PDA

View Full Version : Is 'Americanism' a Religion?



friedrich braun
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 02:37 AM
Is 'Americanism' a religion?
By Spengler

Islamists and neo-conservatives concur in calling "Americanism" a religion, the "worst-ever theology" in the view of the former, but according to the latter, "the beliefs that make Americans positive that their nation is superior to all others - morally superior, closer to God". The quotations come respectively from Abid Ullah Jan at the Tanzeem-e-Islami website, and from Professor David Gelernter in the January 2005 Commentary magazine.

America stems from a religious movement and displays a marked religious character, but its actual religious life is splintered among scores of major denominations. Gelernter wants to lump it all into a generic American religion. He is just as wrong as the Islamists. Both confound American religion with the Bush administration's strategic agenda. American Christianity at once is more personal and strategically more powerful than either the Islamists or the neo-conservatives imagine.

The neo-conservatives are ideologues, not God-fearers, and they habitually confuse their political agenda with the kind of religious conviction that transforms the world. In an August 10, 2004, essay I attacked the idea that Islam was a political ideology rather than a religion. More than a billion people embrace Islam with a passion because it is indeed a religion, promising continuity to fragile societies beset by global pressures. Islam's genius, I contended, is to promise to remake the world in the image of traditional society through jihad (Islam: Religion or political ideology?). What America offers Muslims by way of social progress - shopping malls, broadband Internet, and voter registration drives - represents a deadly threat to traditional society.

Religion proposes not to create a more perfect union, nor to safeguard individual rights, but to vanquish death. America never has had a dominant religion. On the contrary: America has had to rediscover Christianity every few generations, in the form of new "Great Awakenings" (see What makes the US a Christian nation, Nov 30, 2004). The first Great Awakening made the Revolution, and the second made the Civil War. Today's evangelical Great Awakening well may spill out of its American confines and change the course of the world.

Gelernter is a distinguished computer scientist, sadly a victim of the Unabomber, who now has become an amateur theologian. Religion absorbs the aging neo-conservatives, and Gelernter shows an authentic interest in matters spiritual. One cannot dismiss him as another acolyte of Leo Strauss promoting religion as a useful public myth. But a tin ear for matters of the soul afflicts Gelernter along with other neo-conservatives. In 2003 I drew attention to a volume on the Hebrew prophets by Norman Podhoretz, Commentary's editor-at-large (Neo-cons in a religious bind, Jun 5, 2003). Podhoretz, a literary pundit and promoter of single-issue causes, imagines that the prophets were pundits like him promoting a single-issue cause ("the war against idolatry"). Now Gelernter avers, "Americanism is in fact a Judeo-Christian religion; a millenarian religion; a biblical religion." This is utter and complete rubbish.

Gelernter retreads the often-told story of the Puritan Fathers' desire to become (as he puts it) "God's new chosen people, living in God's new promised land ... God's new Israel". He concludes:
To sum up Americanism's creed as freedom, equality, and democracy for all is to state only half the case. The other half deals with a promised land, a chosen people, and a universal, divinely ordained mission. This part of Americanism is the American version of biblical Zionism; in short, American Zionism.
America has deep roots in the Hebrew Bible (Mahathir is right: Jews do rule the world, Oct 28, 2003), but Gelernter has misread them. Islamists misread matters the same way, for what that is worth. Abid Ullah Jan complains:
Radicalism, fanaticism and fundamentalism are the terms exclusively used for religions such as Islam, Christianity and Judaism. But the worst form of fanaticism that we witness today is of the American domination theology, which is even worse than a cult ... Americans who note that America is a bastion of democracy and country of peace and tolerance are right, but only in a narrow bookish sense which hides the facts that America's foundations lie in the genocide of natives and 100 years of lynchings. Other than that, the history of US invading and terrorizing other states, carving state territories from other's land and imposing its hegemony dates as back to the day when America came into existence.
That the Puritan founders of America spoke of a New Israel founding a new Promised Land is well known; readers who wish to learn more about biblical religion in the American Colonial period would do well to consult the work of Michael Novak, a Catholic theologian at Georgetown University, or Paul Johnson's History of the American People.

The trouble, as Gelernter is aware, is that Puritanism melted away into Unitarianism at the turn of the 19th century, leaving hardly a residue of its old Zionist attitude. "Where did all the powerful religions' passion go?" asks Gelernter. "Puritanism did not drop out of history. It transformed itself into Americanism." Americanism, we are led to believe, came from Puritanism, but when Puritanism was no more, it turned into Americanism - a mode of reasoning that would be circular were it not so elliptical.

Gelernter simply ignores the central fact of American religious history, namely that each Christian revival occurred among different people than the previous one. "Different people than the original Puritans of the Massachusetts Bay Colony were swept up in the First Great Awakening, and yet another group of Americans, largely Westerners, joined the Second Great Awakening during the 19th century. Yet another group of Americans joined ... [the]Third Great Awakening of 1890. If the rapid growth of born-again denominations constitutes yet another 'Great Awakening', as some historians suppose, the United States is repeating a pattern of behavior that is all the more remarkable for its discontinuity," I observed in the cited November 30 essay.

The trouble is that Gelernter is a secular Jew with a midlife curiosity about matters of the soul, but inner sense of what religion means. The motivation of religious Americans is too trivial to register on his ideological Richter scale. That motivation is redemption from sin. It may seem trivial to point out the obvious, but Christianity, as opposed to Gelernter's fleshless and bloodless American religion, has to do with the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the Cross to redeem mankind from original sin. The Great Awakenings of American religion do not begin with a public reading of the Declaration of Independence, but with a return in fear and trembling to the Cross. Religion first of all is personal - deeply and searingly personal - and political only as an afterthought.

Sin, Gelernter would know if he bothered to read St Paul, means death. During the Great Extinction of the Peoples ensuing the fall of Rome, Christianity called out of the nations individuals who wished to belong to a New Israel, a people of God beyond ethnicity with the expectation of eternal life beyond the grave. The Gentiles understood original sin, I have argued in the past, to mean the sin of having been born Gentile, that is, into a people doomed to extinction.

Christ sacrificed himself, Christians believe, because man is too depraved to redeem himself. Christianity demands that each individual turn his back on ethnicity and tribe, and accept Jesus in a discrete act of faith. For the endangered nations of late antiquity and the early Middle Ages, Christianity promised a new life, as it does today to hundreds of millions in the southern hemisphere whose existence is no less precarious than that of earlier converts.

Few Christians are quite satisfied with the promised Kingdom of God beyond the grave, and therefore demand something in the present life. Europe's Christians never quite shed their pagan (that is to say national) roots, worshipping their own ethnicity in images of Jesus, the Virgin and the saints. That flaw, in my view, ultimately destroyed European Christianity (Why Europe chooses extinction, Oct 8, 2003).

The Puritans who settled America, as Gelernter observes, looked backward "to the pure Christianity of the New Testament - and then even farther back. Puritans spoke of themselves as God's new chosen people, living in God's new promised land." The Puritans tolerated none of the old pagan devices to pad the Kingdom of God with corporeal consolations. But they did not abjure the world this side of the grave. Rejecting the old pagan devices, the Puritans instead adopted a Hebrew one, that is, a temporal order in emulation of Israel.

New Israel, namely those called to the Cross from among the nations, has no kingdom of this Earth. Old Israel, by contrast, is quite at home in this world. Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel, the sage of postwar Conservative Judaism, observed that Judaism is not a concept, but rather a life, that is, the continuation of the life of Abraham. The Jewish people are redeemed by virtue of Abraham's covenant with God, in recognition of the Patriarch's righteousness as well as his absolute faith. To the Christian these are promises of things to come; to the Jews this is mere family history.

To stretch the point, one might say that that the United States is founded on a Judaizing heresy. Christianity struggles to find a place for human initiative. If man is so depraved that he cannot save himself, what role can he play in his own salvation? To establish an earthly regime in pursuit of grace is more a Jewish than a Christian project. In Christian terms, God's grace, through Jesus' sacrifice on the Cross, is a free gift to man, who otherwise has no way to save himself. If depraved humans can do nothing for their own salvation, it is nonsense to attribute to man free will, as Martin Luther lectured the Catholics. God will decide who will be saved (the "predestined" Elect) and who will burn in hellfire.

The Reformation rejected Free Will, but the founders of the Massachusetts Bay Colony undertook one of the boldest acts of will in human history, namely to seek redemption by becoming a new People in a new Land. Argues Gelernter:
When I say that Americanism equals American Zionism, I am in one sense merely adding up statements by eminent authorities. John Winthrop [governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony] in 1630: "Wee shall finde that the God of Israell is among us." Thomas Jefferson in is Second Inaugural address: "I shall need ... the favor of that Being in whose hands we are, who led our fathers, as Israel of old, from their native land and planted them in a country flowing with all the necessities and comforts of life." ... Abraham Lincoln declared his wish to be a "humble instrument in the hands of the Almighty and of this, His almost chosen people".
Lincoln's ironic characterization of Americans as God's "almost chosen people" is to the point; for America to draw inspiration from the Hebrew Bible is salutary, but for Americans to regard themselves as God's chosen is idolatrous. Megalomania of this ilk infected Europe, beginning with Richelieu's France in the 17th century, and then Nicholas II's Russia and later Adolf Hitler's Germany in the 20th (The sacred heart of darkness, Feb 11, 2003), with apocalyptic consequences. (Jefferson, of course, was a Deist who expurgated the New Testament of reference to the divinity of Jesus.)

Again, Christ's kingdom is not of this world. Luther spoke of "two kingdoms", namely the political life of the corrupt world in contrast to the Kingdom of Heaven. To conflate them in the form of a "New Jerusalem" broke not only with Christian tradition, but beggared Christian doctrine, for it presumed that man might redeem himself. If that is true, why did Jesus need to sacrifice himself? That, I believe, is what led to the extinction of Puritanism. Christians do not join the New Israel through their mere presence in a polity, but by personal faith in God's Kingdom.

Christianity, that is, belief in the redemption of mankind through Christ's sacrifice, all but disappeared from Massachusetts in the decade after the American Revolution. All but one of Boston's churches and Harvard College officially had turned Unitarian by 1800. John Winthrop's descendants found themselves redeemed from earthly tyranny, and promptly became the Brahmins of Boston, a byword for the arrogance of inherited wealth. Without the benefit of the Puritans' accumulated wisdom and with no help from the faculty of Harvard, Americans of the frontier revived Christianity, making Methodism and Baptism the dominant US denomination by the fourth decade of the 19th century. Not the American Puritan religion, but the transplanted denominations of the English working class prevailed.

