You know me.
I don’t care how nasty America’s history is. I keep the America-bashing to a bare minimum. In fact, I can’t recall the last time I trashed the country. The people who run it, however, are fair game.
I found a discussion-worthy article called Why Anglos Lead. (The artice is long, but it’s a really interesting read. If you have the time, especially if you plan to participate in the discussion, read the whole thing.) Lawrence Mead highlights a few reasons why he believes the United States is the world’s leader:
- Other rich countries that might show leadership have abdicated
- Wealth and Law
- The Projection of Force
- Confidence in War
- The Deference of Others
Of course, there are other glaring reasons why Anglos, especially the United States, lead the world in practically every way. I’d like to get a good discussion going on this, so I’ll start the ball rolling with this hint: Christianity.
What are some obvious reasons Anglos (America) lead the world? Don’t worry about whether your answers will be offensive.
Update: Brit Clive Davis (whom I met at the Pajamas Media launch) on America-bashing.
{ 53 comments }
I’ll tell you why we lead the world. We do it because no one else will and because frankly for all our faults if others lead it it would be much worse. The best reason to take leadership is not because we are magically right on all things and like Mary Poppins practically perfect in every way. But, because we can’t trust any one else to do it.
If by “Anglos” you mean the Anglosphere — Britain (the ailing momma), the US, Australia, Canada, and — coming up fast — India, it may be that all have adopted variations of the Magna Carta. Often overshadowed by the US Constitution, the Magna Carta began the erosion of absolute rule by the monarch or anyone else.
Countries which have not fared so well — France and her appallingly bloody revolution and her dictatorship by Napoleon, Germany and its (tamed for the moment) bloodlust, Russia’s long, sad history of absolute rulers — be they czars or commisars — none of these ever came close to anything like the Magna Carta.
almost 800 years later and we are still resonating in tune with that document.
Christianity. My thoughts exactly when I read that article. Isn’t it amazing how people always manage somehow to overlook the only civilizing force that has ever proven to be self-sustaining? Ignoring the Christian roots of this nation and the Anglosphere in general just perpetuates the racist idea that whites really are just that much smarter. They’re not, but they are overwhelmingly more Christian.
I think we (I say this as a proud black Man) “Anglos” lead because of our confidence in Technology.
We know that the human capacity to invent our way out of our current situation is vast, and we expect it from ourselves. We demand the advancement of ourselves, and happily look for ways to use those new inventions to reach our goals.
In the broader, history of the world sense of things, you can look at the Greek, Roman, Byzantine, and the various Chinese dynasties as empires that ruled the respective world without Christianity.
Looking at the more modern world (last 400-500 years), the industrial revolution seems to be one of the biggest forces. Christianity was spreading to Africa, India and North America but was following the path blazed by advanced naval and military technology.
I imagine you could make an argument for the influence of protestant thinkers on the idea of time and work in Western society.
In the most contemporary sense (20th century), it seems USA has been successful because of the political foundations mentioned in the article, strategic geographic location, the cold war military build up,and ability to bring the best and brightest thinkers from all over the world with our education system (ties in with the cold war build up).
Gentlefolk
Let us be specific, most of the Anglo world tries to highlight the best that Christianity has to offer and Christians evangelize more than any other religion. Look no further than the weaning of Mexican citizens from the Catholic church to Evangelical Protestant churches. From one form of Christianity to another form of Christianity. Muslim, Hindu or Buddhist faiths do not allow this conversion.
I agree with the notion of Christianity being the driving force behind America’s domination and Anglo domination in particular. It was the European/Spanish that worked to spread the gospel across the world and sought to flee religious tyranny, which ultimately lead to us having this free nation.
It is funny how many blacks seem to blame white Christians for slavery yet, it was these so called white Christians and their “white” Christianity that allows us to enjoy the freedoms we have today and has ushered in salvation for an African slave that may not have had the opportunity to received Christ otherwise.
I thank God almighty for his grace in allowing blacks to survive the atrocities of slavery and enjoy the many freedoms we have today, including the freedom to worship as we please. Had the middle passage not occurred, would there be as many Black Christians living today?
Just maybe slavery was intended for evil but God used it for good.
Let’s also add in an emphasis on individual freedoms. Most of the rest of the world is mired in some form or other of dictatorship. In those areas that allow people to take some responsibility for the direction of their lives, well, those lives start improving rapidly.
Even in places like Russia and China. Until the governments start cracking down on those freedoms, out of fear.
And yes, I think Christianity, with it’s love and respect teachings, is a factor.
Isn’t this the Devil’s world right now? America dominates in exact proportion to its adherence to Christian values. Christianity saves America from its Satanic self. We are also blessed with tremendous resources, diverse people and separation of powers in a dynamic capitalist system.
I dont hate america but could it be that are economy has been helped by slave labor and now illegal alien cheap labor? Just a thought. I am not sure about it just something that came off the top of my head.
I beg to differ greatly in the ‘bible-belt’ version of the ‘true american’.
Remember theses are the same ‘true americans’ that turn a blind eye to racism, lynching, sexism, and tolerance. Whether you accept it or not we live and must survive in the multi-ethnic, religiously diversified, culturally mixed society that is not decreasing but increasing.
The Crusades are over and have little or no chance of being repeated.
Those of you who embrace the single god theory under the management of the ‘Jesus Christ Project’ have the right to believe so and propagate.
So do those who don’t!
Like it or not the freedom of religious belief does not mean only those who do things the way in which is acceptable to me. Tolerance is what makes a REAL TRUE AMERICAN.
You might be a TRUE AMERICAN if it never occurred to you to be offended by the phrase, “One nation, under God.”
But a REAL TRUE AMERICAN knows that is only one theory and just because it’s popular, does not make it true. Remember the thought that blacks were sub-human, cursed by God and/or genetically inferior as very popular too, for a long time.
You might be a TRUE AMERICAN if: You’ve never protested about seeing the 10 Commandments posted in public places.
But a REAL TRUE AMERICAN allots public space for key quotes from the Koran and other organized religious groups and knows their meanings and holds them in equal reverence.
