RUTHFULLY YOURS

WILLIAM VOEGELI is a senior editor of the Claremont Review of Books and a visiting scholar at Claremont McKenna College’s Henry Salvatori Center. After receiving a Ph.D. in political science from Loyola University in Chicago, he served as a program officer for the John M. Olin Foundation. He has written for numerous publications, including the Christian Science Monitor, City Journal, Commentary, First Things, the Los Angeles Times, National Review, and the New Criterion. He is the author of two books, Never Enough: America’s Limitless Welfare State and The Pity Party: A Mean-Spirited Diatribe Against Liberal Compassion.

The following is adapted from a speech delivered at Hillsdale College on October 9, 2014, sponsored by the College’s Van Andel Graduate School of Statesmanship.

Four years ago I wrote a book about modern American liberalism: Never Enough: America’s Limitless Welfare State. It addressed the fact that America’s welfare state has been growing steadily for almost a century, and is now much bigger than it was at the start of the New Deal in 1932, or at the beginning of the Great Society in 1964. In 2013 the federal government spent $2.279 trillion—$7,200 per American, two-thirds of all federal outlays, and 14 percent of the Gross Domestic Product—on the five big program areas that make up our welfare state: 1. Social Security; 2. All other income support programs, such as disability insurance or unemployment compensation; 3. Medicare; 4. All other health programs, such as Medicaid; and 5. All programs for education, job training, and social services.

That amount has increased steadily, under Democrats and Republicans, during booms and recessions. Adjusted for inflation and population growth, federal welfare state spending was 58 percent larger in 1993 when Bill Clinton became president than it had been 16 years before when Jimmy Carter took the oath of office. By 2009, when Barack Obama was inaugurated, it was 59 percent larger than it had been in 1993. Overall, the outlays were more than two-and-a-half times as large in 2013 as they had been in 1977. The latest Census Bureau data, from 2011, regarding state and local programs for “social services and income maintenance,” show additional spending of $728 billion beyond the federal amount. Thus the total works out to some $3 trillion for all government welfare state expenditures in the U.S., or just under $10,000 per American. That figure does not include the cost, considerable but harder to reckon, of the policies meant to enhance welfare without the government first borrowing or taxing money and then spending it. I refer to laws and regulations that require some citizens to help others directly, such as minimum wages, maximum hours, and mandatory benefits for employees, or rent control for tenants.

One thread runs through all the tribal and ideological jungle of contemporary Mideast politics that few of us care to study much less follow.

But will it “deliberate”?

Americans like to believe as a culture they excel at detail. It’s not true. The Japanese, the Germans, and sometimes the French, may well do so. But the American forte is to reduce the complexity of big ideas – whether in politics or industry – and broaden their appeal or their functionality. The Brits invented TV, radar, discovered antibiotics – but Americans made them marketable and a commonplace.

Indeed, so-called popular culture, now a worldwide phenomenon, is a product of the American lifestyle which strives for universality. The ability to achieve a common denominator, sometimes at the risk of higher quality but wider acceptance, has characterized U.S. decision-making through its history and been the genius of the society.

Therefore, the devil remains in the details. And when they are lost sight of, among other things, there is the avalanche of continuing disasters which have befallen the Obama Administration. True, it is inspired by a 19th century ideology of progressivism that reduces all standards to relativism. But it also borrows heavily – what a comment on the history of ideas! – from the failed Communist and socialist theory that fell in on itself in 1990 with the sudden crash of one of the greatest and most cruel pipedreams in the history of governance.

But the self-evident nature of the Fast and Furious guns smuggling scandal, the Benghazi fiasco and martyrdoms, the IRS persecutions and their discrediting of government institutions, the NSA’s perceived overreach and threat of Big Brother, Eric Holder’s star-chamber pursuit of newsmen, the Secret Service’s corruption and mishaps, the Ebola muckup and threat of epidemic – all are in large part the failure to tend to detail.

One of the more inane criticisms, by Republicans as well as their opponents, is that the GOP did not offer large package proposals to solve all problems in the current midterm election campaign. In the first place there are no such remedies. Nothing has so led the Obama Administration into disasters as its so-called comprehensive solutions, whether Obamacare or its Mideast strategy. Their corollary of comprehensive solutions, that compromise is always best, is also belied by history – whether Dred Scott or the 1935 Neutrality Act.

Are Britons ready to be “disrupted”? Prepared to submit to Theresa May’s totalitarian impulse? The Home Secretary has proposed even more stringent controls on the freedom of speech.

We’ve all seen in the newspapers and on blog sites those cardboard signs carried by maddened, sweaty, screaming Muslims in London and elsewhere on which are scrawled, Freedom of Speech Go to Hell. But now that same sign is being brandished by a political milquetoast, Theresa May, Britain’s Home Secretary. John Bingham’s report in The Telegraph of October 31st, “Sharia law or gay marriage critics would be branded ‘extremists’ under Tory plans, atheists and Christians warn,” is disturbing, to say the least.