From this milieu (the "second Great Awakening") came Abraham Lincoln, the self-educated frontiersman who would join no Church, yet spoke in near-prophetic tones of the mingling of divine will in the affairs of men. The religious crusade that was the civil war achieved its goal, redeeming the United States from slavery, at which point Christianity dissipated, just as it had after the Revolution.

America provides uniquely fertile ground for Christianity, because immigrants to America leave behind the pagan elements that corrupted European Christianity. But that is mere potential, not religion. Man does not live by the American Dream alone. American evangelicals, whose appearance on the political scene has caused so much consternation on the left, spent decades cultivating personal piety, defending hearth and home against the septic tide of popular culture, long before circumstances pressed them into the world arena.

The trouble is that Christianity cannot resolve the conundrum of free will and original sin. A handful of Christians, eg the Mennonites, will form small communities apart from the world and wait for divine grace to find them. That leads to irrelevance. Most Christians will go out into the world and reform it so that it is more amenable to grace, reverting, as it were, to the Hebrew roots of Christianity. Puritan emulation of the Hebrews, once it achieved its earthly goals, led to Brahmin arrogance. America's tragedy, one hears, is to win the war and lose the peace. In the 18th, 19th, and again in the 20th century, the United States achieved its dream, but lost its soul.

Today's evangelicals have risen up against soulless secular culture, not against worldly evil. President George W Bush and his neo-conservative counselors believe that the US will engineer democratic regimes throughout the world; in this, I believe, they will fail. Despite their failure, American religion yet may play the decisive role on the world stage. As I observed last year (Ask Spengler, Jun 2, 2004), Professor Philip Jenkins of Pennsylvania State University reports that US Christian denominations are at the forefront of an "historical turning point" in Christianity, "one that is as epochal for the Christian world as the original Reformation". In the October 2002 edition of The Atlantic Monthly, he wrote, "In the global South (the areas that we often think of primarily as the Third World) huge and growing Christian populations - currently 480 million in Latin America, 360 million in Africa, and 313 million in Asia, compared with 260 million in North America ... It is Pentecostals who stand in the vanguard of the Southern Counter-Reformation. Though Pentecostalism emerged as a movement only at the start of the twentieth century, chiefly in North America, Pentecostals today are at least 400 million strong, and heavily concentrated in the global South. By 2040 or so there could be as many as a billion, at which point Pentecostal Christians alone will far outnumber the world's Buddhists and will enjoy rough numerical parity with the world's Hindus."

As Asia Times Online reader Douglas Bilodeau of Indiana observed, "If Mecca is ever razed by an invading army, it will not be Israeli or American or European, but will march up from Africa south of the Sahara."

(Copyright 2005 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us for information on sales, syndication and republishing.)

SouthernBoy
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 03:09 AM
How can you not expect to begin flame wars after making threads like this one?

friedrich braun
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 06:32 PM
Grow up.

What's your objection to this piece?

k0nsl
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 06:53 PM
SouthernBoy, If you feel something is wrong with this essay why don't you go through it point by point?

-k0nsl

Dr. Brandt
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 07:22 PM
SouthernBoy, If you feel something is wrong with this essay why don't you go through it point by point?

-k0nsl

SouthernGOY - like all yankee Lemmings can not stand critique. They rather whine about the injustice done to poor wittle amerikwa!

While we are at it, I have some serious questions on America and wonder if anyone can answer them:

a) What is an "american"? (I mean this seriously! Obviously they dont know themselves, because they constantly tell us how many % they are of such or other nationalety.

b) What has "America" contributed positive to the world? And when I say "posetive" then I mean such things like cultural achievement on the level of a Beethoven Symphony or St.Peter in Rome. Mass produced refridgerators and silicone boobs do not count!

BTW: Professor David Gelernter = JUDE!


Is 'Americanism' a religion?

No! It's a pest!

k0nsl
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 08:17 PM
“One can rightly say that the United States owes what it is entirely to the Jews: that is, its American nature. What we call Americanism to a large degree is nothing other than the influence of the Jewish spirit.” --- Professor Werner Sombart (http://holocaust-history.info/Americanism-Streicher.html)

[edit]
Mistake, doh.

-k0nsl

norcalnative1971
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 09:09 PM
"Americanism" is a philo-Semitic bastard ideology derived from Semitic ideas.

norcalnative1971
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 09:25 PM
a) What is an "american"? (I mean this seriously! Obviously they dont know themselves, because they constantly tell us how many % they are of such or other nationalety.


I live in America, and honestly, I can't give you an answer. "American" means nothing. HOW can I be the same "nationality" as Colon Bowell or Alan Greenspan? "Americans" are NOT a people but merely a population.

Hence, I consider myself an Aryan, and an Aryan alone.




b) What has "America" contributed positive to the world? And when I say "posetive" then I mean such things like cultural achievement on the level of a Beethoven Symphony or St.Peter in Rome. Mass produced refridgerators and silicone boobs do not count!


Aside from the creations of Aryan "Americans," nothing.

The Declaration of Independence? European ideas & courage applied differently in a new environment.

Electric lights? Created by the Aryan Edison using European brains & techniques.

Moon landings? "Nazi" science applied by "Nazi" scientists like von Braun.

Even America's most notorious inventions, nuclear weapons, developed by Jews using techniques they learned in German and other European universities and labs.

friedrich braun
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 09:31 PM
I actually have a soft spot for many of the 18th Century American leaders. The quaint Deists like Jefferson, Washington, Franklin, etc. (Dubya is an intellectual dwarf in comparison.) However, in the 20th Century the American contribution to world affairs has been overwhelmingly negative.

Lenny
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 10:12 PM
I have some serious questions on America and wonder if anyone can answer them:

a) What is an "american"?An American is a resident of the United States who identifies himself as an American and who embraces what America is about


b) What has America contributed positive to the world?This is not a serious question, America has contributed a lot to the world. I will just name a few important things that were either invented by Americans or drastically improved by Americans: the automobile, air travel, computers, the internet, television, radio, the telephone, the light bulb, the phonograph, countless cultural achievements in the past 80 years or so (most of the popular music in the world since the 1920s has either come directly from America or was heavily influenced by America--for better or for worse!) countless military advances, splitting of the atom, and you must not forget this: defense of the free world from '45-'90. You might be speaking Russian now if not for America defending the free nations of Europe during this period.

There's so much more that I did not include.

Dr. Brandt
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 10:43 PM
An American is a resident of the United States who identifies himself as an American and who embraces what America is about

Now, thats what I call a typicaly democratic answer. Politician talk. Speak a lot and say nothing.
Now tell us "what America is all about"?

"Tool Time", "Friends", "Dallas", "Oprah", "Square Dance", "Kwanzaa", "Haloween", "Table Dance", "Playboy, Hustler", "Billy Graham", "I had no sexual relations with that woman Clinton" ?





This is not a serious question, America has contributed a lot to the world. I will just name a few important things that were either invented by Americans or drastically improved by Americans: the automobile,

The Automobile was invented by a German. But thats beside the point. an automobile is as much an CULTURAL achievement as an electric hair dryer, dishwasher or powerdrill.



air travel, computers, the internet, television, radio, the telephone, the light bulb, the phonograph,

Air Travel wasn't invented by Yanks either. Television was invented by a German - Paul Nipke. Radio also wan't invented by Americans. What has this to do with "culture"? You think in 500 years they will put plastic-cups from Mc-Donalds and inline-skates from "Toy-R-us" in a musueum and the people will walk past them in awe and gasp "how superior! What beauty!" :rofl:



countless cultural achievements in the past 80 years or so (most of the popular music in the world since the 1920s has either come directly from America or was heavily influenced by America--for better or for worse!)

"countless" eh? So countless that you can't even name one?



countless military advances, splitting of the atom,

I hate to break it to you, but the atom wasn't splitt by an american either. It was achieved for the first time by Otto Hahn and Fritz Straßmann at the Kaiser-Wilhelm-Institute 1938.




and you must not forget this: defense of the free world from '45-'90.

Did you just say "free World"? :rofl: You mean you protected us from those ppl which you supported from 1941-1945 with tons of warmaterial and then gave them half of Europe at Yalta? Why golly, thats so sweet of you!





You might be speaking Russian now if not for America defending the free nations of Europe during this period.

You know, in "East Germany" they didn't have to speak Russia at all. As a matter of fact, their German was much purer and original then the anglosized German we have to endure today. At least Russians have culture. I rather live with Peter Tschaikowsky and the Chorus of the Wolga Cossacks thatn the monkey screetching of Michael Jackoff and Sluts like Brittney spears. I assume that's what you understand under the "countless cultural achievements"?


There's so much more that I did not include.

Yeah - "countless"! :rotfl:

Kristallnacht
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 10:44 PM
and you must not forget this: defense of the free world from '45-'90.

What free world? free porn, free racemixing, aresting German NS for saying the true... this is your so called "free world", America is the defender of the jew world!

Constantinus
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 10:47 PM
Air travel Lenny? Surely you don't mean the Wright brothers, who combined aerodynamics, a science perfected in continental Europe in the late 19th century, with a combustion engine, a German invention. Oh, and the first really motorized flight by an airplane which lifted itself off the ground happened in Brazil in 1907. But I'm sure you already knew that. :)

Dr. Brandt
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 10:49 PM
But I'm sure you already knew that. :)

Of course he does! Because Amerikwa has the finest schoolsystem in the World! :rofl:

cosmocreator
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 10:53 PM
I'm getting really tired of hearing endless America bashing. It won't be long before I start endless deleting again.

SouthernBoy
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 10:56 PM
We don't need another flame war.

Constantinus
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 11:01 PM
I fail to see what is bashing about ponting out clearly verifiable facts about scientific history. Someone claims an American invented the car, in a reply someone else points out that wasn't the case. Same with the Brazilian thing, Brazilians are furious about not getting recognition for that flight. Not pointing it out would be Brazil bashing.

SouthernBoy
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 11:22 PM
a) What is an "american"? (I mean this seriously! Obviously they dont know themselves, because they constantly tell us how many % they are of such or other nationalety.


