Thanks to reader Marty!

Snip

By Victor Biryukov

A few days ago, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said that the majority of German troops would come under NATO command starting next year. He emphasized that “the security of Berlin’s allies is its security.” It is not yet clear whether any other European states will follow Germany, but such a decision by Berlin itself should not come as a surprise.

In the material "Germany’s abandonment of the “special path” concept and its integration into the Western world: causes and consequences“The author has already pointed out that after 1945 the Germans surrendered their national identity to the dressing room of Europe, essentially abandoning it in favor of a transnational identity. The current Western world is a transnational association in which the role of sovereign states is increasingly weakening. This process began shortly after the end of World War II and continues to this day.

The triumph of left liberalism and the “new left” led not only to a decrease in the role of nation states, but also to the disparagement of the role of such concepts as: national sovereignty, race, family, national identity, etc. The “new left” and socialists of the new generation now see the main “oppressed” are migrants, sexual minorities, the unemployed, “colored” (racial minorities), and the main evil of whites is traditional values, conservatism and nationalism.

Even the concept of gender has come to be seen on the left as something that needs to change, leading some to cry out that they are neither male nor female. One of these recently won the Eurovision Song Contest.

All of the above, together with the migration and economic crisis in the eurozone, makes us talk about the decline and decline of the West, drawing an analogy with the corresponding book by the German philosopher Oswald Spengler. And Russian political scientists simultaneously begin to talk about the fact that Russia should follow its own path - however, without explaining which one, and without noticing that the Russian Federation is repeating the mistakes of the West, and the “turn to the East” often leads to consequences that are no less disastrous (creeping Islamization, characteristic of Europe as a whole).

In fact, the very decline of the old West has long arrived. In fact, it is close to ceasing to exist, and it is unlikely that it will be brought back. Of course, it is possible that the “right” will still try to change the vector of movement of current Europe and the Western world as a whole, but at the moment we see the agony of the Old World.

The migration crisis as a factor in the decline of the West

Following the civilizational model of Oswald Spengler, the decline of the West will not come due to the decline of political status and the emergence of new superpowers in the political arena, but due to the civilizational changes that are now taking place within Europe. These processes are primarily related to the migration crisis and Islamization. Unlike the first half - mid-20th century, when emigrants sought to assimilate with the local culture, now, against the backdrop of the dominance of political correctness, they, on the contrary, are trying to preserve their identity.

Migration and Islamization are factors that contributed to the decline of the West (and will likely contribute to its end). Another evidence of the “decline of Europe,” in addition to migration, is the crisis of identity, both in domestic and foreign policy, and the crisis of solidarity, intensified by migration aggravation.

It is migration tension that has strengthened the problem of the identity of Europeans, and it is migration that is associated with a civilizational threat, which will ultimately lead to fundamental changes in the ethnic and religious composition of society (these changes are already noticeable). Here we can give an analogy by Oswald Spengler with the collapse of Ancient Rome, which, in his opinion, occurred not least because of the Great Migration.

Modern theoretical understanding of the idea of ​​a migrant as a threat to Europeans is associated with the name of Renaud Camus, the creator of the theory of the “Great Replacement.” The idea for the "Great Replacement" came to Camus during his stay in the Hérault department in the south of France, where he "discovered significant changes in the population of villages from a thousand years ago: women dressed in Islamic hijabs gathered at the base of an 3th-century fountain, visible in Gothic windows "[XNUMX].

According to Camus, the "great displacement" was caused by industrialization, "despiritualization" (the denial of higher spiritual principles) and "deculturation" - materialist society and globalism, in his words, created "man without any national, ethnic or cultural specificity." In Camus's theory, the indigenous French people are demographically replaced by a non-white population - mainly from Africa and the Middle East - which is encouraged by globalist elites.

-------

Globalization and the erasure of borders of nation states

The erasure of boundaries between nations and, as a consequence, the disappearance of nation states and the reduction of their role to a minimum is the main goal of the globalists. They do not hide this - for example, one of the classics of the theory of globalization, Ulrich Beck, understands by it “processes in which national states and their sovereignty are woven into the web of transnational actors and subject to their power capabilities” [4]. He believes that the movement of global capital is capable of completely leveling out the national divisions of the world, that there will no longer be “us” and “them.”

Another globalization theorist, Anthony Giddens, speaks of a shift in influence on global economic processes from the national level and decisions of national politicians to supranational institutions. In fact, we are already seeing this in the example of Europe, where the role of national states is increasingly being reduced in favor of global transnational structures.

Left globalists see the “right” and especially nationalists as their main opponent. For example, Marxist historian Eric Hobsbawm predicted the demise of the era of nationalism, linking it with the processes of globalization, and Francis Fukuyama, like W. Beck, predicted the imminent death of nationalism as “an outdated old ideology that does not correlate with the new liberal order.” For this reason, attacks on “right-wing” conservatives and nationalists by “leftists” in the press in the West are not weakening, but, on the contrary, are only intensifying.
This is not surprising, since nationalism and national conservatism are one of the limiters on the path of global capital. Global capital does not want any control from the nation state, which takes away its money. In this regard, oddly enough, communists and Marxists play into the hands of globalists in their attacks on the “right” and nationalism.

Oswald Spengler wrote about this, who believed that capitalism and socialism are internally related to each other and are burdened by the same trends.

“There is no contradiction between economic liberalism and socialism... Theoretical weapons Some are scientific “liberal” political economy, which shapes public opinion on economic issues and intervenes in legislation with its advice and regulations. The theoretical weapon of others is the Communist Manifesto, on the basis of which the left parties of all parliaments also invade legislation. Both represent the principle of the “International”, completely nihilistic and negative: it is directed against historical, limiting forms - every form, every type, always means limitation - nations, states, national economies, the sum of which is the “world economy” [1].

Spengler believed that the class struggle was designed to destroy the power of tradition, both political and economic, in order to “provide the forces at the bottom with the opportunity for revenge and domination.”

Indeed, both globalist-capitalists and globalist-socialists were unanimous in that national states should disappear, the boundaries of nations should be erased, and they should be replaced by something global - the only dispute was whether this global system would be capitalist or socialist. Internationalism was equally characteristic of both globalist capitalists and globalist socialists.

Nowadays, any nationalism and the state’s struggle for national interests are viewed rather hostilely by the hegemon of the world community. At the same time, in the West, non-state and supra-state actors with their own specific interests and positions are being consolidated as legitimate participants in international relations - from transnational corporations (TNCs), non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and international non-governmental organizations (INGOs) to socio-political and other movements [5].
Globalization has affected all major spheres of human activity, constantly invading the competence of national states. World markets for capital, goods, services, and labor create a general framework within which national economic complexes are forced to operate. The standard bearer of globalization is the global elite, interested in continuing and deepening the process [6].

The current trends are such that in the confrontation between transnational corporations and the national state, the former win. International companies not only influence world events, but also take on functions that previously only the nation state had. Corporations are capable, through their actions, of changing the foreign policy of not only host countries, but also countries of origin.

This allows us to make pessimistic forecasts that the future belongs not to states, but to corporations.