Anyone who criticizes Sharia law or gay marriage could be branded an “extremist” under sweeping new powers planned by the Conservatives to combat terrorism, an alliance of leading atheists and Christians fear. Theresa May, the Home Secretary, unveiled plans last month for so-called Extremism Disruption Orders, which would allow judges to ban people deemed extremists from broadcasting, protesting in certain places or even posting messages on Facebook or Twitter without permission…..

But George Osborne, the Chancellor, has made clear in a letter to constituents that the aim of the orders would be to “eliminate extremism in all its forms” and that they would be used to curtail the activities of those who “spread hate but do not break laws”. He explained that that the new orders, which will be in the Conservative election manifesto, would extend to any activities that “justify hatred” against people on the grounds of religion, sexual orientation, gender or disability.

This particular milquetoast – let us dub her Mother Theresa – is proposing out-and-out, blanket censorship which she would enforce with the heavy hand of the police, the courts, and the slimy accusations of informants and those whose “feelings” have been hurt. “I want” figures prominently in her speech. She delivered her speech, in contrast to the chanting and ranting of Muslims who also inform us that Sharia will dominate Britain (and the West), at a Conservative/Tory Party conference in typical wallflower style, from a printed text at the podium (well, at least she didn’t use a teleprompter), with less charisma than Barbara “Let’s go walkies!” Woodhouse giving advice on how to train one’s dogs. Here she condemned “extremists” of all breeds as possibly infected with rabies and she let it be known that they should all “sit” and “heel” and “stay” in their own speech lest they be served with the blackjack of an “Extremism Disruption Order” (EDO) and isolated in a kennel.

On November 2, 1917 the Balfour Declaration was signed promising the Jews a return to their ancient homeland in Palestine after centuries of survival in a mostly hostile Diaspora.

This event was followed by unspeakable British betrayal and treachery.

In 1923 the British deeded 75% of the proposed Jewish Palestinian homeland to form an Arab Palestinian Nation of “Trans-Jordan,” meaning “across the Jordan River.” The remaining 25% of the original Palestinian territory (west of the Jordan River) was to be the Jewish Palestinian homeland. The British turned a blind eye to the ensuing Jihad terror against the Jews of Palestine.

After every violent riot against the Jews, the British would appoint a “Royal Commission”, to investigate ambushes and murder of Jews- ransacking and torching of homes, synagogues and farms, firebombing of buses and markets. Their conclusions always favored the Arab complaints and suggested limiting Jewish immigration. The culmination was Chamberlain’s 1939 White Paper.Desperate Zionists chartered ships to bring Jews to Palestine as their conditions worsened throughout Europe. The British attacked and rerouted most of them.

The most appalling in a series of British duplicity was the sinking of the vessel “Sturma” which was forced itno the harbor of Istanbul where passengers were not permitted to disembark in spite of their horrific conditions. In that episode the ship sank killing 769 passengers of whom 70 were children under the age of 13 and 250 women.

Europe’s Jews were trapped.

On November 2, 1944 Auschwitz began its systematic gassing of inmates and exterminated two thirds of European Jewry- one out of every three Jews in the world.

Only four years later the State of Israel was reborn. The Jews of Israel, aided by organized Jewry throughout the word participated in the epic ingathering of the traumatized Jews – giving them homes, counseling, vocational training, lessons in Hebrew and best of all, the right to say “I am home” and to carry a gun.

November 2, 2014 Today Israel is a thriving, free-wheeling democracy with beaches, cafes, restaurants, concerts, and academic, scientific and artistic institutions that rival the best in the world.

“The increasing momentum of Dutch jihadism poses an unprecedented threat to the democratic legal order of the Netherlands.” — Dutch intelligence service, AIVD.

“For adherents unable or unwilling to join the armed struggle in Syria or elsewhere, social media offers a form of involvement that allows them to identify themselves as jihadists… without actually having to fight. After all, the movement also considers ‘dawah’ — preaching the ‘call to Islam” — a form of jihad.” — Dutch intelligence service, AIVD.

“Social media has made it possible for a person to go far more quickly from being a passive recipient of jihadist propaganda messages to a sympathizer and then a supporter… Some are also known to have been involved in atrocities, such as beheading prisoners… social media has changed the structure of the and cohesions of the jihadist movement… it has taken on the characteristics of a swarm (in the group behavior sense).” — Dutch intelligence service, AIVD.

“The jihadist movement can only genuinely be disrupted, in a way that prevents the emergence of new guiding figures and structures, if such efforts [not one-off actions] are maintained over an extended period.” — Dutch intelligence service, AIVD.