An American is an permanent inhabitant of either of the two continents known as "South America" and "North America." :rotfl: If you want a flame war then you have one Dr. Bullshit. :rotfl:

Lenny
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 11:36 PM
I fail to see what is bashing about ponting out clearly verifiable facts about scientific history. Someone claims an American invented the car, in a reply someone else points out that wasn't the case. Same with the Brazilian thing, Brazilians are furious about not getting recognition for that flight. Not pointing it out would be Brazil bashing.Americans did not invent the first automobile, but they did drastically improve it, mass produce it, make it practical, make it usable, etc. If America did not exist, it's a real possibility that cars would've still been in the "Model-T" stage well into the 1940s or 50s.

Furthermore, if America did not exist, where would air travel be today? (Brazil's supposed sweeping achievements in the field of air travel not withstanding.) Where would computers be today without America and Americans? Would the internet even exist? Would humans have put a man on the moon by now without America? Where would space travel & satellites be without America?


I also forgot to mention the American advancements in the field of agriculture, without which hundreds of millions (maybe 1 or 2 billion) people would not be alive today.

k0nsl
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 11:39 PM
and you must not forget this: defense of the free world from '45-'90.

No, we must not, for that was when the Americans "Liberated" the Germans of everything, including their lives.

-k0nsl

k0nsl
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 11:47 PM
The Automobile was invented by a German.

Yes, indeed. It was Karl Benz :)

-k0nsl

norcalnative1971
Friday, January 7th, 2005, 01:21 AM
An American is a resident of the United States who identifies himself as an American and who embraces what America is about.


Considering America is about love for Jewish ideas, an "American" would then be a Zionist or philo-Semitic fellow-traveller.




This is not a serious question, America has contributed a lot to the world. I will just name a few important things that were either invented by Americans or drastically improved by Americans: the automobile, air travel, computers, the internet, television, radio, the telephone, the light bulb, the phonograph,


ALL invented by European "Americans" using European intelligence genes, with European techniques.

Nothing good in or from America is indigenous.




countless cultural achievements in the past 80 years or so (most of the popular music in the world since the 1920s has either come directly from America or was heavily influenced by America--for better or for worse!)


95% for the worse.

Most American "culture" is what the Germans call Kulturbolschewismus -- Cultural Bolshevism. It's an assault on genuine, healthy, holistic culture and the foundations and fundamentals necessary to generate the latter. Most American "music," especially shit like from "Pelvis" Presley (a racial mixture of White, Nigger, and Jew), is "Entartete Musik" -- Degenerate Music.




you must not forget this: defense of the free world from '45-'90. You might be speaking Russian now if not for America defending the free nations of Europe during this period.


This is some sort of fucking sick joke, right?

Without American intervention to destroy the Racial Saviors of the Third Reich, there would have BEEN no Warsaw Pact or "Cold War." Further, as Antony Sutton demonstrates in Western Technology & Soviet Economic Development, the "Cold War" was always a fraud, since American capitalists funnelled huge amounts of money and technology to the "Red Menace" continuously from 1919 through the Vietnam War.

Americanism was, is, and always will be antithetical to Aryan racial interests.

norcalnative1971
Friday, January 7th, 2005, 01:24 AM
I'm getting really tired of hearing endless America bashing. It won't be long before I start endless deleting again.

"America bashing"? Does the truth hurt?

If it wasn't for the American government and tens of millions of American boobs, the Aryan Race wouldn't be facing annihilation today.

USS Dixiecrat
Friday, January 7th, 2005, 01:44 AM
"America bashing"? Does the truth hurt?

If it wasn't for the American government and tens of millions of American boobs, the Aryan Race wouldn't be facing annihilation today.

Shut up, and stop whining. I'm sick of you Euros blaming america for everything, when you are perfectly capable of stoping it yourself.

SouthernBoy
Friday, January 7th, 2005, 01:56 AM
I don't so much mind America bashing, but saying the Hitler did more for our race than he did harm to it is far-fetched.

Guest
Friday, January 7th, 2005, 02:09 AM
I can't really see what good all this nation bashing does any of us; I don't like the current Danish government, nor do I like the American or any other current government in any white (or supposedly white) country. Naturally I don't want to be identified with or blamed for the present actions of the Danish government either, and I therefore logically do not identify or blame others with/for theirs!

Frankly I considered this to be obvious and needless to say, but our struggle is undeniably more racial than political.

BTW, this is "The Northern European forum", which definately more than indicates the importance of biology above politics here - at least this is how I see it...

k0nsl
Friday, January 7th, 2005, 02:20 AM
Let's view it from this angle:

The Germans found out that the Jews were working actively to destroy Germany & it's people therefore they decided to deport & resettle these trouble-makers elsewhere - In short: they would not have it!

For this they were howled down by a bunch of "Democracies" --- Alas, we know the rest of the sad story.

Americans elect Presidents who are scum, just plain low-life scum. That's all. They care not about being ruled by the darkest forces in the history, the eternal Jew. It's all fine & dandy, so they think.

But the fact is that these pious little Jews have ruined America, utterly. There is no decency left. The standards of the Jew is applied. Perversion & decadence rules. I am ofcourse not saying that ALL Americans obey the Jew, but the majority must be doing that.

The Americans also never seem to learn from past mistakes. They always elect Presidents who are utterly corrupted & Presidents who cares not about America OR it's people...Well, only the Jews and poor shitty little Israel. That's all - while simultaneously flooding the country with unproductive foreigners.

Americans should do what the Germans did. Throw out the Jews and take back their country...But that will NEVER happen. I am sure of it.

Sorry for being furious - It's nothing I can help. It's all just sad.



but saying the Hitler did more for our race than he did harm to it is far-fetched.


Good grief! If Hitler and his Germany would be left to their own devices there would never have been any 'harm' but the peace-loving "Democracies" wouldn't have it that way!

See LIFE IN THE THIRD REICH and The World Political Situation Then and Now (http://holocaust-history.info/LifeInReich.html) - After reading that you will understand why they wanted to destroy Germany. It was due to Germany's incredible success, nothing else.

-k0nsl

norcalnative1971
Friday, January 7th, 2005, 03:56 AM
Shut up, and stop whining. I'm sick of you Euros blaming america for everything, when you are perfectly capable of stoping it yourself.

"Us Euros"?

Why don't you try deciphering my nym?

norcalnative1971
Friday, January 7th, 2005, 03:57 AM
I don't so much mind America bashing, but saying the Hitler did more for our race than he did harm to it is far-fetched.

What harm did Hitler bring to our Race?

Blaming World War II on Hitler is like blaming the Nigger rape on the racially-aware White girl.

cosmocreator
Friday, January 7th, 2005, 04:04 AM
"America bashing"? Does the truth hurt?

If it wasn't for the American government and tens of millions of American boobs, the Aryan Race wouldn't be facing annihilation today.

Speculative.

Aryan isn't a race.

A large portion of Americans are Nordish. More Nordish than Dr Brandt in fact. This forum is about race not nationality.

What is really odd about your statement is that you are American.

Loki
Friday, January 7th, 2005, 07:27 AM
There are some people who told me they still wanted to reply to this thread. I'll close it maybe tomorrow.

Dr. Brandt
Friday, January 7th, 2005, 01:08 PM
I don't so much mind America bashing, but saying the Hitler did more for our race than he did harm to it is far-fetched.

Of course you mind the "america bashing", i.e. telling the truth. Your answer also begs the question to what Race you must belong to, if you think Hitler dir harm to it. Are you Jewish?



Shut up, and stop whining. I'm sick of you Euros blaming america for everything, when you are perfectly capable of stoping it yourself.

Don't tell ppl to shut up here. And if anyone whines the most, then it is you!

[/IMG]http://forums.skadi.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=2884&stc=1[IMG]

Dr. Brandt
Friday, January 7th, 2005, 01:42 PM
Yes, indeed. It was Karl Benz :)

-k0nsl

And the first computer was built 1937 by Konrad Zuse in Germany.

Laurelin
Friday, January 7th, 2005, 07:16 PM
America's cultural achievements aren't terribly impressive, and one can make a solid argument that its current "culture" is quite corrosive of more organically rooted cultures. It should be self-evident that Europe has historically far surpassed America with regard to cultural achievements. And Europe is certainly the fountainhead of modern science.

But unfortunately, Europe's achievements are largely in the past; no European country can honestly claim to be at the forefront of any cultural or scientific field in the present day. Moreover, I'm not sure how anyone could make a serious argument that America is not in the lead with regard to science and technology. It certainly is, and has surpassed Europe in this field for some decades. The portable, personal computers that people are using to respond to this thread, their operating systems, and the internet itself, were all developed in America and by Americans.

More generally, America's leading research universities and their associated private sector knowledge clusters (such as Silicon Valley) are at the forefront of scientific and technological innovation in every field from biotechnology to nanotechnology. No other country in the world can match these knowledge networks with regard to the scale, density or funding, and no scientific researcher worth their salt would turn down an opportunity to work at a leading American research university, if only for the unique opportunity that experience would afford them before returning to their home country.

I suppose one could still maintain that Americans are rather barbaric on the cultural level, but if so they are very technologially sophisticated barbarians, and frankly they have relegated Europe to the relative status of a backwater with regard to its significance in global affairs.

cosmocreator
Friday, January 7th, 2005, 08:24 PM
The reason America is so powerful is because it's still predominantly Nordish. If it was a negro country or very mixed as some people think, it wouldn't be as powerful as it is.

Dr. Brandt
Friday, January 7th, 2005, 09:02 PM
America's cultural achievements aren't terribly impressive, and one can make a solid argument that its current "culture" is quite corrosive of more organically rooted cultures. It should be self-evident that Europe has historically far surpassed America with regard to cultural achievements. And Europe is certainly the fountainhead of modern science.

But unfortunately, Europe's achievements are largely in the past; no European country can honestly claim to be at the forefront of any cultural or scientific field in the present day. Moreover, I'm not sure how anyone could make a serious argument that America is not in the lead with regard to science and technology. It certainly is, and has surpassed Europe in this field for some decades. The portable, personal computers that people are using to respond to this thread, their operating systems, and the internet itself, were all developed in America and by Americans.

More generally, America's leading research universities and their associated private sector knowledge clusters (such as Silicon Valley) are at the forefront of scientific and technological innovation in every field from biotechnology to nanotechnology. No other country in the world can match these knowledge networks with regard to the scale, density or funding, and no scientific researcher worth their salt would turn down an opportunity to work at a leading American research university, if only for the unique opportunity that experience would afford them before returning to their home country.