You might be a TRUE AMERICAN if: You still say “Christmas” instead of “Winter Festival.”
But a REAL TRUE AMERICAN has a broad enough perspective to understand that Christmas is not the only one of the important organized religious festivals and that Jews, Muslims, and others enjoy festivities during this season. Kwanzaa takes on the teaching of principles of living agreed upon by almost all established religions in there current state.
You might be a TRUE AMERICAN if: You wish that organized prayer should be returned to the school system.
But a REAL TRUE AMERICAN that religious freedom is solely Dependant on personal choice and that anyone can perform any type of religious activity any time they wish should they choose to and it does not endanger others.
You might be a TRUE AMERICAN if: You bow your head when someone prays.
But a REAL TRUE AMERICAN simply provides due deference during any organized religious activities and that there a time and place for everything. Organized meeting of the general public is not one of them.
You might be a TRUE AMERICAN if: You stand and place your hand over your heart when they play the National Anthem.
But a REAL TRUE AMERICAN teaches their kids to be polite, successful, respectful and to do unto others and you would have them to due unto you.
You might be a TRUE AMERICAN if: You treat Viet Nam vets with great respect, and always have.
But a REAL TRUE AMERICAN shows the world how to be polite, successful, and respectful. They also do unto others and you would have them to do to you.
You might be a TRUE AMERICAN if: You’ve never burned an American flag.
But a REAL TRUE AMERICAN shows the world how to be polite, successful, and respectful. They also do unto others and you would have them to do to you.
You might be a TRUE AMERICAN if: You know what you believe and you aren’t afraid to say so, no matter who is listening.
But a REAL TRUE AMERICAN shows the world how to be polite, successful, and respectful. They also do unto others and you would have them to do to you.
You might be a TRUE AMERICAN if: You respect your elders and expect your kids to do the same.
No argument here…
You might be a TRUE AMERICAN if: You’d give your last dollar to a friend.
You might be a REAL TRUE AMERICAN if in addition to sharing that dollar you help them with getting the next. “Teaching a man to fish is always better that just giving the fish to them.”
God Bless the U S A and the People of the World in Which We Live in spite of the Anglo-culture and those who purport to promote the various aspects of the ‘jesus christ project’.
Remember my philosophy:
‘I will gladly march in to hell alone before following a bunch of bible thumping, self righteous bigots into their version of heaven.’
Raymon is an “old friend,” everyone, so I’m indulging him a bit. Try not to bite off his head.
– Admin
I’m sorry if this is off subject but I am a college student coming into my political consciousness And I have to get this out:
I would love to seriously understand why the black republicans tend to be so condescending? I am an African American god fearing woman first, I am independent thinking, and I’m always PRACTICAL
So why do I continue to hear the black repub. say their thinking practical as if the rest of the black voting population isn’t being practical when they vote democrat! Maybe I’m just naive but I’m not uneducated or in need of practicality. We have always been a diverse people! not all looking the same nor thinking the same BUT WE ARE A GREAT PEOPLE! Now I don’t know if the conservative republican “practical thinking” will help us as a people get to were we need to be any more than the progressive democrat “practical thinking” But I believe if we are to truly be practical we as a people must not pledge allegiance to any political party RED or BLUE but instead lead and vote in Our peoples best interest
please email me your thoughts anedd8811@email.vccs.edu
I’m not a “black Republican,” so I can’t speak for them. I consider myself an “independent conservative,” and I’ve been blogging and writing for over two years. If you really want answers, I recommend you read some of my columns found on the Writings page and at least 1/3 of my archives, which go back to November 2003. By the way, your comment is off-topic, but I’ll allow it. – Admin
The money quote for me is: “Either good government must be exported to the Third World, or those peoples will immigrate to the West in search of it, which poses its own problems.”
Shari, good point vis a vis illegal labor. However, why is it that illegals risk life and limb to enter this country? Because prospects are bleak & bleaker back home due to corrupt institutions. Vicente Fox would rather export his unemployable masses here than deal with the infrastructure that causes poverty & misery. Mexico is a prime candidate for the exportation of good government, even over the objections of their elites if need be.
Why do masses of Chinese strive to cross the pacific to work in sweatshops here? Because for all the market reforms, many would rather risk it all for opportunity. Much like the pilgrims.
The real reason for exploiting cheap labor is simply because it was there. We did not create the demand for cheap labor. The cheap labor presented itself as a result of failed policies back home. The decision to exploit that is yet another matter, even in slavery.
Nevertheless, it is Christendom that put an end to the slave trade within our realm even as it persists to this day, sanctioned under Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Paganism, Communism, you name it, even crime syndicates, ie sex trade.
Back to the cheap labor point. Are you aware that most of our early settlers actually came over as bonded labor? Most were too poor to buy passage over the Atlantic, so they bonded themselves, typically for 7 years in exchange for a ticket to the New World.
What built this country wasn’t slave trade, it was the desire to create one’s own destiny. There were a lot more bonded folks than slaves brought to these shores. It can even be argued that the slave business in the South actually hampered growth & prosperity. To wit, the acceleration in technological development once the reliance on slaves was removed.
In reading the Mead’s article I cannot help, but think under it all there seems to be this tinge of the Christian Identity (or British Israelism) philosophy. His analysis sounds very much like some of their other writings, sans the theology and evangelism. So when someone after reading the article simply posits that “Christianity†is the reason for “Anglo†dominance, clearly red flags go up for me.
The Christian Identity philosophy has not only been disproved by honest biblical scholars but by “hard†science scholars looking at the evidence from the region we have to date.
The “Christian Identity†ideology is not only misleading but a very slippery slope and can (and often does) lead people to this anachronous essentialist view of Christianity that includes the Klan, which is the largest Christian identity movement to date ( with the so-called Worldwide Church of God (WCG) as the next). WCG may have renounced such beliefs, but i have not checked out their literature in some time so i am not sure.