“Dutch jihadists are convinced that the caliphate is not some utopian dream but an achievable reality for Syria and other Muslim nations — and even for the Netherlands.” — Dutch intelligence service, AIVD.

The home-grown jihadist movement in the Netherlands is experiencing sudden and explosive growth, according to a new report published by the Dutch intelligence service, AIVD.

The Dutch jihadist movement is not only growing in size and strength, it is also becoming increasingly open and provocative, both online and on the streets, according to the report, which warns that the increasing momentum of Dutch jihadism poses an unprecedented threat to the democratic legal order of the Netherlands.

News is piling up right now about crunch time for the Iran nuclear talks; ISIS, Ebola, Russian warplanes buzzing NATO, and upheaval in Burkina Faso (where this week protesters set fire to the Ouagadougou parliament, the longtime president tweeted his resignation and fled the the country, the military stepped in, and fallout of the upheaval may entail problems for U.S. anti-terror operations in West Africa [1]). What next?

Call me impulsive, but I had a twitch today that amid these crises, it’s about time for North Korea to throw its hat into the ring — with its next nuclear test.

No, I don’t have any inside information. Kim Jong Un does not have me on speed dial. But I have been wading through stacks of material on North Korea’s assorted bouts of nuclear talks and nuclear tests, missile programs, human rights violations, and the current North Korean “charm offensive” — in which North Korean diplomats have been lauding North Korea as a cornucopia of communal joys, while Pyongyang’s Korean Central News Agency has been promising that North Korea will “Mercilessly Shatter U.S. and Its Followers ‘Human Rights’ Campaign.”

And I got to wondering what had happened with that North Korean threat issued in March, when Pyongyang released a statement that it would not rule out “a new form of nuclear test.” Shortly after that, North Korea’s deputy ambassador to the United Nations held a press conference in New York, at which he confirmed that there was another test in the offing. Asked what the “new form” might be, he said “Wait and see,”

Since then, as far as North Korean nuclear testing, it’s been all wait, and no see. Satellite photos of North Korea’s Punggye-ri test site this spring did show what appeared to be preparations for a fourth nuclear test (the previous three having been carried out in 2006, 2009 and 2013). Analysts say North Korea appears ready to carry out its next illicit nuclear detonation. There have also been signs that North Korea is expanding its uranium enrichment facilities. And last week the commander of U.S. Forces in Korea, General Curtis Scaparrotti, said at a press conference that he believes North Korea has the capability to miniaturize a nuclear warhead and the technology to deliver it on a missile.

All of which is dire. But most of the U.S. fuss over North Korea in recent times has centered on such dramas as Kim’s fit of avunculicide in late 2013, the imprisonment of American tourists, the mysterious disappearance and reappearance this fall of the limping young tyrant Kim, and the damning United Nations report accusing North Korea’s leadership of crimes against humanity, to which North Korea has been responding with the diplomatic and propaganda blitz now dubbed a charm offensive.

Her name means life in Hebrew but this Jewish Israeli-American infant had few precious days on this earth before the monster destroyed her and scarred her family forever. Her last moments were at the Western Wall, where this picture of Chaya Zisel Braun was taken. The three-month old girl was thrown from her stroller as the Hamas terrorist’s car made “a [deliberate] hit-and-run terror attack” killing the baby and injuring eight others.

In the Bible, the Book of Judges is considered a particularly gruesome and violent book. In it one learns that the Canaanites burned children on altars as sacrifices to their gods. And as such, these actions needed to be halted. The culture of depravity would not change of its own accord and it was destructive to those around it as well as to the purveyors.

And so the Israelites are told to “destroy every man, woman, and child.” It is a chilling tale. In essence, why does the author of Joshua have God command the Israelites to destroy all the Canaanites whom they fought — even the children? Surely the latter are innocent.

The following passage from the Book of Genesis explains.

Know well that your offspring shall be strangers in a land not theirs…. And they shall return here in the fourth generation, for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete (Gen. 15:16).

The name Amorites refers to all the inhabitants of Canaan, not just to the group officially called Amorites. And herein, lies the answer. The Canaanites will be conquered and lose their land because they are sinners. For they “even offer up their sons and daughters in fire to the gods” (Deut 12:29-31). And this tradition seems to have no end.

No one is held to a different standard. If the Israelites will sin, they too, will be destroyed. Thus, they are reminded that they must make moral and ethical choices of the highest order.

And, yet so many centuries later the conundrum continues. Present-day Israelis are continually dealing with the descendants of the Amorites who persist on destroying their own offspring and the little ones of other people.

In 2005, then Secretary General of the U.N. Kofi Annan observed that while the U.N. previously dealt only with governments, in the interest of global peace and prosperity the United Nations should extend its reach and partner directly with the business community, civil society and international organizations. He envisioned the elimination of state sovereignty and nationalism to make way for global citizenship, ushering in a borderless world run by a U.N.-centered, international bureaucracy. This world government with international institutions, global citizenship and a world code of justice would supplant individual nation-state governments to bring about a better world free of hunger, conflict and inequities.