I do not agree! You should read "The great patent heist".

Furthermore if you look at Americas technical achievements, they are just leeching from foreign uneverseties. In the past (and present) they lure scientists with lucrative contracts and a lot of cash into the states, to work for their companys. The other countries educate these ppl at their expenses and USA has hardly no costs at all. So a young, bright white child ist educated at the expenso of a foreign state it's entire life and then they are "hijacked" by american companys.
Since european Goverments are overly buraucratic and make it terrible hard for a bright youngster to found his own firm or get anyone to risk putting any money into his ideas, they go with their wisdom to America, taking everything with them, which they had learned in practice on european unversetys and research institutes. Not to forgett that USA is Number one in economic espionage. It is estimated that alone in Germany they damage our economy each year with a double-digit billion summ with their echelon spy-system (NSA). And we are their "Friends".



I suppose one could still maintain that Americans are rather barbaric on the cultural level, but if so they are very technologially sophisticated barbarians, and frankly they have relegated Europe to the relative status of a backwater with regard to its significance in global affairs.

"America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between."
Oscar Wilde (1854 - 1900)

Your "significance" in global affairs rests on your military hegemony which you achieved because the Anglo element in Europe betrayed our continent and because over the last century you have done everything in your power to undermine and destroy Europe. It is the same today. No wonder USA is pushing for a EU-membership of Turkey. Thats why you went to War against Germany, to destroy the white leadership and force "diversety" on us.

FadeTheButcher
Friday, January 7th, 2005, 11:48 PM
"America bashing"? Does the truth hurt?Oh. So you want to talk about the truth now? Okay. Snort,
chortle — seriously — guffaw… Let's step out of your make believe fantasy world where the Third Reich still exists and take a look at reality.

http://www.dhm.de/ausstellungen/bildzeug/qtvr/DHM/n/BuZKopie/raum3417.jpg

If it wasn't for the American government and tens of millions of American boobs, the Aryan Race wouldn't be facing annihilation today.The so-called Aryan race doesn't exist. Perhaps you are referring to all the Nazis we wiped off the face of the earth in between 1941 and 1945. We terminated all those losers decades ago.

FadeTheButcher
Saturday, January 8th, 2005, 12:00 AM
Furthermore if you look at Americas technical achievements, they are just leeching from foreign uneverseties. Just where are the top twenty universities in the world? Not in Germany . . . Oops. Vital information is not correlating with your ridiculous master race theory.

1.) Harvard University (US)
2.) University of California, Berkeley (US)
3.) Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
4.) California Institute of Technology (US)
5.) Oxford University (UK)
6.) Cambridge University (UK)
7.) Stanford University (US)
8.) Yale University (US)
9.) Princeton University (US)
10.) ETH Zurich (Switzerland)
11.) London School of Economics (UK)
12.) Tokyo University (Japan)
13.) University of Chicago (US)
14.) Imperial College London (UK)
15.) University of Texas at Austin (US)
16.) Australian National University (Australia)
17.) Beijing University (China)
18.) National University of Singapore (Singapore)
19.) Columbia University (US)
20.) University of California, San Francisco (US)

http://www.eng.nus.edu.sg/corporate/top20/
The other countries educate these ppl at their expenses and USA has hardly no costs at all. You seem to have forgotten that it was the United States that pioneered the mass public education system in the first place -- a model which was exported to Europe.
In the past (and present) they lure scientists with lucrative contracts and a lot of cash into the states, to work for their companys.Lets take a look at all the significant accomplishments in technology in the past three thousand years. Then we will discuss who is truly inferior.


Central Events in Technology

-400 -- China, Egypt -- First know use of the abacus.

-270 -- Greece -- Sostrates builds the first known lighthouse, the Pharos of Alexandria.

-245 -- Levant -- First known glass blowing.

-200 -- Asia Minor -- First known use of parchment.

1 -- China -- Chinese engineers invent the sternpost rudder, enabling efficient steering of large vessels.

100 -- China -- First known use of paper for writing (earlier verisons had been used for packing and other purposes).

250 -- China -- First gunpowder (date uncertain).

300 -- China -- First known use of stirrups.

984 -- China -- Chinese engineers invent locks for canals.

1045 -- China -- Bi Sheng invents movable type, reinvented by Gutenberg in Germany, 1440.

1502 -- Germany -- Peter Henlein invents the mainspring in a pocket watch (and invents the pocket watch itself).

1556 -- Germany -- Georgius Agricola's De re Metallica is for centuries the best text on mining.

1589 -- England -- William Lee invents the stocking frame, the basis for all subsequent knitting nad lace-making machines.

1603 -- England -- Hugh Platt discovers coke, essential to steel production.

1622 -- England -- William Oughtred invents the slide rule by repositioning Gunter's scales.

1642 -- France -- Blaise Pascal invents a calculating machine, the Pascaline, that can handle up to nin-digit numbers.

1656 -- Netherlands -- Christiaan Huygens invents the pendulum escapement and thereby invents the pendulum clock.

1679 -- France -- Denis Papin invents the pressure cooker.

1690 -- France -- Denis Papin invents the atmospheric engine, pioneering many design principles of the steam engine.

1693 -- Germany -- Gottfried von Leibniz invents an improved calculator for multiplication and division.

1698 -- England -- Thomas Savery invents the Miners' Friend, a practical atmospheric steam engine without a piston.

1699 -- England -- Jethro Tull invents the modern steam drill.

1709 -- England -- Abraham Darby successfully uses coke in iron smelting.

1712 -- England -- Thomas Newcomen uses steam to push a piston.

1731 -- England -- John Hadley invents the reflecting octant, precursor of the modern sextant, which follows in 1757.

1733 -- England -- John Kay invents flying shuttle, an important step toward automatic weaving.

1740 -- England -- Benjamin Huntsman develops the crucible method for making homogeneous steel (Sheffield steel), with high tensile strength.

1742 -- USA -- Benjamin Franklin invents the Franklin stove, a major improving in heating efficiency.

1750 -- USA -- Benjamin Franklin invents the lightning rod.

1764 -- England -- James Hargreaves invents the spinning jenny, which does the work of 30 spinning wheels.

1764 -- Scotland -- James Watt invents the condenser, employing latent heat to improve the efficiency of the steam engine, the first of several improvements that create the modern steam engine.

1765 -- England -- John Harrison completes 40 years of refinement of an accurate ship's chronometer, enabling the determination of longitude and revolutionizing navigational techniques.

1769 -- England -- Richard Arkwright invents the water frame, a waterwheel driven machine device that powers multiple spinning machines and a foundation of the modern factory system.

1770 -- England -- Richard Arkwright, Samuel Need, and Jedediah Strutt open a water-driven mill at Cromford, the start of the factory system.

1776 -- England -- John Wilkinson invents the first precision boring machine, essential for the manafacture of cylinders for steam engines.

1779 -- England -- Abraham Darby III and John Wilkinson build an all-iron bridge at Coalbrookdale.

1781 -- Scotland -- Jame Watt invents a governor for a steam engine and uses a sum-and-planet gear to use a steam engine to drive a wheel.

1782 -- Scotland, England -- James Watt and Jonathan Hornblower invent a double-acting steam engine in which steam is admitted alternatively on both sides of the piston.

1783 -- France -- L.S. Lenormand, Jean Blanchard, and André Gernerin invent the first parachute capable of carrying a human.

1783 -- France -- The Montgolfier brothers conduct the first manned flight of a hot air balloon.

1785 -- France -- Claude Berthollet invents chemical bleach (chlorine and potash).

1785 -- USA -- Oliver Evans invents an elevator to move grain, automating the process and requiring only two workers.

1787 -- USA -- John Fitch invents a working steamboat.

1793 -- USA -- Eli Whitney invents the cotton gin, revolutionizing the economics of cotton production.

1795 -- France -- Nicolas Appert discovers that food can be preserved by heating, leading to the invention of canned food.

1796 -- Bohemia -- Aloys Senefelder invents lithography.

1800 -- Italy -- Alessandro Volta invents the voltaic cell, the first battery.

1804 -- England -- Richard Trevithick uses a locomotive on rails to pull iron from an ironworks to the Glamorgan canal.

1805 -- France -- Joseph-Marie Jacquard invents punch cards to create patterns with the Jacquard loom, the first nonalphabetic means of storing information.

1807 -- USA -- Robert Fulton builds the first commercially successful steamboat.

1814 -- England -- George Stephenson invents a practical steam locomotive.

1815 -- Scotland -- John McAdam invents the modern paved road.

1820 -- USA, Scotland -- Cyrus McCormick, Obed Hussey, and Patrick Bell invent independent versions of the mechanical reaper in the course of the decade.

1822 -- France -- Joseph Niépce creates the first permanent photograph.

1824 -- England -- Joseph Aspdin invents Portland cement.

1825 -- England -- Stephenson begins the first rail service using a steam locomotive.

1831 -- England -- Michael Faraday invents the electric generator.

1831 -- USA -- Joseph Henry invents a practical electric motor.

1833 -- England -- Charles Babbage designs an "analtyic engine," programmed by punch cards, that is the conceptual origin of the computer.

1835 -- USA -- Samuel Colt invents the Colt revolver.

1836 -- England -- John Daniell invents the Daniell cell, the first modern battery.

1830 -- USA, England -- William Cooke, Charles Wheatstone, and Samuel Morse independently invent the telegraph in the course of the decade.

1839 -- England -- William Grove invents the fuel cell, producing electricity by combining hydrogen and oxygen.

1839 -- France -- Louis Daguerre invents the camera and plates that make photography practical.

1839 -- Scotland -- Kirkpatrick Macmillian invents the first true bicycle.

1839 -- USA -- Charles Goodyear invents vulcanization, revolutionizing the utility of rubber.

1841 -- England -- William Fox-Talbot invents a photgraphic negative that permits unlimited paper positives.

1842 -- England -- John Lawes invents the first chemical fertilizer.

1843 -- England -- Isambard Brunel builds a propeller-driven, iron, transatlantic liner.

1843 -- England -- John Lawes founds the Rothamsted Experimental Station for improving agricultural production, introducing rigorous experimental procedures and field trials.

