G20 Summit: Global Bolshevik Revolution?
By: NCViking
Well, maybe a new global Bolshevik Revolution may be a bit extreme but there seems to be striking similarities between this and what is happening now. Charismatic leader, fabricated mobs of ‘peasants’ (see Obama’s pitchfork analogy below) riling against elitism, power and money. Fairness, redistribution of wealth, shared sacrifice and a savior.
It never fails: crisis always breeds extremist reactions. Question: Has the American model been a failure? Seeing that we are the most powerful and prosperous nation on earth that everyone wants to move to says probably not. Also, since when did Europe become the standard bearer of prosperity and greatness? And why is Obama capitulating America’s leadership role in the world to the E.U.? I for one do not like where this is going: Submission to ignorant Euro mob dissent, while fabricating domestic dissent to push a socialist agenda.
I have collected a few references below for analysis of what happened at the G20 summit, the one Obama declared a ‘Success’. Is this the ‘Change’ we need?
From Dick Morris:
From The Steyn:
If government has a role in this crisis, it ought to be to reverse the combination of unaffordable social programs and deathbed demographics that make a restoration of real GDP growth all but impossible in many European nations. But that would involve telling the citizenry unpleasant truths, and Continental politicians who wish to remain electorally viable aren’t willing to do that. President Sarkozy, the Times of London reported, “said that the summit provided a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to give capitalism a conscience.” What he means by “a conscience” is a global regulatory regime that ensures there’s nowhere to move to. If you’re France, which has a sluggish, uncompetitive, protectionist, high-unemployment business environment whose best and brightest abandon the country in ever-greater droves, it obviously makes sense to force the entire planet to submit to the same growth-killing measures that have done wonders for your own economy. But it’s not good news for the rest of the world. The building blocks for a global regulatory regime and even a global central bank with an embryo global currency (the IMF and the enhanced role of “Special Drawing Rights”) are an ominous development.
A serious G20 summit would have seen France commit to the liberalization of its economy; Germany to serious natalist incentives; Britain to a reduction of the near-Soviet size of state spending in Scotland and Northern Ireland; and the United States to allowing its citizens to keep more of their hard-earned money and thus reduce both the dependency on ludicrous asset inflation as the only route to socio-economic improvement, and the risk of a Euro-style decline in birthrate caused by the unaffordability of kids.
Instead, the great powers are erecting a global regulatory regime to export their worst mistakes to the entire planet.
From Chuck:
From Oliver North (old, but interesting):
For the past seven years, according to Rep. Jim Moran, “We have been guided by a Republican administration who believes in the simplistic notion that people who have wealth are entitled to keep it.” Actually, that “simplistic notion” has been the linchpin of the American system of free enterprise for the past two centuries. It has served to make the United States the most bountiful, wealthy and charitable nation on earth. Yet Moran says that system “doesn’t work in the long run.”
My fellow Americans, welcome to the long run.
Unfortunately, the “bold steps” being contemplated by some of the G-20 participants may prove to be as stifling to the U.S. economy as the solution for Gore’s “greenhouse gases.” Among the G-20’s “official representatives” are those — such as Brazil’s socialist president, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva — who blame the United States for the current economic downturn.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who claims credit for having come up with the idea for this confab, has said that there is an urgent need to “regulate capitalism” and that the G-20 gathering is a “great opportunity” to “build the capitalism of the future.” Among other things, he wants to eliminate “offshore tax havens” and is pressing for the means to enforce new international “codes” against “excessive risk taking.”
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and others in the European Union are advocating the creation of a global regulatory agency for financial oversight and “international transparency” for banking activities. He supports giving the IMF unprecedented authority for surveillance over transactions by borrowers and lenders.
Proposals such as these will be very costly, and it won’t be just the expense of yet another bloated international bureaucracy. In the rush to establish “adequate regulation and oversight” over financial transactions, too many G-20 leaders are willing to sacrifice national sovereignty and personal privacy. “In the long run,” to use Moran’s words, that’s too high a price for Americans to pay.
From Austin Hill, TownHall.com:
Who ever imagined that in the year 2009, the President of the United States and the protesters who sought to disrupt the G-20 Summit would actually agree on something?
“Capitalism is immoral” was one of the phrases scrawled on several of the banners carried outside the summit meetings this past week. And although he has never said this in so many words, indeed President Obama would seem to be in lock-step with that assertion, or at least with the sentiment that the assertion entails.
From President Obama (via Politico.com):
(Bank Summit) President Barack Obama wasn’t in a mood to hear them out. He stopped the conversation and offered a blunt reminder of the public’s reaction to such explanations. “Be careful how you make those statements, gentlemen. The public isn’t buying that.”
“My administration,” the president added, “is the only thing between you and the pitchforks.”
“The only way they could have sent a more Spartan message is if they had served bread along with the water,” says a person who attended the meeting. “The signal from Obama’s body language and demeanor was, ‘I’m the president, and you’re not.’”…
The president spoke of public outrage over the high flying executive lifestyle. “The anger gentlemen, is real,” Obama said. He urged pay reform and said rewards must be proportional and balanced, and tied to the health and success of the company.
Get used to it folks, the European model is our future. If you don’t like it, move to Canada Mexico China er … uh…
- Economic Crisis of Confidence - February 8th, 2010
- Cato Analysis and Fact Check of SOTU Speech - January 28th, 2010
- State of the Union Déjà vu? - January 26th, 2010
- Purple Predestination - January 25th, 2010
- Prince Composes New Vikings Fight Song (Oh Yes He Did!) - January 22nd, 2010
We need to tread carefully as our fight will certainly become our childrens war. Capitalism is not bad though where some capitalists have led us to is. Automatic weapons are not bad, yet in the hands of a few they seem to be a problem. Alcohol is not bad, drunk drivers are not good. Banning capitalism,weapons, alcohol and immigration are not the answers. The thought of giving all this regulatory power to the feds also makes me a little queasy, but who should we trust besides our elected officials.
Part of me is in denial on this. I am not sure where we are going, but I am also equally sure that it will not end badly. I am an optimist… a cynical one, but an optimist nonetheless.
But when I hear and see what I do now, I wonder if we could wind up reverting into a European model. The scary thing is that Europe is in decline: declining population, declining productivity, declining influence, and declining culture. Mark Steyn captured how the West is committing national suicide and America stands alone in the fight. Looking at our new path, I am not sure our national leaders do not see Europes failings. Our current leaders don’t want to stand alone, but rather it seems as if they would rather go down with the ship because everyone else told them the water is great.
I would question the notion that Europe is in decline. From what mark? 1800’s, 1890’s ? 1960’s?
Don’t buy talk-radio nonsense. The facts say otherwise,
Europe real GDP for just the EU 15 (there are 27 countries in Europe, so I am not even counting 12 of those) has been higher that the comparable measure for US GDP. Europe GDP since the 1960’s has been higher — each and every year that the US. In 1992, 1993, and 1994, Europe GDP has exceeded by more than double US GDP.
US GDP growth fluctuates more that European GDP growth. Since 1969, the US has experienced 5 years where GDP growth was negative, EU 15 only had 2.
In the same period, the US had 10 years where GDP growth was less than 2.0%, the same as EU. The differences in these numbers suggests that the EU has had softer landings.
By Europe I mean roughly Western Europe. I would say much of what I say next applies much more to WE than to EE. Europe here is about EU15, not including Russia.
To your other markers,
Population Growth. Europe has less population growth than the US, but I would say that if one were to compare recent immigrant population to older established populations one would see extremely similar population growths. The US has more recent immigrants and therefore more growth.
Declining Productivity. EU GDP is higher than US GDP, which essentially proves this point wrong. Moreover, Europe has retained significant manufacturing capacity which is a driver among GDP, especially if you consider EU 27 countries.
Declining Influence. If influence is measured as the ability to change the course of events of an adversary, say like Sudan, Iran, China or North Korea, I would say neither the US or Europe (individually or as a whole) have been very successful, and therefore not influential at all.