More than anything else I think what accounts for is whatever “dominance†“we†can claim is God’s tremendous mercy on America and indeed the world. I am little uncomfortable to say that it is because of “our Christian roots” as if they predate others “Christian rootsâ€. The oldest Christian churches in the world are in Ethiopia. They to this day are some of the most devout Christians out there, yet Ethiopia languishes in poverty and lack of resources. Where is their dominance and favor? Ethiopia, not England, not anywhere in Europe was directly referenced in the book of Genesis. So let’s not entertain this notion that Christianity did not exist in Africa before Caucasians took it there. The birthplace our faith was more likely in place where people look like me (a black/African-American/etc man), than anywhere in Europe; and it is more highly likely that the Spainards got their Christianity from peoples of African descent as they migrated into Andalusia (Iberian peninsula) than from anywhere else.
For more reading on Anglo/British Israelism and Christian Identity go here http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_bels.htm.
Thanks for reading this if my comments get approved. Be Blessed
fred, your point about the Coptics is fine to a point, but did their Christian roots ever translate to public policy/governance?
Furthermore, Ethiopia was launched into a cycle of poverty ever since Haile Selassie was run out by the Marxists and beset by continued wars and rumors of wars.
One could even say their troubles went as far back to the days of Italian colonialism. People can’t be productive when they have to dodge bullets, oppression and terror.
But this doesn’t have to be a permanent situation. And I have to go back to my “money quote” mentioned in my earlier post.
At one time, Ethiopia was very much the jewel of East Africa and for a long time at that — going all the way back to the age of Sheba.
Finally, the Klan is NOT the largest Christian identity movement to date and never was. It is/was the largest Democratic party movement dressed up in pseudo-christian psycho-babble for the express purpose of holding back the non-white man.
Much as it could be argued that the Aryan Nation is the largest right-wing pseudo-christian bunch of bigots for the express purpose of holding back the non-whites.
Just because someone goes around quoting scriptures don’t make them Godly. Even Satan knows the Bible inside out and can quote it to suit his purposes.
Ciao
Wow. Thanks for the topic. First, I have to write that I am disappointed in the author. I cannot believe he is a professor of politics, unless that is something different then political science. He complete lack of discuss of the rights of man is shocking, because it is elemental to the subject.
I do not think generic Christianity is the point. Certainly, Roman Catholics are Christian, but one cannot look on any of their countries or colonies as successful.
{Regarding Shari #10.} Slave and cheap labor are not what build this economy. It free labor, the rule of law, and the movement of capital the make this country strong. Latin America has been full of slave labor and cheap labor and it has not helped.
I think Protestant Christianity is very important, because it endows members with responsibility and accountability. Think of the Plymouth Colony they established their own laws, the Mayflower Compact, before they exit their boats. Protestant Churches have boards made up of members that run their Churches.
England’s greatest gift was the notion of a free man at a time when other countries thought their Rulers were gods, or that God has established their absolute right to rule.
It has been the great fortune of the world that England and the US have kept expanding the notions of man and his inherent rights.
England and the US abolished the slavery trade and then they abolished slavery, because of their notions about of the rights of man and Christian enlightenment.
La Shawn
Although I have high regard for Christianity, I don’t think it’s why “Anglos” lead….
In fact, Anglos (especially Americans) lead because they are fortunate progenies of founding fathers (many of whom were arguably un-Christian) who had the brilliance to bequeath a system of governance and civil liberties (all based on the rule of law) the have proved most conducive to personal growth, economic development and national defense.
And, to the extent China, India and other countries emulate key features of this system (the principles of which form the organizing bases of Anglo countries), I submit to you that America’s leadership will diminish in direct proportion (as is fast becoming the case in Asia – where China is assuming leadership, and in Latin America – where Venezuela is assuming leadership (democratically, notwithstanding it’s socialist bent).
Sorry. One more point to question the role of Christianity in this context:
It is generally recognized that Africa and Latin America are two of the most devoutly Christian regions in the world. Yet they have been mired in poverty for as long as Anglos have enjoyed an embarrassment of riches….
Enough said?
anthony, that is what was said of Japan & the Asian Tigers back in the 80s, in the 90s it was the Euro Fortress.
Whither these paragons of economic might? Assuming leadership? Leadership is more than just sacksful of $$$. Who is the first country the world looks to for aid in natural disasters? Who do they hope will come riding to the rescue in times of political distress?
Ellen nailed it: free labor, the rule of law, free movement of capital, as well as responsibility and accountability of the free man.
Japan didn’t have all of that – namely free labor & accountability. Euroland didn’t — bound by the degrees & pedigrees of their edumacated socialist elites. China won’t as long as the Chinaman has no freedom of religion & political thot.
Democratic Venuzuela? Ha, just because our own Jimmah Cahtah says it was a valid election don’t make it so. Chavez is a thug and Venezuela will soon be as rich as Cuba, as long as he stays in power.
The shining hope for Venezuela is the the old adage, ‘Live by the sword, die by the sword’. I think within the year, months even, he may well be overthrown.
I cringe at thinking that I may sound a bit like Pat Robertson here. However, if you will bear with me a moment… I am a Christian, and so my take on this is necessarily defined through that lens. I think that answering the question of Anglo (and particularly American) leadership is a complex task. However, it must be said that this nation has, in the years of its existence, become the greatest evangelistic influence of out time. God’s purposes, as I have understood the Scriptures, are fairly clear. He desires to bring glory to Himself (and rightfully so)through the salvation of many by Jesus Christ (whom I am not afraid to make mention of on every occasion).
America has been useful in accomplishing this purpose, and God has shown us immeasurable grace and forbearance because of it.
However, I also consider that our present course may very well bring that forbearance to an end. I’m not speaking of Republican this or Democratic that here. Rather, it is the deliberate, informed abandonment of moral and ethical standards which contributed greatly to the formation of our present opportunity, and the rejection of the message which brings the salvation of His great concern. While I have no intention of identifying any particular disaster with His judgment, it would not be unusual, given the biblical record, for us to find ourselves experiencing increasing difficulties which are in direct relation to the aforementioned abandonment and rejection. In summary, I believe that a consideration of man’s own abilities, philosophies, and opportunities are secondary to God’s stated intentions in history as I have understood them.
http://www.isteve.com/ is an anthority on the subject in my opinion.