1844 -- USA -- Samuel Morse creates the first functioning telegraph line, from Washington to Baltimore.

1845 -- Germany -- Christian Schonbein invents nitrocellulose, or gun cotton.

1846 -- USA -- Elias Howe invents a two-thread, lock-stich sewing machine.

1847 -- Italy -- Ascanio Sobrero prepares nitroglycerine.

1851 -- USA -- Issac Singer invents an improved sewing machine with treadle and lock stitch.

1852 -- France -- Henri Giffard conducts the first successful flight of a powered airship (a steam powered dirigible).

1852 -- France -- Jean Foucault invents a gyroscope that can be used as a substitute for a magnetic compass.

1852 -- USA -- Elisha Otis invents the safety elevator.

1853 -- England -- Abraham Gesner and James Young invent kerosene.

1853 -- England -- George Cayley invents a glider that accomplishes the first unpowered, manned flight in a heavier-than-air vehicle.

1854 -- France, Germany -- Robert Bunsen and Henri St.-Claire Deville develop an electrolytic process for obtaining metallic aluminum from sodium aluminum chloride.

1856 -- England, USA -- Henry Bessemer and William Kelly invent the Bessemer process for manafacturing steel.

1856 -- England -- William Perkin invents a synthetic dye (mauve), founding the synthetic organic chemical industry.

1859 -- France -- Gaston Planté invents the rechargable storage battery.

1859 -- USA -- Edwin Drake drills the first successful oil well, in Titusville, Pennsylvania.

1859 -- USA -- George Pullman invents the sleeping car.

1860 -- France -- Jean Lenoir invents a practical internal combustion engine.

1861 -- France -- Eugene Meyer and Pierre Michaux invent the chain-driven bicycle.

1865 -- England -- Alexander Parkes creates laboratory samples of celluloid.

1865 -- USA -- Linus Yale invents the pin-tumbler cylinder lock.

1866 -- Sweden -- Alfred Nobel invents dynamite.

1866 -- USA -- Cyrus Field lays the first successful transatlantic telegraph cable.

1877 -- France -- Georges Leclanché invents the forerunner of an easily manafacturing dry cell battery.

1867 -- USA -- Carlos Glidden and Christopher Sholes invent the first commerically practical typewriter.

1868 -- USA -- George Westinghouse invents an automatic air brake for railroad cars.

1869 -- Belgium -- Zénobe Gramme and Ernst Siemens develop and manafacture a DC dynamo.

1869 -- France -- Ferdinand de Lesseps supervises the design and construction of the Suez Canal.

1869 -- USA -- John Hyatt invents a commerically successful plastic (celluloid).

1876 -- Germany -- Nikolaus Otto invents the four-stroke cycle basic to modern combustion engines.

1876 -- USA -- Alexander Bell and Elisha Gray independently invent the telephone.

1877 -- USA -- Thomas Edison invents the phonograph.

1878 -- England, USA -- Thomas Edison and Joseph Swan independently invent the carbon filament incandescent bulb.

1880 -- Herman Hollerith invents the first workable electromechanical calculator, used to automate tabulation of the 1890 U.S. Census.

1883 -- France -- Louis de Chardonnet invetns the first synthetic fabric, rayon.

1883 -- USA -- Nikola Tesla invents a motor using alternating current.

1884 -- England -- Charles Parsons invents a successful steam turbine.

1884 -- USA -- Lewis Waterman invents the free-flowing fountain pen.

1884 -- USA -- Ottmar Mergenthaler invents the linotype machine.

1885 -- Germany -- Carl Benz invents the first true automobile.

1885 -- USA -- William Stanley invents a transformer for shifting voltage and amperage.

1886 -- France, USA -- Charles Hall and Pierre Héroult invent an inexpensive method for extracting aluminum.

1887 -- Scotland -- John Dunolp invents the pneumatic rubber tire.

1888 -- USA -- George Eastman invents the Kodak camera.

1889 -- England -- Frederick Abel and James Dewar invent cordite, leading to smokeless gunpowder.

1889 -- USA -- Thomas Edison invents the motion picture camera.

1891 -- USA -- Edward Acheson invents carborundum, the first industrial abrasive.

1892 -- Germany -- Rudolf Diesel invents the diesel engine.

1900 -- Germany -- Ferdinand Zeppelin begins the first airline, using rigid airships.

1901 -- Italy -- Guglielmo Marconi broadcasts radio waves from England to Newfoundland.

1903 -- USA -- The Wright Brother's airplane achieves the first successful powered flight by a heavier-than-air machine.

1904 -- USA -- John Fleming invents the rectifier, the first radio tube.

1906 -- USA -- Lee De Forest invents the amplifier vacuum tube.

1908 -- Germany -- Fritz Haber invents a process, later perfected by Carl Bosch, for mass production of nitrates, which in turn permits mass production of fertilizers (and explosives).

1908 -- USA -- Henry Ford invents the assembly line.

1909 -- USA, Scotland -- Leo Baekeland and James Swingburne independently invent a thermosetting plastic.

1911 -- Switzerland -- Jacques Brandenberge invents cellophane.

1911 -- USA, Germany -- Elmer Sperry and Hermann Anschutz-Kampfer independently invent the gyrocompass.

1911 -- USA -- Charles Kettering invents an electric starter for cars.

1912 -- Germany -- Friedrich Bergius invents a process of produce gasoline from coal hydrogenation.

1914 -- USA -- The Panama Canal is completed.

1917 -- USA -- Clarence Birdseye and Charles Seabrook invent a technique for quick-freezing foods, founding the frozen food industry.

1918 -- USA -- Edwin Armstrong invents the superheterodyne receiver, making home radio receivers possible.

1921 -- USA -- Thomas Midgley, Jr., invents tetraethyl lead, an anti-knock compound for gasoline.

1932 -- USA -- Vladimir Zworykin invents the iconoscope, the precursor of the television tube.

1926 -- USA -- Robert Goddard invent the liquid-fuel rocket.

1926 -- USA -- Samuel Warner introduces a motion picture system that integrates sound into film.

1927 -- USA -- Charles Lindbergh pilots the first nonstop flight from the United States to continental Europe.

1929 -- Germany -- Fritz Pfleumer invents magnetic recording of sound.

1929 -- USA -- Edwin Armstrong invents frequency modulation (FM), a method of transmitting radio waves without static; perfected in 1933.

1930 -- England -- Frank Whittle invents the jet engine.

1930 -- USA -- Thomas Midgley, Jr., discovers freon, the refrigerant.

1930 -- USA -- Vannevar Bush invents a machine capable of solving differential equations.

1931 -- USA -- Wallace Carothers invents nylon.

1932 -- USA -- Edwin Land invents a synthetic substance that will polarize light, leading to the first synthetic light-polarizing film.

1935 -- Scotland -- Robert Watson-Watt invents a way to display radio wave information on a cathode ray tube, enabling the development of radar.

1936 -- USA, Germany -- Igor Sikorsky and Heinrich Foch independently invent a successful helicopter.

1938 -- USA -- Roy Plunkett invents Teflon.

1938 -- USA -- The Biro brothers invent the first workable ballpoint pen.

1939 -- Germany -- Hans Ohain designs the first successful jet plane.

1939 -- Switzerland -- Paul Muller discovers the insecticidal properties of DDT.

1940 -- USA -- George Stibitz invents the Complex Number Calculator, the first machine to service more than one terminal and to be used via a remote location.

1943 -- France -- Jacques Cousteau and Emile Gagnan invent the aqualung.

1943 -- USA -- Martin Whitaker and Eugene Wignar lead the construction of the first operational nuclear reactor.

1945 -- England -- Arthur Clarke conceptualizes the use of satellites for global communication.

1946 -- USA -- ENIAC, the first entirely electronic computer, developed by John Eckert, John Mauchly, Arthur Burks, and John von Neumann, becomes fully operational.

1946 -- USA -- Arthur Burks, John von Neumann, and Hermann Goldstine's "Preliminary Discussion of the Logical Design of an Electronic Computing Instrument" provides the conceptual foundation for computer development in the coming decades.

1947 -- USA -- Charles Yeager pilots the first supersonic flight.

1947 -- USA -- Edwin Land, Howard Rogers, and William McCune invent the Polaroid camera.

1948 -- USA -- John Bardeen, Walter Houser, and William Shockley invent the transistor.

1948 -- USA -- Peter Goldmark invents the long-playing record.

1950 -- England -- Alan Turing creates the Turing test, establishing a criterion for judging artificial intelligence.

Guest
Saturday, January 8th, 2005, 12:01 AM
The so-called Aryan race doesn't exist. Perhaps you are referring to all the Nazis we wiped off the face of the earth in between 1941 and 1945. We terminated all those losers decades ago.

I don't think you're making it easier for yourself and the other Americans in here, or for those others who do not take an absolute anti-American stance, with remarks like this. :icon_wink

Kristallnacht
Saturday, January 8th, 2005, 12:05 AM
Perhaps you are referring to all the Nazis we wiped off the face of the earth in between 1941 and 1945. We terminated all those losers decades ago.

They say "Nazis" but mean Germans....

FadeTheButcher
Saturday, January 8th, 2005, 12:15 AM
Your "significance" in global affairs rests on your military hegemony which you achieved because the Anglo element in Europe betrayed our continent and because over the last century you have done everything in your power to undermine and destroy Europe. The United States is not a European nation. It is part of North America, which is an entirely different continent. And Americans have hardly "betrayed" Europe either, as we have no allegiance whatsoever to it in the first place. The majority of our ancestors came here to make a better life for themselves and leave Europe behind. And to be perfectly honest, that is precisely what we have done, as the U.S. left Europe in the dust over a century ago when it began to degenerate and go into decline for largely internal reasons.

But you seem to have a problem accepting that. This stems from your own exaggerated sense of self-importance and your inability to understand that you lost both world wars. Maybe this is why you worship a dead guy and his deceased cult. You hate Americans in precisely the same manner that children hate their parents. You are a lot of whine . . . but that's about it. In reality, you know very well who's the boss. Want to know the difference between the Romans and the Americans? The Americans conquered Germany. Funny how the master race can't seem to win wars . . . or urinate while standing! :icon_evil

Rome, AC... Rome, DC?

http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/...02/0918rome.htm (http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/analysis/2002/0918rome.htm)

By Jonathan Freedland

Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/)
September 18, 2002

They came, they saw, they conquered, and now the Americans dominate the world like no nation before. But is the US really the Roman empire of the 21st century? And if so, is it on the rise - or heading for a fall? Jonathan Freedland sifts the evidence.

