America and Her Friends

Mr. Trump has visited Europe. There he made an impression. The reactions provide an opportunity to use items from the “hard-to-believe” file.

POTUS has found it easy to shock “Europe” by clearly stating some truths. Straying into the world of facts means exiting the favored paradise of PC-infested liberal imagination. That being the case, his assessments that shocked those that overcome reality through piety, have earned the man the adjective “brutal”.

Was he? Would you, hunting for Easter eggs, enlighten a three-year old about the incompatible reproductive habits of rabbits and chicken? Now then, that would be brutal. Has Trump taken a leave from being “the elephant in the china shop” to do such a thing? By the standards of his surprised fellow-leaders, the answer is “yes”. Does that condemn the firebrand that upsets the consensual apple-cart? “Hardly”.

Let us begin with the background of the turmoil. Long ago, America had asked NATO to spend, as agreed, 2% of GDP on defense. Only a few met that standard. Germany, that invests 1.2% needs to be mentioned because much of what follows rotates around her. Clearly, for the “world export champion” this is rather meager.

However, that performance can be said to be an expression of a national consensus. Once we insert another ignored news item, the pretense gains substance. Only 40% of the Germans are willing to help an attacked NATO member. Poland and the US weigh in with 62%. The Dutch score 72% and even in France 53 % favor fulfilling their obligation. Oddly, but not surprisingly, the entire pact’s population wants and expects the USA to act against aggression. If anything, this reveals the problems of the alliance and the need for its revision.

Yet, there is more. Germany’s has a rejoinder to the critique about under-spending. It is that her outlay only seems to be under the agreed upon level. If one counts the costs of peace missions, and the money spent on the migrant masses invited to make the country more multicultural, then the norm is met. By that logic, we may list as fighting terrorism the candles and the dolls deposited at the scenes of the massacres by those that feel deputized by Allah to kill unbelievers.

Such absurdities are so frequent that one smells the replacement of survival with exhibited weakness. The unstated hope of those who need to look up instead of watching their step to keep their halo from falling down, is that if we are “nice” then they, too, will be nice. Here a cute example that suggests a PC way to spend on the military while serving a noble cause, in this case that of gender equality.

Being properly enthused, you deserve the info Spiegel, a weekly, shared with us on 29/05. We are told that the German army tests military uniforms for pregnant women. The naïve might think here of clothing for office duty. But no, camouflage dresses, for service in the field, are being developed.

It would be a mistake to underestimate the impact on an enemy of such evidence of decadence and lost bearings. About that foe little is known at this time. However, should we assume that it will be deterred once dirty diapers are hurled at him?

Those who can imagine themselves sharing a genuine front with diaper slingers that incant the Geneva Convention’s rules, will ask to be reassigned. An ally that is a millstone around your neck is more dangerous than the enemy can be. As things stand, some governing elites prefer to provide for security by searching for enemies impressed facing an international court -after their assured victory.

Decisive steps have been taken in a direction that adds seriousness to the jest.  After May 28, the summits attended by EU and world leaders, the distance between the President and the moralizing elites represented by Merkel, Macron, Juncker, and Tusk, the gap became too wide to be ignored. Conclude: The bold and the principled stands alone. At least the space around him will not be crowded.

In Brussels and Sicily, it became clear to official Europe that, not only is their power network at home challenged, but that additionally, the isolated, post-liberal small states of the pact, have a virtual spokesman that cannot be bullied or seduced.

Up until now, Europe’s leadership, bolstered by a like-minded Obama, formed a self-reinforcing closed elite. Whether nominally of the right or the left, the insiders shared ideologies, got and used power according to the same pattern, applied the same turns of speech, and followed identical rules of non-committal good behavior. This meant that, within the network, real disagreements among the tribe’s members were rare, and that the consensus of the like-minded ironed out all wrinkles. Real disagreement about principles – being all negotiable- did not arise.

Well, at least until post liberals representing the outskirts of the expanded EU appeared. Led by the Poles and the Hungarians, these see liberty and national sovereignty as inseparable. That in a union that regards nations as relics to be overcome by a centralized, official-run, new state. The post liberals, that had only recently regained their independence from an “empire”, evince attitudes that do not fit the once unchallenged liberal consensus. The Trump-like “undiplomatic” inclination not to present black and white as a shade of grey, created consternation among those that had their private club reserved for “members only”. The closed community did not cherish the diversity inserted by the new kid on the block.

It is on this screen that the response needs to be projected with unkind clarity. Let us begin with Chancellor Merkel. Meaning her, Le Pen has told the French that their vote will determine which woman will rule over them. The choice meant was between herself and Germany’s Merkel.

Merkel reacted to “Trump the Blunt”, with a seldom shown undiplomatic clarity. The Chancellor, who had minimized the problems created by integration-resistant migrant masses -cosmetically “refugees”- by claiming that “Islam is part of Germany”, became untypically blunt. Obviously, Trump’s disregard for PC conformity has been the temerity that provoked that openness.

It is a classic that statists think that they are the state. Thus, if individuals must be controlled under that scheme, then any consideration of efficiency or consent is secondary. Of primary importance is, who gets power and who exercises control. That is the Achilles heel where Eurocracy feels bitten.

Thus, Merkel declared (May 28), “the times in which we could completely depend on others are on the way out. I’ve experienced that in the last few days. We Europeans truly have to take our fate into our own hands.” After all, the US and Britain are no longer reliable partners. Her Social Democrat foreign affairs minister added to that in a talking heads program diagnosing the “elimination of the United States as an important country”. As a US headline put it “As Trump’s Aides Touted His Alliance-Building, European Leaders Mocked … Him. Certainly EU-Head Juncker agrees. He proclaimed that he dislikes acting as though “we” would be America’s “servants”.

Soberly judged, the announced “go it alone” is not really bad news -even if it is not good news either. For one thing, the cited reactions clarify an opaque situation. Indeed, the announced self-sufficiency is welcome: reliance on the much-criticized USA has been an expression of weakness and also of the real-world fragility of the Atlantic Alliance.

Regrettably, there is reason for caution. The circles that now bemoan America’s departure from the camp of liberty also see US democracy in danger. The crowd that rages has a record of being hostile to the US. In its eyes, America had been the toad among nations because of capitalism, imperialism, and for being anti-social.

Therefore, the real motive for concern is unlikely to be the sincere worry that America is losing her soul. Much rather, the case might be that, the pronounced Americanism of Trump, his use of words, and his demeanor, have created a chance. That opportunity is that, in the struggle to overthrow Trump, a pre-existing anti-USA course has, under a new label, attained formal legitimacy -with much State-side support.

 

Comments are closed.