Regards
Yes – Christianity. That’s it!! That’s why Mexico and all of South America are doing so well. A lot of the Soviet Union was Christian too.
I love your site and your courageous and (almost always) thoughtful point of view, but I just can’t agree with you on this.
Accompanied by a little luck and a lot of opportunity (eg: westward expansion), there is nothing that correlates higher with success and wealth than freedom.
Also, don’t forget, 200 years into the Roman and English empires, they were looking pretty good, too!! In another 300 years or so, we might be Maine.
We are still a young country, and a young culture (although I think we are the oldest continuously operating government in existence, currently).
Freedom is it. Everything else is details. Oh, and a solid rule of law helps.
Although I don’t like sarcasm when it’s directed toward me, I want to make a note. The “Christian” underpinnings of our nation are a definite factor in our success, in my somewhat “thoughtful” point of view. Nobody here, including me, said that Christianity is the only reason we lead the world, “Pablo.” I wish your reading comprehension matched your wit. – Admin
Hey, hey, hey. Don’t get bent out of shape, here. Your track record for being thoughtful is a great deal higher than my own. I just meant that I agree with most of what you write, not all of it.
I was only mildly jabbing at you. Sheesh! It was a little funny.
C’mon, you have to admit, from a religion that brought us the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, and Pat Robertson, Christianity is not immune from criticism. Nor does it have an exclusive relationship with faith and morality.
I believe faith was important to the founding fathers, and it is important now. But Christian faith? Israel does just fine without “Christian” values.
Of the world’s religions I have surveyed, not that this is terribly scientific or anything, my observation is that most of religion is the same. Belief in family, morality, higher power (of one fashion or another), etc. So, what is so exclusively Christian that is a factor in our collective success?
The thing that bends me out of shape, and maybe too present in my original comments, is that when people say things like “christianity is a factor in our success,” they usually mean it in a superior way. Kinda like saying, if the buddhists had discovered America, they would have mucked it up.
And, I don’t see where I say that you say christianity is the “only” reason for America’s success.
I apologize. I hadn’t intended this to be presented as an argument. You just got me going again.
Respectfully,
Paul Bressie
Interesting article. In general terms, the assertion that “effective” government (I put effective in quotes because the article has a unclear notion of what comprises good governance. I believe this needs to be qualified more in order to understand that good governance is not the exclusive domain of Anglo cultures) explains the current distribution of powers in our global community is a little too simple in this case. Racism, sexism, labor exploitation and basic violations of human rights underly the history of Anglo good governance, and these things should not be ignored. In reading the discussion, I would warn against disregarding the basic injustice which was rooted into the economic system through institutions such as slavery, immigration laws, trade laws, and laws of property ownership. These unjust practices severely limit the extent to which free market principles can occur. More importantly, they force us to reckon with something left unanswered in this article, which is what comprises good governance.
In regards to Christianity, as a Christian, I do not believe that the history of “Anglo”‘ countries reflects the teachings of Jesus Christ. To the extent that the governance of Anglo countries, in many respects, violates the fundamental tenets of Christian doctrine, it doesn’t seem to me that this explains Anglo dominance.
In fact, I would go as far as saying that the explanation of Anglo dominance rests in the many ways in which the history of Anglo societies is the antithesis of Christian doctrine. The racist greed of imperialism and its material and strategic effectiveness in consolidating a network of resources which allowed governments to meet the needs of select groups of their citizenry must be considered and factored into any explanation of Anglo dominance. While the historical connection between imperialism and the contemporary global distribution of historical power can be debated, it would be wrong to dismiss it out of hand.
It used to be argued that Protestantism (specifically) was the key difference between the posperous nations of Northern Europe and the Catholic and Orthodox nations of Europe. The same goes for North America and Latin/South America.
Also known as the doctrine of the “Protestant Work Ethic”.
First, for perspective, I am Christian-like in my beliefs. That said, I have to go with the rule of law- And chief among our rights guaranteed by our law- is the right to practice the religion of our choice, or not to, as the case may be. That “…we are endowed by our creator…” (notice it does not say God) Acknowledges the fact that the new government is subject to something larger. In an interesting read, “Ghengis Khan and the Making of the Modern World” by Jack Weatherford, One thing that stood out was the Khan’s insistance that religious freedom was protected (offenders faced death) yet was an Animist ( I believe that is the correct term) himself. Under his rule he the Far East with the Middle East (everything in between) and stopped just shy of Europe. He even hosted a debate between the three emerging religions of the time (might have been his son ?) namely the Christianity, Islamic, and Jewish religions. His one rule: argue only the benefits of your religion and respect the others. Sound familiar?
Good posting (very polite) and interesting topic.
Sheldon @ #23 “In regards to Christianity, as a Christian, I do not believe that the history of “Angloâ€â€˜ countries reflects the teachings of Jesus Christ. To the extent that the governance of Anglo countries, in many respects, violates the fundamental tenets of Christian doctrine, it doesn’t seem to me that this explains Anglo dominance.
In fact, I would go as far as saying that the explanation of Anglo dominance rests in the many ways in which the history of Anglo societies is the antithesis of Christian doctrine.”
Such as? Inquiring minds would like to know just a few of the many ways. And which doctrines are we talking about?
Thanks.
Our government structures are more able to capture the wisdom of crowds.
In the US, we can access more distributed wisdom than most countries, due to a republican structure, with parallel implementations in different states. And relatively limited government, which allows our culture to carry a lot of information.
Lets not lose it.
I believe that America does have a spiritual destiny of leadership in the world and that much of our painful history has been about the struggle towards fulfilling the purpose which God has for this nation which is to rally all the other nations of the world toward the establishment of world peace and a world civilization which reflects the Will of God, in Biblical language, the Kingdom of God. This is the leadership which ultimately counts. Thanks for pointing out this article. I enjoyed reading it and it gave me some things to think about.
