understandably can’t fathom it, unless they actually try it or see it with their own eyes.

#10 Comment By Emil Bogdan On April 27, 2018 @ 12:41 pm

I’m gonna twist the dagger:

By advocating fear and dread about immigrants, Pat Buchanan, you are being a stone cold chickenhawk.

You casually speak of and order war, with no life experience in what it means to die in battle.

I have learned a lot from your admonishions, your constant warnings about the danger of aggressive militarism. Having experienced a bit of dictatorship personally, I’m not a fan, and I’m prone to talk tough without signing up to serve. I didn’t support Iraq, I’m not sure what to do about Assad–probably nothing–but I am so freaking happy every time an authoritarian dictator dies… I want them all dead, I’m like Trump, I don’t like it viscerally. I hate neo cons too, but if they spoke nothing but gibberish, they wouldn’t have much influence! This stuff isn’t easy, but it’s fun, and I know you’re a rascal, too.

#11 Comment By collin On April 27, 2018 @ 1:06 pm

The Last Multilateralist

Really? The end of history here. It is wise to remember Macron won by margins larger than Reagan 1984 and for all the complaints the Euro is still intact while Brexit is struggling to define itself against the Multilateralist, France & Germany. (Mostly because F&G are salivating at taking Finance jobs from London.)

Maybe another way to think about it is, this might be the internal political battle within nations to debate. Most western nations have little of a defined foreign enemy, so they will debate how globalist/nationalist they want to be.

#12 Comment By John S On April 27, 2018 @ 2:00 pm

What a lot of alarmist rabble rousing this is. Practically every point Buchanan makes is completely wrong.

#13 Comment By pbnelson On April 27, 2018 @ 2:38 pm

Ya gotta love how the trolls just *pounce* on everything Mr. Buchanan writes. He posts an essay at 12:01AM, and inevitably the first response, at time 12:29AM will be from some know-it-all Soros-inspired (if not paid) do-gooder who has dedicated her life to trolling Pat. Do they have alerts on their smartphones? “Alert! P.B. just posted something! Quick, get that retort into 1st place on the combox!” Get a life, trolls. Keep up the good work, Pat.

#14 Comment By Tom S. On April 27, 2018 @ 4:42 pm

Has it occurred to anyone posting here that the system we currently have is a direct reaction to the nationalist movements that triggered World War II? Yes, the current system is showing its age and needs some adjustments, but unless you all enjoy the prospect of Hungary and Romania duking it out over Transylvania, or Russia slowly gobbling now-independent bits of its former empire, the system that Macron champions is what we should maintain.

#15 Comment By Miguel On April 28, 2018 @ 1:31 am

Europe cannot defend it self because modern war is too expensive. Europeans cand desing modern military equipment, and built some, but are economicaly unable to provide it with logistics. And without logistics there is no military activity. Or any other type of human, organized activiy.

#16 Comment By Voltaire’s Ghost On April 28, 2018 @ 11:14 am

At one time “real” Americans were fighting to keep out Pat’s descendants (and mine) in order to protect the America they loved and cherished. Stop admitting these third world papists who will infiltrate America and defile it with their secret allegiance to Rome, their intrinsically violent, lazy and drunken ways. How did Pat’s ancestors do once they organized politically and formed unions? The question answers itself.

#17 Comment By Davo On April 28, 2018 @ 12:03 pm

Even a casual read of the news shows that macron is not the “open borders” straw man Buchanan make him out to be.

#18 Comment By JKS On April 28, 2018 @ 1:48 pm

Pat, don’t forget our rich globalist friends who throw seemingly endless money to push the USA ever closer to the abyss of 80% poverty, lowest possible wages forever and the end of political power for the working class. They will reward Macron handsomely after his political time is up.

#19 Comment By Zone Ark / Charlotte On April 28, 2018 @ 2:06 pm

“President Trump’s economic nationalist/fair trade agenda can fix this problem.”

No it can’t. It can’t because Trump doesn’t have a nationalist/fair trade agenda. He actually raised the caps on H1B works visas for foreigners, letting in more of them than Obama did. Immigrants are still pouring in and competing with Americans for jobs and scarce resources. No change to NAFTA. And there are already so many exceptions to his “tariffs” that he might as well not have bothered.

Macron likes Trump because, like Macron, Trump is a globalist and an interventionist.

#20 Comment By Some Wag On April 28, 2018 @ 3:04 pm

Michael Kenny:
The anti-EU campaign doesn’t originate from Washington. The Establishment pushing that policy is a little more Eastern.

#21 Comment By Hector_St_Clare On April 29, 2018 @ 9:07 pm

Georgina Davenport,

I agree with much of the rest of your comment, in particular with your point that “nationalism is neither good nor bad”. It depends entirely what you mean by nationalism. Separate nations, tribes, and ethnicities are a good thing. Expanding and dominating other nations is not.

As a biologist though I have to take issue with this:

“Biologically, it is known that our genes get stronger with more diversity, that community gets weaker with too much inbreeding.”

No, that isn’t “known” at all, and I’d be very surprised if you had any evidence in favour of that claim. Are you referring to inbreeding depression and things of that nature? That only affects population that number in the hundreds or maybe the thousands: essentially every nation and most ethnic groups on the planet (with some exceptions) are more than large enough (by a very large margin) to ensure long term fitness and survival. A country like Poland, which has 38 million people today, isn’t going to be any less genetically healthy if they completely closed their borders for the next few thousand years.

#22 Comment By Berkeley House On April 29, 2018 @ 9:50 pm

@Voltaire’s Ghost : “At one time “real” Americans were fighting to keep out Pat’s descendants (and mine) in order to protect the America they loved and cherished. […] How did Pat’s ancestors do once they organized politically and formed unions? The question answers itself.”

Those are my ancestors you’re sneering at. You know. The ones who kicked out the Brits and the French and made it possible for Pat’s ancestors to come here. I don’t really care how Pat’s ancestors did once they organized politically and formed unions, and to the extent they succeeded I see no reason to celebrate it. Their success doesn’t validate anything. It’s absurd. Like saying that having lost one battle you’re morally obliged to lose the rest of them. Maybe you don’t “get” that, but I bet Pat does.

#23 Comment By KD On May 10, 2018 @ 2:22 pm

Sounds familiar: