My fellow Americans, what makes these United States so different from the rest of the Americas? Is it because we are a very complex “society” with an equally complex history spanning four centuries? Is it because we are “wealthier” than Latin America or “livelier” than Canada? Is it because we were never “feudalist” at any point? Is it because these United States were founded as a “Democracy” or a “Republic,” without every bothering to realize that neither of these ancient concepts accurately describe the American Way of Life itself? Or is it because we are a “Jeffersonian Empire of Liberty” locked in a “Trotskyist Permanent Revolution” for more “Hitlerist Real Estate?”
These are the common explanations (or “theories”) that I have heard in 19th-20th century US History from practically everyone who is either party members of the Democratic-Republican Party (be they “Democrat,” “Republican,” or “Bipartisan”) and everyone else beholden to them, from the CPUSA and the DSA to the Federalist Society and the American Nazi Party. There is no “Left-Right Political Spectrum” in America if everyone is adhering to variations of the same Jeffersonian Weltanschauung because it fits too neatly into Clarke’s Cassandra Coefficient:
“We have seen experts ignored in the past, when paying attention to them might have prevented or reduced the scope of calamities. In many of those cases, the same factors were at work over and over again. We can list them. If you see those things happening in that combination again, now or in the future, you may face a problem that deserves more attention and the application of a more diligent, rational, and unbiased analysis. The Coefficient can help us identify and understand our biases, the flaws in our wiring that repeatedly hinder rational thought.”-Richard Alan Clarke and R. P. Eddy, Warnings: Finding Cassandras to Stop Catastrophes, ca. 2017
I am not the only Individual in World History to be arriving at these conclusions. There are various passages in my research which not only oppose so-called “American Exceptionalism,” but they also recognize its significance as having its origins in the Madisonian Faction (“Democrats”) and Monroean Faction (“Republicans”), eventually contributing to the distinctly Jeffersonian presidencies Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Delano Roosevelt. I have a growing list of historical figures who had arrived at very similar conclusions and I list them here.
- Here in America, there is one obscure, albeit extremely relevant, historical event for myself and for US History in particular, where somebody could craft an argument against “American Exceptionalism” and that is the Americanist Heresy. I will explore it in a future Thus Spoke Lenin entry involving Lenin’s sister, Anna.
- I do find a lot of references here and there within the “Ultramontane” works of Mary Perkins Ryan, the “Nationalist” works of Michael Lind and the “Socialist” works of Richard David Wolff, but from entirely different fields. The only one in my research who pretty much nailed everything down for those three is of course Oswald Spengler in Prussianism and Socialism:
“By means of a new Völkerwanderung we have made America a part of Western Europe. We have constructed on every continent our special kind of cities, and have subjected the native populations to our way of life and thought. Such activity is the highest possible expression of our dynamic sense of world power. What we believe, what we desire, is meant to be binding on all. And since life has come to mean for us external, political, social, and economic life, all must submit to our political, social, and economic ideal, or perish.”
“This drive toward universal domination is what I have termed ‘modern socialism.’ We are now growing more and more conscious of its presence. It is what we of the Western world have in common. It is active in every human being from Warsaw to San Francisco, and each of our peoples is fascinated by the spell of its promises and potentialities.“-Oswald Spengler, Prussianism and Socialism, ca. 1919
“Three Western peoples have embodied Socialism in this larger sense: Spain, England, and Prussia. Florence and Paris were the sources of the Anarchic antithesis to Socialism: Italy and France. The conflict between these two dispositions toward life and the world forms the basic outline of what we call modern world history.”
There is a reason why I bring up Ss. Johann Nepomuk Neumann, CSsR and Elizabeth Ann Seton, SC in relation to my research. Whether one is religious or not is hardly the focal point behind why I invoke them in relation to Spengler, Jünger, and all the rest. Those two American Catholic Saints embody the obscure role that the Catholic Church has played in the historical development of the American Essence. It is very peculiar for Spengler to have cited the “Spanish,” the “English,” and the “Prussians” as the three European peoples that gave Socialism its definitive form and actuality. This is because an argument can also be made from a Roman Catholic Conception of US History that England, Prussia and Spain were three Europeans peoples who had shaped the three big countries on the North American Continent over the past four centuries: Canada (England); United States (Prussia); and Mexico (Spain).
Anyone who has been reading this Blog over the past month or two will recall that I was repeating the very notion that we cannot comprehend these United States without realizing the fact that the American Essence over the centuries had been gradually cobbled together from the past millennia of expectations and experiences in Prussia (and by extension, the German Reich). Most Americans and non-Americans in the 21st century have also forgotten about these three distinct American cultures that emerged in the Thirteen Colonies, one of which was not only Prussian but Pennsylvanian. Living on the East Coast in this day and age, there is only one geographical region in this entire Union for me to find the American Essence as being a “more perfect ‘Europe'”:
“In the United States, the shift from post-1945 democratic pluralism to technocratic Neoliberalism was fostered from the 1960s onward by an alliance of the white overclass with African Americans and other racial minority groups. The result was a backlash by white working-class voters, not only against nonwhites who were seen as competitors for jobs and housing, but also against the alien cultural liberalism of white ‘gentry liberals.’ The backlash in the North was particularly intense among ‘white ethnics’—first-, second-, and third-generation white immigrants like Irish, German, Italian, and Polish Americans, many of them Catholic. The disproportionately working-class white ethnics now found themselves defined as bigots by the same White Anglo-Saxon Protestant (WASP) elites who until recently had imposed quotas on Jews and Catholics in their Ivy League universities, but who were now posing as the virtuous, enlightened champions of civil rights.-Michael Lind, The New Class War, ca. 2016
[I]n its ‘Against Trump’ issue of January 22, 2016, the editors of National Review mocked the ‘funky outer-borough accents’ shared by Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. Indeed, Trump, a ‘white ethnic’ from Queens with German and Scots ancestors, with his support in the US industrial states where working-class non-British European-Americans are concentrated, is ethnically different from most of his predecessors in the White House, whose ancestors were proportionately far more British American. Traits which seem outlandish in a US president would not have seemed so if Trump had been elected mayor of New York. Donald Trump was not Der Führer. He was Da Mayor of America.”
Categories: Financial Warfare