Rather than Christianity as one factor, I’d go with Protestantism, i.e. specifically excluding Catholicism and Orthodox.
I think the split with more authoritarian Catholicism ultimately led to more individual freedom while still keeping moral restraint. The conditions in Catholic South and Latin America are, in my opinion, partially due to this authoritarianism.
Mead points out important events inspired by great thought that occured in England: the adoption of the Magna Carta and the classic liberal economic (modern conservative) thinking of Adam Smith which ended mercantilism and monopoly in favor of free markets and free trade. Those concepts were codified and expanded with the exceptional foresight of the Federalist that drafted the Declaration and Constitution.
At the heart of the governance inspired by the Magna Carta is skepticism of government which was amplified by the Constitutional concept of limited government. Capitalism works because all parties do what’s in their own self-interest, which ironically, usually turns our to be anything but self-serving.
Milton Freidman points out that Capitalism doesn’t flourish where democracy is denied and vice versa. America has combined capitalism and freedom unlike any country in the world. Further, we revere the longest standing governing document in the world the U.S. Constitution (the rule of law).
To La Shawn’s point (and something Mead obliquely references when mentioning transparency of governance) are the values Americans have adopted. Some founders were slave owners, we (black folk) were 60 percenters constitutionally, women weren’t allowed to vote, we broke treaty after treaty with the native population, etc. But the words in our Declaration “We hold these truths to be self-evident” are held before “We the People” and have served as a stinging rebuke, until the injustices are rectified. Some day, we will rectify the injustice to the unborn.
Finally, in his equation, Mead points out military power and its use extends from our values. Limited Government, the rule of law and free markets informed by Judeo-Christian values defended with strength = America.
“You might be a TRUE AMERICAN if: You still say “Christmas†instead of “Winter Festival.â€
But a REAL TRUE AMERICAN has a broad enough perspective to understand that Christmas is not the only one of the important organized religious festivals and that Jews, Muslims, and others enjoy festivities during this season…”
re: this bit of feel good pap, Muslims don’t have important religious festivals during this season. Their festivals/holidays are on a lunar calendar & as such, the holidays are appear at different times throughout the year on the normal calendar. REAL TRUE AMERICANS know that!
Note that the modern calendar comes from the Romans, and was finalized by a Catholic Pope way back in the day, & is basically based on Christ’s time, w/ 0 being the year of Christ’s birth.
The ability to lead is based on having several factors- a moral code ( Judaeo-Christian); a political philosophy that encourages individual
freedom ( democracy, Magna Cart, rule of law):
a sound and mostly victorious military system and tradition; technological and scientific innovation and production and finally, the
will to use all of these in the firm belief that
we can make better choices than most of the other
cultural/ economic /national competitors.
The excerpts below are from a summary of a World
Bank study on the “Wealth of Nations”. I think
they give a basis for where our wealth and power
come from as compared to other countries.
“For the average American living in the United States is like having more than half a million dollars in wealth. So says a new study from the World Bank, Where is the Wealth of Nations?: Measuring Capital for the 21st Century, which makes estimates of the contribution of natural, produced, and intangible capital to the aggregate wealth of 120 countries. ”
“Once the analytical framework is set up, what the researchers at the World Bank find is fascinating. “The most striking aspect of the wealth estimates is the high values for intangible capital. Nearly 85 percent of the countries in our sample have an intangible capital share of total wealth greater than 50 percent,” write the researchers. They further note that years of schooling and a rule-of-law index can account for 90 percent of the variation in intangible capital. In other words, the more highly educated a country’s people are and the more honest and fair its legal system is, the wealthier it is.”
“As noted above, 90 percent of intangible capital is accounted for by years of schooling and the rule of law. On average, the rule of law explains 57 percent of countries’ intangible capital while schooling accounts for 36 percent. The World Bank has devised a rule-of-law index that measures the extent to which people have confidence in and abide by the rules of their society. An economy with a very efficient judicial system, clear property rights, and an effective government will produce higher total wealth. ”
“On the World Bank’s rule-of-law index, the United States scores 92 out of a possible 100. The Swiss are even more law-abiding, achieving a score of 99 out of 100. By contrast, Nigeria’s rule-of-law index score is a pitiful 4.8; Burundi’s 4.3; and Ethiopia’s 16.4. The OECD’s average score is 90, while sub-Saharan Africa’s is 28. …..”
“Where is the Wealth of Nations? convincingly shows what countries need to do to create wealth and lift billions of people out of abject poverty. Establish the rule of law and educate people. The big question that the World Bank researchers don’t answer is : How can the people of the developing world rid themselves of the kleptocrats who loot their countries and keep them poor? “
I’ve seen a lot of dancing around the answer, and no small number of people have hit parts of it. I don’t think that anyone has quite gotten the entirity of the answer stated in one place though. Why do the Anglos lead? Because our culture is built upon three legs:
1. Protestant work ethic: The only people that can outwork us are the Asians.
2. Judeo-Christian religion: Say what you will, it is this, more than anything else, that makes us who and what we are. The thought that we answer to a *rational* (not entirely arbitrary) higher moral authority drives our worldview, influencing:
3. English reverance for the law: In the 12th century, a subtle but profound shift took place in the thinking of people — the King’s law applied to the King himself; the law was paramount, not the King. It was this thinking that drove the barons to Runnymeade and created the Magna Carta.
#10. could it be that are economy has been helped by slave labor and now illegal alien cheap labor?
Of course cheap “alien” labor (legal or otherwise) helps the economy, or else it wouldn’t occur. What’s typically not recognized is that it’s a win-win situation, just like any free economic transaction. The foreign laborer is better off for having the job (or else he’d go back to Mexico, wouldn’t he?), and the employer is better off for having the labor available (or else he wouldn’t hire the illegal alien, would he?).
Legalities cloud the issue — their may be good reasons for limiting legal immigration to less than would naturally occur, but the price is to reduce economic benefits.
Meanwhile, any American who is liable to lose their job to an illegal immigrant who is illiterate and doesn’t speak English really, really needs to develop a more useful skill set. Thus is progress made.
