Ultima Thule

In ancient times the northernmost region of the habitable world - hence, any distant, unknown or mysterious land.

Thursday, June 30, 2005

Thomas Lifson defines the "Anglosphere"

By Aussiegirl

The incomparable Thomas Lifson, writing in today's American Thinker, makes a powerful (if politically incorrect) statement about the dominant power of the new Anglosphere -- and why you don't even have to speak English to join -- and why it is the world's last best hope for peace, stability and freedom.

In a sense Lifson is saying that any nation can become part of the "Anglosphere", even non-English speaking ones, just as anyone can become an American.

Furthermore, he makes the additionally politically incorrect statement that it has been helpful for a country to have been either colonized in the past by an "Anglo" power, or as in WWII, soundly defeated militarily by one.

Here he extends at length the short and rather pithy phrase used by Ann Coulter shortly after 9/11, when she famously proclaimed that we need to "invade their countries, kill their leaders, and forcibly convert their populations." Bold words which got her promptly fired by the editors of National Review Online, who blanched at her uncompromising and politically insensitive language. But she was correct. As she pointed out at the time in defense of herself -- what else did we do in Japan in WWI but exactly those three things? And now, as Lifson so correctly points out, Japan is a member of the "Anglosphere".

Similarly, one can't help but remember the timeless humor of those British comedic geniuses, Peter Sellers and Terry Thomas, in their sendup of the benevolence of an American military conquest which they depicted so brilliantly in the classic movie, "The Mouse That Roared". In the film a small mythical principality, facing economic ruin, decides to invade America in order to lose the war and receive American post-war reconstruction assistance. How far have we come since those days when being conquered by America seemed like a nation's last best hope?

This is precisely what we are trying to do in Iraq and Afghanistan as well -- insisting on democratic reforms, free elections, secular constitutions and the rights of women -- all western values, all "Anglo" values. In all of human history, none have been found to work better to ensure economic progress and prosperity and individual rights and democracy.

If not for the "Anglosphere", what does the rest of the world have to offer? The theocracy of a religion mired in the 7th century which denies all human rights to women and engages in barbaric forms of punishment like dismemberment or stoning to death? Or the moribund, economically stagnant and morally bankrupt Socialist model of Europe, which is seeing soaring rates of unemployment and staggering rates of taxation just to keep overlarded welfare-state social programs funded.

As Churchill so succinctly put it: "Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been tried."

We live in an age in which few important conflicts can be described accurately and economically, which is to say, bluntly. Race and religion are obvious examples of domains�in which condescension-masquerading-as-sensitivity must be employed.

So too, the realities of world power. Ask any journalist, almost anywhere, and she will tell you that the world is a lamentably "unipolar" power construct, with hyperpower America lording it over the rest of the world's nations, all of them consigned to second-class (or worse) membership in the community of man. Such an arrangement is deemed unnatural, exploitative, unduly hierarchical, and inherently unstable. By our allies. Our enemies use far harsher terminology.

The truth is rather different.

The world's future lies in the hands of a surprisingly open coalition of countries, regions, cities, and individuals, all of whom are members of the Anglosphere. Anyone, potentially, can join.

The Anglosphere is a state of mind, a set of market-centered economic institutions, a philosophical understanding of the role and danger of government power, and a vast, dynamic, and almost universal popular culture, beloved of ordinary people and abhorred by elites.

. . . But the Anglosphere is also a political and (increasingly) a military alliance, aimed at guaranteeing the political, moral, economic and cultural freedoms necessary for Anglospherical societies to function.

Who are the members of the Anglosphere? At its heart are The United States (its leading force) and the United Kingdom (whose culture and imperium gave it birth and made it a world force). Other members include Australia, Japan, India, Israel, Taiwan, and (less closely attached, militarily) Singapore, and even more distantly Hong Kong and Canada, which are controlled by regimes somewhat hostile to the dominance of the Anglosphere. Other nations participate in the Anglosphere in some realms, but not others, as they choose. The Netherlands, South Africa, New Zealand, Costa Rica, and Malaysia are examples of countries which join in some ways, yet stay outside in others.

. . . Most of the world's major geo-strategic conflicts can only be understood in the context of struggle against the dominance of the Anglosphere. Islamo-fascism and terror are sparked by the (well-founded) fear that Anglosphere culture and society will dissolve the power base and control of rulers based in a Ninth Century political economy. Historical memories of a time in which Islamic Civilization was a rising force, prior to the arrival of the Anglosphere as the dominant world force serve to aggravate the fear and humilitaion they feel.