China is the most influential nation standing today. It is able to insert any language it wants in any agreement. Influence is played strictly by being the player at the center. It takes deep diplomatic skills. I would say the US has been unable to do so for much of the last 20 years.
Declining Culture. US culture is projected through movies, fashion, and it’s carefree attitude. US movies have clearly dominated. Fashion, like jeans and casual clothes, have been widely adopted. Yet in many other ways, fashion in Milan or Paris is still quite dominant.
Our carefree attitude has not been adopted. Europeans and third world countries have not adopted much of the carefree style that we have in the US.
Europe leads in several personal freedoms that the US sorely needs: gay rights, for example. The US is quite unable to accept European style freedoms.
Your standard of living in Europe is higher, as is demonstrated by the value of the Euro with respect to the Dollar.
There are differences: owning a car, traveling to work, health care, are among a few.
Can you back up your declining everything comment?
Here are a couple of interesting links…
(from 2004) http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005242
http://politicalcalculations.blogspot.com/2007/11/2006-gdp-ppp-eu-vs-us-smackdown.html
China is not yet (if ever) the most influential nation standing today, the United States is by far. The world’s largest economy, strongest military, the most prosperous and free nation on Earth, melting pot, and a true land of creativity and opportunity. China is a big machine with a storied culture and slick foreign policy.
One note of historical precedence that blew my mind: No time in human history has one nation’s navy so controlled and dominated the world’s seas as we do now – virtually uncontested. The truly amazing thing is not just this domination, but the reaction of the rest of the world to this unprecedented development, which has been relatively benign. Why? Because the world at it’s heart trusts American goodness. This is a truly amazing event in human history.
The chart at political calculations do not agree with the US Dept Commerce GDP numbers. The DOC shows US at $14.0T v EU27 at $14.8T. They are relatively close. GDP, versus real GDP, is a measure that includes inflation. That is a problem for the US since it overstates the actual numbers. Both the US and EU are in for a correction in GDP.
Estimates of PPP, per population purchasing power, can be misleading. It does not include health care (US must pay for their own, usually as a partial deduction of their income).
Unless you were able to compare typical breadbaskets, I wouldn’t put a great deal of value in these numbers. Similarly, if I would not trust them if it showed EU populations to be farther ahead than US ones.
Just to demonstrate how skewed the numbers are, look at the number for DC. It shows the average DC at $150k. Laughable. There are a number of residents in DC that are very poor. The rich don’t live in DC, so the number represents essentially restaurant and hotel income divided by # residents. Not much of a measure.
Te US is still the place to go and make it in the world, it is the beacon of freedom where an immigrant can become a successful member of society, unlike say Europe where you’ll get kicked out. I am not claiming Europe is all good – just saying it’s not all decline economically either.
As far as the US Navy (and more broadly) its projection of power is concerned, that power projection did save the world from both Nazi and Soviet invasions, keeps oil flowing, stopped the war in Kosovo, and will soon hopefully put an end to terrorism.
But is the US influential enough to get others to follow it?
It needs to do much more to be influential.
Mike… responding to a bit that you said in regards to my Europe comments…
I was speaking about its decline since 1492. I mean, come on… modern times… it is currently in decline.
Which talk radio nonsense? Air America? Ed Schultz? Alan Combes?
This sounds like cherry picking. Are you using cummulative numbers, or each of the 15 separately? Which 15? Which ones are left out? Why are you not using all 27? I really do not care about Luxembourg if that is one of them? This could be like picking the unemployment numbers from Louisiana to say that we are not experiencing unemployment problems. I will also question your use of statistics. We can pick out any statistics to favor our point. I don’t know your source, but if I were to read it, would I find that the US had higher periods of growth in some of the years than Europe? Were our highest years of growth higher than theirs? What happens when I combine all 27 countries? How about if I pick out Great Britain, France, Germany, Spain, and Italy? What happens to the numbers then?