ANDY (Post 18)
You say that Latin America and Africa are heavily Christian, and yet remain in a cycle in poverty.
Do those countries practice Protestant Christianity? Or, are they followers of the Catholic Church?
It’s the Protestant component of Christianity, in my opinion, which leads to leadership. The pioneers of the Protestant Reformation had moral authority on their side, in a way that the corrupt Catholic Church with it’s false idols, don’t—have that same moral authority.
It’s no surprise to me that third world countries, under the clutches of the corrupt, and frankly biblically incorrect …. Catholic Church….remain in poverty with a lack of sound leadership.
P.S. I apologize to any Catholics out there, but even they have problems with their Church!
Glamchild, you got the wrong A-person
But I agree with your challenge of “…generally recognized that Africa and Latin America are two of the most devoutly Christian regions…” by distinguishing between Protestants and Catholics.
In fact, our truly Spiritual brethren over there could teach us a few things about devotion and truth, to wit, the Episcopalians’ dispute over gay priests.
Back to the issue of religion, most of Latin America & Africa practice a Marxist brand of “Christianity”. Libertine theology is the bane of the common people’s existence. Just look at the disaster that is Haiti & Aristides.
Furthermore, as stated elsewhere, that people are devout is not enough, this has to be part and parcel of the government as well.
Ciao
I don’t think that LaShawn is saying “Bible-thumping makes America great!”
I think she is saying the general evangelical Christianity that underlies much of American culture is responsible for many aspects of our society, including its willingness and drive to achieve greatness.
It’s a complex mix of other thoughts, too. Sure, there are neo-classical and pagan and Roman Catholic and what-have-you. But I think she’s saying it’s the general evangelical ground.
BTW, saying that the Founding Fathers weren’t Baptists is far different than saying they were anti-Christian.
Note that the modern calendar comes from the Romans, and was finalized by a Catholic Pope way back in the day, & is basically based on Christ’s time, w/ 0 being the year of Christ’s birth.
Not quite, but it’s a common mistake. There is no year Zero: 1 BC was followed by AD 1. Also note that correct usage is that BC is a suffix and AD is a prefix to the year – this makes sense if you remember AD stands for Anno Domini, literally, “in the Year of our Lord”. Calendars are surprisingly fascinating, a good reference site for the basics is http://aa.usno.navy.mil/faq/docs/calendars.html .
One interesting thing about calendars: everything has changed over the years except the week (for instance, New Year’s day was March 25th in English-speaking countries until 1752, which was also the year when Sept. 2 was followed by Sept. 14, as England finally adopted the Gregorian calendar that had been in use by most other western countries for a century or more.) The week, though, has always been seven days, in uninterrupted sequence since that very first week of Creation…
The problem with identifying Christianity or even the Protestant work ethic as a factor in this discussion is that much of non-Anglo Europe fits these categories, Germany being the largest. The discussion is on the present leadership of Anglo countries only one of which is European.
I’m failing to see how Christianity has anything at all to do with the status of the US being a world leader. The reason we are a world leader is because anytime we think another country might be thinking about stepping up for even a second, we attack them. We are the global equivalent to the school bully, using force to get our way and ignorantly thinking it can continue that way forever. The problem is like the school bully, we will eventually have a horrific fall when the rest of the world finally agrees to put aside their personal differences in the interest of banding together and taking us out. I’m not saying that’s what I want to happen or that I think it will happen in my lifetime, but I think it’s been heading in that direction for a long time.
I think Christianity has not played and will never play a part in our status as a world leader, but it has played a part in the future fall of the U.S. The majority of Christians voted to elect and then re-elect the president who has done, I think, far more harm to our country’s worldwide reputation than any other president in history.
Anglos are a forward looking people. We believe in a better future and are working hard to get there. You cannot lead the way if you are looking backwards. Most others are preoccupied with maintaining the status quo, or wish to turn the clock back. I do not think you can overestimate the importance of our willingness to move forward as a reason we lead.
Andy:
fred, your point about the Coptics is fine to a point, but did their Christian roots ever translate to public policy/governance?
Actually , like our own president many leaders, prior to Haile Selassie saw them selves as rulers sent by God. Your point is taken that such sentiments did not “officially†find their way into the rhetoric and founding documents of the country (as far as I know , I am not an expert of Ethiopia), but I then must seriously question if the sentinments of said Christian roots had truely found their way in to the hearts of our Founding Fathers, given the existence and brutality of slavery at the time our founding documents were drafted.
Furthermore, Ethiopia was launched into a cycle of poverty ever since Haile Selassie was run out by the Marxists and beset by continued wars and rumors of wars.
Point taken, however the presence of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church has still remained rather powerful as a cultural and social force, in spite of regime change.
One could even say their troubles went as far back to the days of Italian colonialism.
Absolutely, many countries on the continent of Africa, suffer from the effect of colonialism.
People can’t be productive when they have to dodge bullets, oppression and terror.
Actually, I beg to differ. I know many people who grew up in environments like this and have been very productive, some of them may actually frequent this website.
But this doesn’t have to be a permanent situation. And I have to go back to my “money quote†mentioned in my earlier post.
At one time, Ethiopia was very much the jewel of East Africa and for a long time at that — going all the way back to the age of Sheba.
Finally, the Klan is NOT the largest Christian identity movement to date and never was. It is/was the largest Democratic party movement dressed up in pseudo-christian psycho-babble for the express purpose of holding back the non-white man.
Much as it could be argued that the Aryan Nation is the largest right-wing pseudo-christian bunch of bigots for the express purpose of holding back the non-whites.
If the Klan (and all of it arms) is not the largest Christian Identity movement in America (I changed the scope of the statement for the sake of discussion, I thought this was understood in my earlier statement, excuse my omission) than not I would like to know what is. I am not trying to politicize this discussion, but I don’t think anyone (Dem or Rep) has a monopoly on “pseudo-christian psycho babbleâ€, both sides use it fairly well when needed. Furthermore I don’t think that such babble, would hold me or any other “non-white man†back.