However idealistic Annan’s vision, the reality would be darker and misshapen, like the grotesque creature put together by Dr. Frankenstein. Signing away of sovereignty and independence is a surefire route to tyrannical subordination of freedom and individual liberty. One-size-fits-all precepts imposed on all nations by an international body would ignore regional needs, interests and values. World governance would eliminate the ability and self-determination of nations to protect their interests and act for the good and security of their people. These functions would be abdicated to an international body without direct consent of the people. Further, if the U.N. became the world governing body, we’d be overseen by an organization dominated by state sponsors of terror, dictatorships and anti-Western forces. For the United States, this amounts to what Joseph Klein, author of Global Deception: The UN’s Stealth Assault on America’s Freedom, called “the neutering of the Constitution and the nation it defines.”

Yet, the imperial presidency of Obama and his “I have a pen and a phone” executive overreach has been doggedly pursuing this perverse global vision. Obama has sought to bring life to this Frankenstein creation of non-participatory globalist government that dismisses the constitutional order and the citizen self-government intended by our Founding Fathers. Obama’s “fundamental transformation of America” program aligns with U.N. goals in its acceptance of open borders and expanded rights for illegal aliens, socialized medicine, income redistribution, subordination of the American justice system to international law, unilateral disarmament and other policies designed to weaken America.

ONE GOVERNMENT UNDER ALLAH

The Secretary of State of the United States just ordered Israel to limit prayers in a particular place to Muslims, not Jews. And apparently to ban other non-Muslims too.

Remember when the United States used to uphold religious freedom? These days it sends people to jail for offending Muslims and orders other countries to engage in religious discrimination on behalf of Muslims.

Kerry Says Only Muslims, Not Jews, May Pray at Jewish Holy Site

80% of London Muslims Support ISIS

REMEMBER THE USSR

This is the corrupt ocean that the Clintons swim in. Expecting Hillary to know how jobs are created is like expecting an ex-con to go straight. Crime is all he knows. It’s all that the Clintons, the Obamas and the Warrens know. We are dealing with people who have no concept of how earning a living even works.

Like McAuliffe’s GreenTech, which in true Clinton style involved Hillary Clinton’s brother, dirty Chinese businessmen, an international fugitive, endangering national security, insider lobbying, an SEC investigation, millions in government loans and 2,000 union jobs for Virginia that never materialized.

And those million cars a year that it was supposed to build are nowhere in sight. But that’s how you create jobs in Hillary’s world.

The ‘You Didn’t Build That’ Party

Man Says Islam is Violent, Muslims Violently Beat Him

Last week Sweden officially “recognized” Palestine as though it were an existing state imbued with all the accouterments of a genuine nation. That is, it was a nation invisible on any standard map except the ones to be found in Palestinian school books. This was as much an exercise in fantasy as recognizing the Wizarding World of J.K. Rowland as a real, authentic state with which to exchange ambassadors and diplomatic immunities. The “recognition” is fundamentally an endorsement of Hamas’s genocidal agenda. Daniel Greenfield remarked about this delusional cretinism in his October 30th FrontPage article, ”Sweden Recognizes Unelected Government of Bankrupt Terror State That Doesn’t Control its Own Territory”:

…Sweden didn’t recognize an elected government. It recognized the leadership of a terrorist group…..

Not only is it unelected and not in control of its own territory, but it’s funded by foreign interests. If it had to function as a state, it would die tomorrow. Not only doesn’t it have the infrastructure, but it doesn’t even have the economy.

…Sweden recognized the unelected government of a bankrupt terror state that can’t function as a state or a government because… that’s how much it’s new leftist leaders hate Israel and Jews. There’s no rational reason for extending state recognition to an entity that fails the test of functioning as a state at every level from the economy to elections to simple territorial control.

But, then, Sweden was not setting a precedent in acting on its own fantasies. In a nearly analogous exercise in leftist ideological incontinence was President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the U.S. recognizing the Soviet Union as a legitimate government in 1933. Josef Stalin and his terror leadership at the top of the Soviet machine controlled Russian and satellite territories, but their economy was anemic and failing. Read Walter Duranty’s white-washing New York Times story of November 17th of the event here. One certainly couldn’t accuse him of “Communophobia.” Duranty was a “journalist” like I am a nuclear physicist or beautician.

The recently published The Days Trilogy: Expanded Edition of H.L. Mencken’s memoirs contains a lengthy and illuminating section about the journalist’s visit to Palestine, then under the British Mandate, in 1934. In Chapter XIX, “Pilgrimage” (pp. 578-580), he records the contrasting differences between Jewish lands and Arab lands. Not much has changed since Mencken’s visit, at least in terms of Muslim character.