China's quest for ascendancy in East Asia is an understandable attempt to restore an era in which the Central Kingdom was the moving force in the world known to it, and the redress grievances dating from the Opium War, an Anglosphere project, which made evident the inability of China to match, much less exceed the power of what it regarded as a lesser civilization.

7 Comments:

At 3:07 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

So do you believe Ukraine can and should join the anglosphere? I just read a quote from Yuschenko about the UK being the primary force "leading" Ukraine to Europe.

OEC

 
At 4:09 PM, Blogger Aussiegirl said...

Great comment, OEC!! And I should have addressed it in my post. You are right, England is kind of on the fence -- they are moving towards union with the EU, but at the same time they defied the UN and the EU and joined the U.S. in the war in Iraq. Similarly, all the former Soviet states, like Poland, are aiming for the EU, but in the end, they may fundamentally shift its focus -- or they will form their own loose alliances -- which may eventually lead them into the Anglosphere. They value their newfound freedom and would make more of a common bond with the Anglosphere eventually, than the EU countries. However, one of the features of an Anglosphere country appears to be a stable economy and a strong civic structure along with deep democratic traditions and roots -- none of which Ukraine currently has -- it's nip and tuck to see if the ship of state can be turned in that direction eventually. Hopefully, Ukraine won't revert to familiar habits by falling in line with Big Brother Russia again -- that way lies ruin.

Great to hear from you!

 
At 11:04 PM, Blogger Perun said...

Ukraine being a part of the Anglosphere? I fail how to see how that's possible. Ukraine is a Slavic nation and has a heritage tied to the Byzantine and Continental European heritages. Ukraine is simply not an Anglo-Saxon nation nor one that adheres to its values.

Ukraine doesnt have strong democratic roots? Yes it actually does, but not in the parliamentary form familiar to the Anglosphere.

There was clearly a democratic tradition going back to the veche of Kievan Rus, and even to the Kozaks. Even the historian Mykola Kostomarov noted the natural democratic inclinations of the Ukrainian people, as opposed to the autocratic inclination of the Russians.

If democracy is to develop in Ukraine, I say it should look back to its historical roots as opposed to trying to copy a system that suited for an entirely different cultural context.

Democracy only flourishes when it adopts to local customs and traditions, not when the customs and traditions of another culture are imposed; which is what the Anglosphere thinks is the way to go.

 
At 1:00 PM, Blogger Aussiegirl said...

Thanks for the comment -- and you are of course, correct about Ukraine's historical democratic roots as I've noted on these pages before -- the first written constitution, plus as you said, the tradition of the Kozaks and the Hetmanate. However, since then the many years of domination by Russia, first under the Czars and then most recently by the Russian dominated communists, much of this history and tradition has been lost. The current generation of Ukrainians have no democratic traditions that they are familiar with from their own experience. And the effort to impose a top-down market reform strategy has only resulted in a kleptocracy with little guarantee for the individual to be able to own property, to start and run a business and to prosper under some reliable rule of law that enforces contracts. the Anglosphere, as it is presently visualised, includes many non-Engish speaking countries if you read Lifson's article. Countries such as Japan, Taiwan, India, etc.
The problem with Ukraine is that local customs and traditions have been virtually obliterated by years of communist purges and suppression. That is why Ukrainians do need to learn and rediscover their true natural heritage - the benevolent rule of Volodymyr -- who actually tried to use Christian principles to govern his nation, and the long tradition of independence and fair play that characterized the Ukrainin nation in contrast to the Russian character.

Yushchenko has been right in that -- Ukrainians must re-connect with their roots. They must drink from the Yevshan zilya -- the Yevshan herb which will remind them of who they really are.

 
At 9:28 PM, Blogger Perun said...

Yes I did read Libson's argument about Japan, Taiwan, and India being part of the Anglosphere. I sincerly disagree with that assestment, for in each example you still find native traditions playing a big part in the social outlook of things. Unless Libson really means that simply being allied with the United States and Britain as being part of the Anglosphere, his argument doesnt hold up much.

I agree that Ukrainians need to rediscover their roots, and certainly the diaspora should play a key role in that(since we preserved our traditions while the motherland was oppressed).

However, I dont think the direction Ukraine is heading will gurantee that.

 
At 1:10 PM, Anonymous viagra online said...

However, since then the many years of domination by Russia, first under the Czars and then most recently by the Russian dominated communists, much of this history and tradition has been lost.

 
At 3:19 PM, Anonymous pay per head service said...

blogs in here looking forward to often visit your blog

 

Post a Comment

<< Home