The word of the hour is empire. As the United States marches to war, no other label quite seems to capture the scope of American power or the scale of its ambition. "Sole superpower" is accurate enough, but seems oddly modest. "Hyperpower" may appeal to the French; "hegemon" is favoured by academics. But empire is the big one, the gorilla of geopolitical designations - and suddenly America is bearing its name.

Of course, enemies of the US have shaken their fist at its "imperialism" for decades: they are doing it again now, as Washington wages a global "war against terror" and braces itself for a campaign aimed at "regime change" in a foreign, sovereign state. What is more surprising, and much newer, is that the notion of an American empire has suddenly become a live debate inside the US. And not just among Europhile liberals either, but across the range - from left to right.

Today a liberal dissenter such as Gore Vidal, who called his most recent collection of essays on the US The Last Empire, finds an ally in the likes of conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer. Earlier this year Krauthammer told the New York Times, "People are coming out of the closet on the word 'empire'." He argued that Americans should admit the truth and face up to their responsibilities as the undisputed masters of the world. And it wasn't any old empire he had in mind. "The fact is, no country has been as dominant culturally, economically, technologically and militarily in the history of the world since the Roman empire."

Accelerated by the post-9/11 debate on America's role in the world, the idea of the United States as a 21st-century Rome is gaining a foothold in the country's consciousness. The New York Review of Books illustrated a recent piece on US might with a drawing of George Bush togged up as a Roman centurion, complete with shield and spears. Earlier this month Boston's WBUR radio station titled a special on US imperial power with the Latin tag Pax Americana. Tom Wolfe has written that the America of today is "now the mightiest power on earth, as omnipotent as... Rome under Julius Caesar".

But is the comparison apt? Are the Americans the new Romans? In making a documentary film on the subject over the past few months, I put that question to a group of people uniquely qualified to know. Not experts on US defence strategy or American foreign policy, but Britain's leading historians of the ancient world. They know Rome intimately - and, without exception, they are struck by the similarities between the empire of now and the imperium of then.

The most obvious is overwhelming military strength. Rome was the superpower of its day, boasting an army with the best training, biggest budgets and finest equipment the world had ever seen. No one else came close. The United States is just as dominant - its defence budget will soon be bigger than the military spending of the next nine countries put together, allowing the US to deploy its forces almost anywhere on the planet at lightning speed. Throw in the country's global technological lead, and the US emerges as a power without rival.

There is a big difference, of course. Apart from the odd Puerto Rico or Guam, the US does not have formal colonies, the way the Romans (or British, for that matter) always did. There are no American consuls or viceroys directly ruling faraway lands.

But that difference between ancient Rome and modern Washington may be less significant than it looks. After all, America has done plenty of conquering and colonising: it's just that we don't see it that way. For some historians, the founding of America and its 19th-century push westward were no less an exercise in empire-building than Rome's drive to take charge of the Mediterranean. While Julius Caesar took on the Gauls - bragging that he had slaughtered a million of them - the American pioneers battled the Cherokee, the Iroquois and the Sioux. "From the time the first settlers arrived in Virginia from England and started moving westward, this was an imperial nation, a conquering nation," according to Paul Kennedy, author of The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers.

More to the point, the US has military bases, or base rights, in some 40 countries across the world - giving it the same global muscle it would enjoy if it ruled those countries directly. (When the US took on the Taliban last autumn, it was able to move warships from naval bases in Britain, Japan, Germany, southern Spain and Italy: the fleets were already there.) According to Chalmers Johnson, author of Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire, these US military bases, numbering into the hundreds around the world, are today's version of the imperial colonies of old. Washington may refer to them as "forward deployment", says Johnson, but colonies are what they are. On this definition, there is almost no place outside America's reach. Pentagon figures show that there is a US military presence, large or small, in 132 of the 190 member states of the United Nations.

So America may be more Roman than we realise, with garrisons in every corner of the globe. But there the similarities only begin. For the United States' entire approach to empire looks quintessentially Roman. It's as if the Romans bequeathed a blueprint for how imperial business should be done - and today's Americans are following it religiously.

Lesson one in the Roman handbook for imperial success would be a realisation that it is not enough to have great military strength: the rest of the world must know that strength - and fear it too. The Romans used the propaganda technique of their time - gladiatorial games in the Colosseum - to show the world how hard they were. Today 24-hour news coverage of US military operations - including video footage of smart bombs scoring direct hits - or Hollywood shoot-'em-ups at the multiplex serve the same function. Both tell the world: this empire is too tough to beat.

The US has learned a second lesson from Rome, realising the centrality of technology. For the Romans, it was those famously straight roads, enabling the empire to move troops or supplies at awesome speeds - rates that would not be surpassed for well over a thousand years. It was a perfect example of how one imperial strength tends to feed another: an innovation in engineering, originally designed for military use, went on to boost Rome commercially. Today those highways find their counterpart in the information superhighway: the internet also began as a military tool, devised by the US defence department, and now stands at the heart of American commerce. In the process, it is making English the Latin of its day - a language spoken across the globe. The US is proving what the Romans already knew: that once an empire is a world leader in one sphere, it soon dominates in every other.

But it is not just specific tips that the US seems to have picked up from its ancient forebears. Rather, it is the fundamental approach to empire that echoes so loudly. Rome understood that, if it is to last, a world power needs to practise both hard imperialism, the business of winning wars and invading lands, and soft imperialism, the cultural and political tricks that work not to win power but to keep it. So Rome's greatest conquests came not at the end of a spear, but through its power to seduce conquered peoples. As Tacitus observed in Britain, the natives seemed to like togas, baths and central heating - never realising that these were the symbols of their "enslavement". Today the US offers the people of the world a similarly coherent cultural package, a cluster of goodies that remain reassuringly uniform wherever you are. It's not togas or gladiatorial games today, but Starbucks, Coca-Cola, McDonald's and Disney, all paid for in the contemporary equivalent of Roman coinage, the global hard currency of the 21st century: the dollar.

When the process works, you don't even have to resort to direct force; it is possible to rule by remote control, using friendly client states. This is a favourite technique for the contemporary US - no need for colonies when you have the Shah in Iran or Pinochet in Chile to do the job for you - but the Romans got there first. They ruled by proxy whenever they could. We, of all people, should know: one of the most loyal of client kings ruled right here, in the southern England of the first century AD. His name was Togidubnus and you can still visit the grand palace that was his at Fishbourne in Sussex. The mosaic floors, in remarkable condition, are reminders of the cool palatial quarters where guests would have gathered for preprandial drinks or a perhaps an audience with the king. Historians now believe that Togidubnus was a high-born Briton educated in Rome, brought back to Fishbourne and installed as a pro-Roman puppet. Just as Washington's elite private schools are full of the "pro-western" Arab kings, South American presidents or African leaders of the future, so Rome took in the heirs of the conquered nations' top families, preparing them for lives as rulers in Rome's interest.

And Togidubnus did not let his masters down. When Boudicca led her uprising against the Roman occupation in AD60, she made great advances in Colchester, St Albans and London - but not Sussex. Historians now believe that was because Togidubnus kept the native Britons under him in line. Just as Hosni Mubarak and Pervez Musharraf have kept the lid on anti-American feeling in Egypt and Pakistan, Togidubnus did the same job for Rome nearly two millennia ago.

Not that it always worked. Rebellions against the empire were a permanent fixture, with barbarians constantly pressing at the borders. Some accounts suggest that the rebels were not always fundamentally anti-Roman; they merely wanted to share in the privileges and affluence of Roman life. If that has a familiar ring, consider this: several of the enemies who rose up against Rome are thought to have been men previously nurtured by the empire to serve as pliant allies. Need one mention former US protege Saddam Hussein or one-time CIA trainee Osama bin Laden?

Rome even had its own 9/11 moment. In the 80s BC, Hellenistic king Mithridates called on his followers to kill all Roman citizens in their midst, naming a specific day for the slaughter. They heeded the call - and killed 80,000 Romans in local communities across Greece. "The Romans were incredibly shocked by this," says ancient historian Jeremy Paterson of Newcastle University. "It's a little bit like the statements in so many of the American newspapers since September 11: 'Why are we hated so much?' " Internally, too, today's United States would strike many Romans as familiar terrain. America's mythologising of its past - its casting of founding fathers Washington and Jefferson as heroic titans, its folk-tale rendering of the Boston Tea Party and the war of independence - is very Roman. That empire, too, felt the need to create a mythic past, starred with heroes. For them it was Aeneas and the founding of Rome, but the urge was the same: to show that the great nation was no accident, but the fruit of manifest destiny.

And America shares Rome's conviction that it is on a mission sanctioned from on high. Augustus declared himself the son of a god, raising a statue to his adoptive father Julius Caesar on a podium alongside Mars and Venus. The US dollar bill bears the words "In God we trust" and US politicians always like to end their speeches with "God bless America."

Even that most modern American trait, its ethnic diversity, would make the Romans feel comfortable. Their society was remarkably diverse, taking in people from all over the world - and even promising new immigrants the chance to rise to the very top (so long as they were from the right families). While America is yet to have a non-white president, Rome boasted an emperor from north Africa, Septimius Severus. According to classicist Emma Dench, Rome had its own version of America's "hyphenated" identities. Like the Italian-Americans or Irish-Americans of today, Rome's citizens were allowed a "cognomen" - an extra name to convey their Greek-Roman or British-Roman heritage: Tiberius Claudius Togidubnus.

There are some large differences between the two empires, of course - starting with self-image. Romans revelled in their status as masters of the known world, but few Americans would be as ready to brag of their own imperialism. Indeed, most would deny it. But that may come down to the US's founding myth. For America was established as a rebellion against empire, in the name of freedom and self-government. Raised to see themselves as a rebel nation and plucky underdog, they can't quite accept their current role as master.

One last factor scares Americans from making a parallel between themselves and Rome: that empire declined and fell. The historians say this happens to all empires; they are dynamic entities that follow a common path, from beginning to middle to end.