The information I got as to the Klan being the largest CI movement came from the FBI’s Meddigo report, I think they still have info on it on there website. The other group I cited, World Church of God comes. They said it not me.
Just because someone goes around quoting scriptures don’t make them Godly. Even Satan knows the Bible inside out and can quote it to suit his purposes.
This is true, let’s just not forgot this when our favorite elected officials use rhetoric that may imply a statement of belief, but their behavior may not always come so correct.
Repectfully,
fred
Thomas, I hardly know where to begin. I think the thought processes (I’m being generous here) in your post are one example of why the Left in America is declining even as it becomes more shrill. For you to say:
“The reason we are a world leader is because anytime we think another country might be thinking about stepping up for even a second, we attack them. We are the global equivalent to the school bully…”
is either willful ignorance or just plain stupidity, I’m not sure which. Afghanistan was attacked because it was the personal training ground of Osama Bin Laden, and the Taliban refused our requests to turn him over after the events of September 11, 2001. Iraq was attacked because it was wrongly(?) believed to have WMDs and it had violated seventeen UN resolutions since 1991, including some that threatened the use of force.
Even if you keep up with current events by only watching The Daily Show, you will know that there are all sorts of countries all over the world that are “stepping up†against us every day and we have not attacked them. (I feel like I’m explaining this to a first grader.) Germany and France explicitly denounced our invasion of Iraq. We didn’t attack them. Russia did, too. No attack. Every single Arab state and all the non-Arab Muslim nations were strongly opposed. No attack from us. Our NATO ally, Turkey, refused to let us invade from their territory, upending our war-fighting strategy. No attack. Iran has directly supported terrorist attacks against us since the bombing of the Marine Corps barracks in Lebanon. We have never done anything about that, except to lead the world in imposing sanction. Hugo Chavez is turning Venezuela into another Cuba (you probably see Cuba as a shining example of social justice), and we haven’t attacked, nor will we.
We have trade disputes with Canada over lumber and wheat exports, but we aren’t going to attack. Japan almost wiped out our auto industry in the 1980s, and may yet do so, but we won’t attack. I could fill pages with examples of other countries who have disagreed with us, actively opposed us, and lent material support to our enemies, and we never attacked them.
You can make any number of valid criticisms of this country and its foreign and domestic policies, its culture, and maybe even its political philosophy, but if you want to score some points, it would help if you would stop being an imbecile.
Ok, two notes:
1. It’s called the “Protestant work ethic” for historical reasons having to do with the time of Cromwell and the Roundheads, and the fact that it was an outgrowth of the protestant/reformation society of the times. If renaming it the “Anglo work ethic” is less confusing for you, go for it. Because Germany may be technically Protestant, but you can’t get anything done when you’re taking SIX-week vacations on the north coast or in Italy.
2. The reason some people don’t see how Protestant Christianity has affected our national zeitgeist is because they are either too close to the trees to see the forest, or they just didn’t pay attention in school. I don’t give a rip how agnostic or atheistic you are; if you cannot see that substituting Odin and the Norse panthenon would result in a radically different country, you’re blind.
Read “the Roots of American Order” by Russell Kirk. Some of them off the top of my head (it’s been years since I read it):
Judaism, Christianity, Roman Law & Government, English Common Law and Government, John Locke.
He believed that all the aspects of any civilization arise out of a people’s religion.
Also he mentions Greek government (first democracies and all that) as an example to our founding fathers on how NOT to do it.
Dear Lou North,
And you don’t need a political affiliation to recognize it.
Referring to someone as an imbecile as you butcher their relatively valid point is no way to engage in the sophisticated discourse that a critical mind needs to develop. I think the point made about international relationships is a valid one and deserves more respect than you offer. Theoretically, the mentality of preemptive containment is based on the concept of intimidation. Just as a bully is able to preclude people initiating conflict toward him by pre-empting them, the American political establishment does, and has throughout its history, deemed it appropriate to exert force in order to deter future conflict. Now, I think there is an interesting discussion to have on the fundamental style of justice that arises out of this principle, but it is purely ignorance, in the most objective meaning of the term, to ignore that the principles which our government espouses legitimizes the “bullying” of other countries vis a vis our military and resource advantage. Save the insults for the playground and simply concede the obvious. There is a thin line between leading and bullying.
It’s because we have the hottest chicks.
We also made the best music. (That’s past tense, since rock is dying, rap never should’ve been born, and Middle Eastern music remains largely undiscovered).
Finally, because we’re a melting pot we have the best food. China, Italy, and Mexico aren’t doing much on their own.
Fred, several points.
1)All rulers, from Ceasar to Idi Amin and all points in between/around, are by God’s POV appointed by Him. What they do with that power is of their own free will and judged accordingly. So yes, Bush was “appointed” by God and had it been Al Gored instead, it still would have been by God’s appointement. Why? Cause it says so in the Bible in many places, even by Christ himself. “Give unto Caesar…”
2) The fact that slavery exists is a condition of Man’s imperfection. If slavery must exist, then so be it, but even so, God outlined how they must be treated in such cases. There are a lot of things that God would rather us not do, but if we must, He has a roadmap. To wit divorce, polygamy, political leadership etc. Prior to King Saul, the Jews were ruled by clergy & judges. But the people felt inadequate because other nations had kings & they didn’t — a royal envy.
As pointed out by others, our nation was founded by forward looking fathers. So even while slavery was very much in existence — be releastic there was not much they could have done to stop it, right then and there — they were looking ahead to the day when that blight would pass. That is plain enough from the structure of our founding documents.
3) I don’t think the Ethiopian Orthodox Church was always or ever as strong as you seem to give credit imply. Right now it is but in single digits as a population stat and centered around a relatively small region.
4) Dare I say, depending on the type of colonialism? Some countries were notorious for ransacking everything, others tried to develop the region. We can debate the outcomes, nevertheless the intent was there. Furthermore, you can’t be serious to think that Africa would have been better off if left to their animist superstitions. Missionaries indeed brought light into the dark jungles where heretofore, Satan ruled the hearts & minds of man.