To answer specific question:
Population Growth: Birth rates in Europe are dangerously low. For a population to be considered at replacement level, birth rates needs to be at 2.1 children per woman. The national averages in Europen countries include: Ireland: 1.99, France: 1.90, Norway: 1.81, Sweden 1.75, UK: 1.74, Netherlands: 1.73, Germany: 1.37, Italy: 1.33, Spain: 1.32, and Greece: 1.29. The last four are, in such decline, their populations will half in 30 years or so. The most popular boy name in Queen Elizabeth’s London last year? Mohammed. Average age of a person in Germany? 43. For purposes of comparison, how about Palastine? 15.
So how does one support the socialistic nanny state with these kind of declines in the native population? Immigration, right? Except, the difference between immigration in the USA (birth rate is at a marginal 2.10) is that when an immigrant comes here, he is an American in the end… and can assimulate into the population and succeed. Just look at success stories like Bobby Jindal, Jennifer Grandholm, and Arnold… all immigrants or a child of immigrants… all governors. There are many other success stories like that in the USA.
On the other hand, many European immigrants do not or can not assimulate. They live in slums and become angry “youths” throwing rocks and turning over cars. In France, for example… these immigrant populations have twice the national unemployment rate, and 4 times the national employment rate if you are an immigrant under 30. The writing is on the wall. Many places in Europe, local governments are opting for allowing their Muslim minorities to live in under Sharia. The Archbishop of Canterbury even sees places where this would work in Great Britain. The demographic make up of Europe is changing, and this will lead to its further decline… in production, although maybe not influence eventually. Radials with bombs have our attention in Iran and North Korea… maybe when the radicals take over the French nukes, the will also have influence.
As for culture, the US culture is dominant. You want to pull out “fashion”, I think one could put NY or LA and see what people are wearing around the world.
I think Europe would find our “carefree” attitude quite restrictive. They are much more carefree over there. We are a much more religious nation with restrictions based upon those moral values. They are written into our social norms and our culture. Compared to the Taliban, we are quite hedonistic, but compared to Europe, we are quite prude (“haw haw haw… zay care about hes mistriss?”).
I would argue that our standards of living are much higher than those in Europe.
You bring up gay rights. I think gay rights are important, but it seems that “gay rights” have turned into “gay marriage” since most of the rights gay couples look for today exist almost everywhere in the USA.
The measure of growth is the year-to-year difference in real GDP. Using all EU 27 countries would show tremendous growth (think Poland, Check Republic, etc…). In order to compare GDP growth from 1969 to 2008, I used the Western Europe countries, all of them, collectively known as the EU 15.
I am surprised you did not know about the differences between EU 15 and EU 27. It’s pretty much a standard measure. It is not, to address your concern, picking the best 15. It is the 15 countries known as Western Europe.
Measuring Europe since 1492 is unusual as well as irrelevant. Sure, Royalty in England can’t order beheadings anymore. But are they an economic power? Totally different question. Europeans have had significant economic growth in the last 50 years. They do not feel in decline at all.
As for rock throwing immigrants, my advice is for you to stop watching TV. I suggest you travel to Europe. Totally different. Think of the difference between LA riots in the 1990’s and the reality of the minority experience in the US. Totally different.
I don’t care if gays get married or not, or whether they live here or in Europe. My comment on the carefree attitude in the US has to do with the ability to move up the social and professional ladder.
Trackbacks
Topics about Economy » Archive » G20 Summit: Global Bolshevik Revolution? | The Great Illuminator
Dumb Video of the Day II | The Great Illuminator
Michael Savage Banned from UK Radio for Extremist Views | The Great Illuminator
Howard Dean: “We’ve had quite enough capitalism …” | The Great Illuminator
Obama: The New Chevy Celebrity ‘Eurosport Edition’ | The Great Illuminator
Leave your response!
Our Growing Debt
Countdown Timer
in 32 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 17 hours, 54 minutes, 31 seconds
Latest Illuminations
Subscribe to Posts
Categories
Authors
Archives
Center Links
Conservative Links
Great Forums
Liberal Links
The Great Illuminator
Most Commented
Tags