"What America will need to consider in the next 10 or 15 years," says Cambridge classicist Christopher Kelly, "is what is the optimum size for a nonterritorial empire, how interventionist will it be outside its borders, what degree of control will it wish to exercise, how directly, how much through local elites? These were all questions which pressed upon the Roman empire." Anti-Americans like to believe that an operation in Iraq might be proof that the US is succumbing to the temptation that ate away at Rome: overstretch. But it's just as possible that the US is merely moving into what was the second phase of Rome's imperial history, when it grew frustrated with indirect rule through allies and decided to do the job itself. Which is it? Is the US at the end of its imperial journey, or on the brink of its most ambitious voyage? Only the historians of the future can tell us that.

norcalnative1971
Saturday, January 8th, 2005, 01:09 AM
Oh. So you want to talk about the truth now? Okay. Snort,
chortle — seriously — guffaw… Let's step out of your make believe fantasy world where the Third Reich still exists and take a look at reality.


Jesus Christ is deader than a door nail, and it doesn't stop millions of CONservatives like yourself from worshipping him.




The so-called Aryan race doesn't exist. Perhaps you are referring to all the Nazis we wiped off the face of the earth in between 1941 and 1945. We terminated all those losers decades ago.

You are nothing but an Enemy that should be fitted with a Braided "Neck-Tie."

National Socialism lives in the hearts of many around the world. Deal with it, prick.

k0nsl
Saturday, January 8th, 2005, 01:16 AM
They say "Nazis" but mean Germans....

Yep, NEVER forget that 'Hitler', Gestapo', 'The Nazis', etc., are ALL code words for 'German'. That is the reason for the incessant vilification of all these names and concepts. There is NEVER any philosophical reason given, always intellectual trash such as - They were abominable, Their philosophy was unacceptable, etc.

-k0nsl

FadeTheButcher
Saturday, January 8th, 2005, 01:20 AM
The Roman analogy is fascinating but it actually does not suffice. The Roman Empire was at its height a regional hegemon. There has never been anything in history remotely like the American empire today.

"All told, there have been no more than seventy empires in history. If the Times Atlas of World History is to be believed, the American is, by any account, the sixty-eighth. (Communist China is the sixty-ninth; some would claim than the European Union is the seventieth.) How different is the American empire from previous empires? Like the ancient Egyptian, it erects towering edifices in its heartland, though these house the living rather than the dead. Like the Athenian Empire, it has proved itself adept at leading alliances against a rival power. Like the empire of Alexander, it has a staggering geographical range. Like the Chinese Empire that arose in the Ch'in era and reached its zenith under the Ming dynasty, it has united the lands and peoples of a vast territory and forged them into a true nation-state. Like the Roman Empire, it has a system of citizenship that is remarkably open. Purple Hearts and U.S. citizenship were conferred simultaneously on a number of the soldiers serving in Iraq last year, just as service in the legions was once a route to becoming a civis romanus. Indeed, with the classical architecture of its capital and the republican structure of its constitution, the United States is perhaps more like a "new Rome" than any previous empire -- albeit a Rome in which the Senate has thus far retained its grip on would-be emperors. In its relationship with Western Europe too, the United States sometimes seem like a second Rome, though it seems premature to hail Brussels as the new Byzantium. . .

Nor should it be forgotten what formidable military technology can be unleashed from these bases. Commentators like to point out that "the Pentagon's budget is equal to the combined military budgets of the next 12 or 15 nations" and that "the U.S. accounts for 40-45 percent of all defense spending of the world's 189 states." Such fiscal measures, impressive though they sound, nevertheless understate the lead currently enjoyed by American armed forces. On land the United States has 9,000 M1 Abrams tanks. The rest of the world has nothing that can compete. At sea the United States possesses nine "supercarrier" battle groups. The rest of the world has none. And in the air the United States has three different kind of undetectable stealth aircraft. The rest of the world has none. The United States is also far ahead in the production of "smart" missles and pilotless high-altitude "drones." The British Empire never enjoyed this kind of military lead over the competition. Granted, there was a time when its network of naval and military bases bore a superficial resemblance to America's today. The number of troops stationed abroad was also roughly the same. The British too relished their technological superiority, whether it took the form of the Maxim gun or the Dreadnought. But their empire never dominated the full spectrum of military capabilities the way the United States does today. Though the Royal Navy ruled the waves, the French and later the Germans -- to say nothing of the Americans -- were able to build fleets that posed credible threats to that maritime dominance, while the British army was generally much smaller and more widely dispersed than the armies of the continental empires.

If military power is the sine qua non of an empire, then it is hard to imagine how anyone could deny the imperial character of the United States today. Conventional maps of U.S. military deployments understate the extent of America's military reach. A Defense Department map of the world, which shows the areas of responsibility of the five major regional commands, suggests that America's sphere of military influence is now literally global. The regional combatant commanders -- the "proconsuls" of this imperium -- have responsibility for swaths of territory beyond the wildest imaginations of their Roman predecessors. USEUCOM extends from the westernmost shore of Greenland to the Bering Strait, from the Artic Ocean to the Cape of Good hope, from Iceland to Israel."

Ferguson, pp.14-17

FadeTheButcher
Saturday, January 8th, 2005, 01:38 AM
Jesus Christ is deader than a door nail, and it doesn't stop millions of CONservatives like yourself from worshipping him. You seem to be a little confused. Jesus Christ has some relevance in the modern world. He has over a billion followers today. Adolf Hitler is just some sadistic dictator that lost WW2 . . . a man held in contempt in his own country.
You are nothing but an Enemy that should be fitted with a Braided "Neck-Tie."BANG! That was the last thought that went through your hero's mind. :rofl:
National Socialism lives in the hearts of many around the world. Deal with it, prick.(chews bubble gum)

LOL okay.

Draugr
Saturday, January 8th, 2005, 02:37 AM
I believe the term 'Americanism' was applied to Irish and Italian Catholics in America, to denote the fact that they put being 'American' ahead of being Catholic. This fact was brought to the attention of the Pope by the German Catholics in America.

Nachtengel
Sunday, April 19th, 2009, 06:26 AM
Is 'Americanism' a religion?

By Spengler

Islamists and neo-conservatives concur in calling "Americanism" a religion, the "worst-ever theology" in the view of the former, but according to the latter, "the beliefs that make Americans positive that their nation is superior to all others - morally superior, closer to God". The quotations come respectively from Abid Ullah Jan at the Tanzeem-e-Islami website, and from Professor David Gelernter in the January 2005 Commentary magazine.

America stems from a religious movement and displays a marked religious character, but its actual religious life is splintered among scores of major denominations. Gelernter wants to lump it all into a generic American religion. He is just as wrong as the Islamists. Both confound American religion with the Bush administration's strategic agenda. American Christianity at once is more personal and strategically more powerful than either the Islamists or the neo-conservatives imagine.

The neo-conservatives are ideologues, not God-fearers, and they habitually confuse their political agenda with the kind of religious conviction that transforms the world. In an August 10, 2004, essay I attacked the idea that Islam was a political ideology rather than a religion. More than a billion people embrace Islam with a passion because it is indeed a religion, promising continuity to fragile societies beset by global pressures. Islam's genius, I contended, is to promise to remake the world in the image of traditional society through jihad (Islam: Religion or political ideology? (http://www.proxyboxonline.com/browse.php?u=Oi8vd3d3LmF0aW1lcy5jb20vYXR pbWVzL0Zyb250X1BhZ2UvRkgxMEFhMDEuaHRtbA% 3D%3D&b=13)). What America offers Muslims by way of social progress - shopping malls, broadband Internet, and voter registration drives - represents a deadly threat to traditional society.

Religion proposes not to create a more perfect union, nor to safeguard individual rights, but to vanquish death. America never has had a dominant religion. On the contrary: America has had to rediscover Christianity every few generations, in the form of new "Great Awakenings" (see What makes the US a Christian nation (http://www.proxyboxonline.com/browse.php?u=Oi8vd3d3LmF0aW1lcy5jb20vYXR pbWVzL0Zyb250X1BhZ2UvRkszMEFhMDQuaHRtbA% 3D%3D&b=13), Nov 30, 2004). The first Great Awakening made the Revolution, and the second made the Civil War. Today's evangelical Great Awakening well may spill out of its American confines and change the course of the world.

Gelernter is a distinguished computer scientist, sadly a victim of the Unabomber, who now has become an amateur theologian. Religion absorbs the aging neo-conservatives, and Gelernter shows an authentic interest in matters spiritual. One cannot dismiss him as another acolyte of Leo Strauss promoting religion as a useful public myth. But a tin ear for matters of the soul afflicts Gelernter along with other neo-conservatives. In 2003 I drew attention to a volume on the Hebrew prophets by Norman Podhoretz, Commentary's editor-at-large (Neo-cons in a religious bind (http://www.proxyboxonline.com/browse.php?u=Oi8vd3d3LmF0aW1lcy5jb20vYXR pbWVzL0Zyb250X1BhZ2UvRUYwNUFhMDIuaHRtbA% 3D%3D&b=13), Jun 5, 2003). Podhoretz, a literary pundit and promoter of single-issue causes, imagines that the prophets were pundits like him promoting a single-issue cause ("the war against idolatry"). Now Gelernter avers, "Americanism is in fact a Judeo-Christian religion; a millenarian religion; a biblical religion." This is utter and complete rubbish.

Gelernter retreads the often-told story of the Puritan Fathers' desire to become (as he puts it) "God's new chosen people, living in God's new promised land ... God's new Israel". He concludes:
To sum up Americanism's creed as freedom, equality, and democracy for all is to state only half the case. The other half deals with a promised land, a chosen people, and a universal, divinely ordained mission. This part of Americanism is the American version of biblical Zionism; in short, American Zionism.America has deep roots in the Hebrew Bible (Mahathir is right: Jews do rule the world (http://www.proxyboxonline.com/browse.php?u=Oi8vd3d3LmF0aW1lcy5jb20vYXR pbWVzL0Zyb250X1BhZ2UvRUoyOEFhMDIuaHRtbA% 3D%3D&b=13), Oct 28, 2003), but Gelernter has misread them. Islamists misread matters the same way, for what that is worth. Abid Ullah Jan complains:
Radicalism, fanaticism and fundamentalism are the terms exclusively used for religions such as Islam, Christianity and Judaism. But the worst form of fanaticism that we witness today is of the American domination theology, which is even worse than a cult ... Americans who note that America is a bastion of democracy and country of peace and tolerance are right, but only in a narrow bookish sense which hides the facts that America's foundations lie in the genocide of natives and 100 years of lynchings. Other than that, the history of US invading and terrorizing other states, carving state territories from other's land and imposing its hegemony dates as back to the day when America came into existence.That the Puritan founders of America spoke of a New Israel founding a new Promised Land is well known; readers who wish to learn more about biblical religion in the American Colonial period would do well to consult the work of Michael Novak, a Catholic theologian at Georgetown University, or Paul Johnson's History of the American People.