Missionaries for the most part carried out the great commission from God to spread the Gospel unto the ends of the earth, not the “World” as they knew it at the time. As a result, the Book of Life contains the names of a lot more folks, much to Satan’s frustration.
5) With reference to dodging bullets, I think you misconstrued my point. All of these famines (Ethiopia, Sudan, Chad, Zimbabwe, etc, etc) in recent decades were the direct result of wars and corrupt governance, not nature. Raising crops doesn’t happen autonomously or by magic. Crops are intensely TLC dependent. When crops don’t get it, they will whither away, get eaten by animals or what have you. What’s left is unsustainable.
That of course has no bearing on whether a person is “productive” or not — especially when removed from the hardships — it is a matter of survival.
6) Actually, I understood your introducing the Klan to be an attempt to associate them with other “Christian” believers, be they Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant — guilt by association. Nevermind that the Klan also hated the Catholic, the Irish and later the Italians. If that wasn’t, then your mentioning them would really be pointless to the topic at hand, n’est pas? It is a fact of life, human nature actually, that no matter the cause, there will always be unsavory elements that attempt to hitch a ride under the banner.
Andy:
1.As Christians, we believe in God’s omnipotence so I follow your thinking. Indeed every ruler who assumes rule, so long as we assume that God is in control of the universe, is appointed by Him. However there is a distinct difference between one knowing this or holding such a view versus a leader taking the initiative to articulate such views in his platform. In the continuum you cited (All rulers, from Ceasar to Idi Amin and all points in between or around) I am quite sure there are more than a few leaders who did not articulate their rule with regard to God as part of their platform, nor would they frame it as such if they could comment on their rule.
2.I agree that our founding documents were quite promising documents for those designated as “personsâ€, but not quite as promising for those designated as chattel or property. To say that our founding fathers were so forward thinking that they foresaw or envisioned their world without free labor, when it at the time it was a financial staple of colonial economy; I think give them to much credit. Slavery was necessary for the lives they were living and to say that they
3.Actually, the position of the Ethiopia Orthodox Church remained; quite strong during the Dirge (when the facists took over) and the period after the Dirge (I forgot what it is called, but still a Communist regime).
4.I am a little weary of this line of argument that says missionaries brought “the light†into “the darkness†of Africa, more and more scholars are learning that much of what missionaries and “explorers†wrote about the continent of Africa was colored by their biases and misunderstanding and misinterpretation (sometimes deliberately) of the cultures and languages of the people in the areas they were “developingâ€.
As more thorough scholarship is done with regard to the continent and the cultures, languages and peoples there, we are discovering that some of the same creation myths that we hold so dear as original articles in our faith directly mirror creation myths that predated them on the continent of Africa (and I am not talking about this reactionary, Egypt focused Afrocentrism). To simply say that Africa is better off is very arrogant of us, particularly in light of the fact that Africa throughout history has been continually been misunderstood and misinterpreted, often deliberately for justification of ill-treatment or misuse of its beauty, natural and human resources.
5.I made no reference to crops. Maybe I misunderstood your use of the word “productiveâ€, I did not think you were using it with regard to agriculture. I was speaking in more general terms of leading a “productive†life. In the case of agriculture, yes I agree it hard to be at work in a field that doubles as a battleground (although it has been done). My comments were directed at all of the words (or phrases) you used “dodge bullets, oppression, and terrorâ€. My point was that some people have thrived and continue to thrive under such conditions and go on to lead “productive†lives and some of these same people may actually frequent this website. I would be interested in what your definition of hardship is, and it relationship to motivating survival. That a part of your comments sounded kind of Darwinian.
6.Actually, no I am not attempting to associate the Klan with other believers (I am a believer), when I said “all of its arms†I was referring to all of the other “white supremacist†and other tiype of organizations that fall specifically under the “Christian Identity/ British Israelism†banner and how the FBI, classifies such groups as “Christian Identity movement (outlined in their Meddigo Report).
My point in referencing this group specifically was simply to note that simply combining Mead’s analysis with Christianity to substantiate “why Anglo’s lead†was a very dangerous assumption, because it taken together sounds like the same rhetoric of “Christian Identity†movement, the tenets of which obviously no one on this site subscribe to, or least I would hope not, but if they do I guess that is what makes America great n’est pas?
The problem with citing Christianity in general for the Anglosphere’s rise to world power and influence, is that the Anglosphere is not the only group which embraces (or embraced) Christ in both a cultural and religious fashion.
I would qualify the “Christianity” cause by noting that Protestantism is very much at the root of what makes the Anglosphere so great; just as the rise of Protestantism helped lift Europe out of the dark squalor it imposed upon itself under the general rule of Papal doctrine.
Note, this is not a Catholic-bash. I am just observing history.
Protestanism is what allowed the Christian mind to eventually free itself from the chains of monarchical rule and the absolutist thought process. Protestantism allowed for questioning and experimentation, with an aim to practical application, both in materialist realms of the everyday world, and in higher realms of moral and spiritual quest.
Obviously, the Protestant genesis was a long and occasionally bloody one. And what events in particular made English/British history different from that of, say, Germany, where Protestantism had its Continental roots, is a subject so complex I am not sure any of us can truly understand it.
But the proof is in the pudding. Protestant Christianity is intertwined with the rise of the British Empire and, in turn, the birthing of the Anglo republic in North America. It informs great whacks of our society, even now, in our overly secularized and vulgar era.
Yes, Protestantism.
But also marriage
America is the world leader because of food and climate. Where we sit on the globe is the most benign of habitats that is also very well suited to large-scale agriculture. That, and the fact that human civilization arrived here much later than in the old world. Except for an easily gotten-rid of native population, the land was open for the taking.
The Central and South American cultures were equal to or more advanced than their old-world counterparts in many ways when the Spanish arrived, but were un prepared for the fury of the conquistadores.
The next 50 to 100 years should be interesting, as global warming shifts “the money zone” into southern Canada, and Brazil takes over as the worlds food-producing superpower.
Comments on this entry are closed.