The trouble, as Gelernter is aware, is that Puritanism melted away into Unitarianism at the turn of the 19th century, leaving hardly a residue of its old Zionist attitude. "Where did all the powerful religions' passion go?" asks Gelernter. "Puritanism did not drop out of history. It transformed itself into Americanism." Americanism, we are led to believe, came from Puritanism, but when Puritanism was no more, it turned into Americanism - a mode of reasoning that would be circular were it not so elliptical.

Gelernter simply ignores the central fact of American religious history, namely that each Christian revival occurred among different people than the previous one. "Different people than the original Puritans of the Massachusetts Bay Colony were swept up in the First Great Awakening, and yet another group of Americans, largely Westerners, joined the Second Great Awakening during the 19th century. Yet another group of Americans joined ... [the]Third Great Awakening of 1890. If the rapid growth of born-again denominations constitutes yet another 'Great Awakening', as some historians suppose, the United States is repeating a pattern of behavior that is all the more remarkable for its discontinuity," I observed in the cited November 30 essay.

The trouble is that Gelernter is a secular Jew with a midlife curiosity about matters of the soul, but no inner sense of what religion means. The motivation of religious Americans is too trivial to register on his ideological Richter scale. That motivation is redemption from sin. It may seem trivial to point out the obvious, but Christianity, as opposed to Gelernter's fleshless and bloodless American religion, has to do with the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the Cross to redeem mankind from original sin. The Great Awakenings of American religion do not begin with a public reading of the Declaration of Independence, but with a return in fear and trembling to the Cross. Religion first of all is personal - deeply and searingly personal - and political only as an afterthought.

Sin, Gelernter would know if he bothered to read St Paul, means death. During the Great Extinction of the Peoples ensuing the fall of Rome, Christianity called out of the nations individuals who wished to belong to a New Israel, a people of God beyond ethnicity with the expectation of eternal life beyond the grave. The Gentiles understood original sin, I have argued in the past, to mean the sin of having been born Gentile, that is, into a people doomed to extinction.

Christ sacrificed himself, Christians believe, because man is too depraved to redeem himself. Christianity demands that each individual turn his back on ethnicity and tribe, and accept Jesus in a discrete act of faith. For the endangered nations of late antiquity and the early Middle Ages, Christianity promised a new life, as it does today to hundreds of millions in the southern hemisphere whose existence is no less precarious than that of earlier converts.

Few Christians are quite satisfied with the promised Kingdom of God beyond the grave, and therefore demand something in the present life. Europe's Christians never quite shed their pagan (that is to say national) roots, worshipping their own ethnicity in images of Jesus, the Virgin and the saints. That flaw, in my view, ultimately destroyed European Christianity (Why Europe chooses extinction (http://www.proxyboxonline.com/browse.php?u=Oi8vd3d3LmF0aW1lcy5jb20vYXR pbWVzL2Zyb250X3BhZ2UvRUQwOEFhMDEuaHRtbA% 3D%3D&b=13), Oct 8, 2003).

The Puritans who settled America, as Gelernter observes, looked backward "to the pure Christianity of the New Testament - and then even farther back. Puritans spoke of themselves as God's new chosen people, living in God's new promised land." The Puritans tolerated none of the old pagan devices to pad the Kingdom of God with corporeal consolations. But they did not abjure the world this side of the grave. Rejecting the old pagan devices, the Puritans instead adopted a Hebrew one, that is, a temporal order in emulation of Israel.

New Israel, namely those called to the Cross from among the nations, has no kingdom of this Earth. Old Israel, by contrast, is quite at home in this world. Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel, the sage of postwar Conservative Judaism, observed that Judaism is not a concept, but rather a life, that is, the continuation of the life of Abraham. The Jewish people are redeemed by virtue of Abraham's covenant with God, in recognition of the Patriarch's righteousness as well as his absolute faith. To the Christian these are promises of things to come; to the Jews this is mere family history.

To stretch the point, one might say that that the United States is founded on a Judaizing heresy. Christianity struggles to find a place for human initiative. If man is so depraved that he cannot save himself, what role can he play in his own salvation? To establish an earthly regime in pursuit of grace is more a Jewish than a Christian project. In Christian terms, God's grace, through Jesus' sacrifice on the Cross, is a free gift to man, who otherwise has no way to save himself. If depraved humans can do nothing for their own salvation, it is nonsense to attribute to man free will, as Martin Luther lectured the Catholics. God will decide who will be saved (the "predestined" Elect) and who will burn in hellfire.

The Reformation rejected Free Will, but the founders of the Massachusetts Bay Colony undertook one of the boldest acts of will in human history, namely to seek redemption by becoming a new People in a new Land. Argues Gelernter:
When I say that Americanism equals American Zionism, I am in one sense merely adding up statements by eminent authorities. John Winthrop [governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony] in 1630: "Wee shall finde that the God of Israell is among us." Thomas Jefferson in is Second Inaugural address: "I shall need ... the favor of that Being in whose hands we are, who led our fathers, as Israel of old, from their native land and planted them in a country flowing with all the necessities and comforts of life." ... Abraham Lincoln declared his wish to be a "humble instrument in the hands of the Almighty and of this, His almost chosen people".Lincoln's ironic characterization of Americans as God's "almost chosen people" is to the point; for America to draw inspiration from the Hebrew Bible is salutary, but for Americans to regard themselves as God's chosen is idolatrous. Megalomania of this ilk infected Europe, beginning with Richelieu's France in the 17th century, and then Nicholas II's Russia and later Adolf Hitler's Germany in the 20th (The sacred heart of darkness (http://www.proxyboxonline.com/browse.php?u=Oi8vd3d3LmF0aW1lcy5jb20vYXR pbWVzL0Zyb250X1BhZ2UvRUIxMUFhMDEuaHRtbA% 3D%3D&b=13), Feb 11, 2003), with apocalyptic consequences. (Jefferson, of course, was a Deist who expurgated the New Testament of reference to the divinity of Jesus.)

Again, Christ's kingdom is not of this world. Luther spoke of "two kingdoms", namely the political life of the corrupt world in contrast to the Kingdom of Heaven. To conflate them in the form of a "New Jerusalem" broke not only with Christian tradition, but beggared Christian doctrine, for it presumed that man might redeem himself. If that is true, why did Jesus need to sacrifice himself? That, I believe, is what led to the extinction of Puritanism. Christians do not join the New Israel through their mere presence in a polity, but by personal faith in God's Kingdom.

Christianity, that is, belief in the redemption of mankind through Christ's sacrifice, all but disappeared from Massachusetts in the decade after the American Revolution. All but one of Boston's churches and Harvard College officially had turned Unitarian by 1800. John Winthrop's descendants found themselves redeemed from earthly tyranny, and promptly became the Brahmins of Boston, a byword for the arrogance of inherited wealth. Without the benefit of the Puritans' accumulated wisdom and with no help from the faculty of Harvard, Americans of the frontier revived Christianity, making Methodism and Baptism the dominant US denomination by the fourth decade of the 19th century. Not the American Puritan religion, but the transplanted denominations of the English working class prevailed.

From this milieu (the "second Great Awakening") came Abraham Lincoln, the self-educated frontiersman who would join no Church, yet spoke in near-prophetic tones of the mingling of divine will in the affairs of men. The religious crusade that was the civil war achieved its goal, redeeming the United States from slavery, at which point Christianity dissipated, just as it had after the Revolution.

America provides uniquely fertile ground for Christianity, because immigrants to America leave behind the pagan elements that corrupted European Christianity. But that is mere potential, not religion. Man does not live by the American Dream alone. American evangelicals, whose appearance on the political scene has caused so much consternation on the left, spent decades cultivating personal piety, defending hearth and home against the septic tide of popular culture, long before circumstances pressed them into the world arena.

The trouble is that Christianity cannot resolve the conundrum of free will and original sin. A handful of Christians, eg the Mennonites, will form small communities apart from the world and wait for divine grace to find them. That leads to irrelevance. Most Christians will go out into the world and reform it so that it is more amenable to grace, reverting, as it were, to the Hebrew roots of Christianity. Puritan emulation of the Hebrews, once it achieved its earthly goals, led to Brahmin arrogance. America's tragedy, one hears, is to win the war and lose the peace. In the 18th, 19th, and again in the 20th century, the United States achieved its dream, but lost its soul.

Today's evangelicals have risen up against soulless secular culture, not against worldly evil. President George W Bush and his neo-conservative counselors believe that the US will engineer democratic regimes throughout the world; in this, I believe, they will fail. Despite their failure, American religion yet may play the decisive role on the world stage. As I observed last year (Ask Spengler (http://www.proxyboxonline.com/browse.php?u=Oi8vd3d3LmF0aW1lcy5jb20vYXR pbWVzL0Zyb250X1BhZ2UvRkYwMkFhMDEuaHRtbA% 3D%3D&b=13), Jun 2, 2004), Professor Philip Jenkins of Pennsylvania State University reports that US Christian denominations are at the forefront of an "historical turning point" in Christianity, "one that is as epochal for the Christian world as the original Reformation". In the October 2002 edition of The Atlantic Monthly, he wrote, "In the global South (the areas that we often think of primarily as the Third World) huge and growing Christian populations - currently 480 million in Latin America, 360 million in Africa, and 313 million in Asia, compared with 260 million in North America ... It is Pentecostals who stand in the vanguard of the Southern Counter-Reformation. Though Pentecostalism emerged as a movement only at the start of the twentieth century, chiefly in North America, Pentecostals today are at least 400 million strong, and heavily concentrated in the global South. By 2040 or so there could be as many as a billion, at which point Pentecostal Christians alone will far outnumber the world's Buddhists and will enjoy rough numerical parity with the world's Hindus."

As Asia Times Online reader Douglas Bilodeau of Indiana observed, "If Mecca is ever razed by an invading army, it will not be Israeli or American or European, but will march up from Africa south of the Sahara."

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/GA04Aa01.html