This just makes me respect the AMERICANS more than the Europeans. The Europeans have become like docile tamed animals of different kinds in a fenced-in pasture. You can see different formerly distinct European cultures slowly ceding their individual identities and beliefs for peace and safety and predictable outcomes in life. While the Europeans are alive, the Americans truly LIVE.
I couldn't agree more, and I say that as someone who has spent about half his life in America and half his life in numerous European countries. (That's why it saddens me when I see America become increasingly similar to Europe in some respects.)
Thank you for making these videos that really helps to give people that don’t have a lot of learning about these issues. Be able to form a general understanding or better understanding of what is going on. I thought it was really interesting how you made such a fascinating point about how something can look like one thing on the surface, but actually be completely different or even the opposite when examined deeper.
There's so much to explore in this line of thinking. To an extent the founding of the EU was an expression of an assertive, top-down, delusion of European elites to do away with the dark, unmentionable, legacies of nationalism, imperialism, colonization, and in a sense a branding exercise against the US - rough, uncultured, a bit stupid, and unpredictable. The supra-sovereign delusion was driven by cultural self-loathing. The 90s Balkans conflict was also an irruption of that barbaric nationalist sentiment. The Europeans were embarrassed and ashamed by US air power acting decisively in the Balkans. And then outraged that the sanctified UN was bypassed in the Iraq context. So, time and time again European self-identity expressed in opposition to the US version of modernity. The US hubris in liberal interventionism is paralleled by European hubris that Europe had a sacred duty to clean up after US-led wars in the Middle East. And that it would succeed. (Succeed how? Has any mass migration EU state ever set success measures or metrics for the way the policy is going? Most seem terrified to even collect statistics.) How can this all happen, and continue for almost 10 years? A disastrous policy is usually overturned by voters after a couple of electoral cycles. I have a hunch it lies in the supra-sovereign delusion - that the connection between voters and governments, and between governments and the EU, means European policy is completely detached from voter sentiment. Voters are also detached from policy, and detached from any lingering sense that they may share responsibility and accountability for the policy. I've always thought that politics - as in electoral politics - is downstream from culture. That suggests some long and arduous years of stasis, before crisis finally changes the game.
Have you ever read the book or watched the movie Ender's Game? I just watched it, and it feels like an Oikophobic mess. It almost seems like it was based on the current Israel war, although it was made far before it. Spoilers: It basically teaches that even if we are faced with what is seemingly an existential threat, we should not fight back, because there's a chance that the enemy doesn't mean harm and is just misunderstood. If we didn't know this, and if we acted as if the enemy truly was a threat, and we then inflicted major casualties on what turns out to have been a misunderstood group, then we forever bare the guilt for our crimes (again, despite the fact that we acted in self defense based on all available data). In the movie, they call this ultimate battle "the battle to end all battles" or something like that. This refers to their goal of completely neutralizing the threat, not because the threat deserves to go, but because the threat is too dangerous. This sounds a lot like the Israel war, but instead of coming to the conclusion that we must sometimes do extreme things (like the nuclear bombs in Japan) to end war, they come to the opposite conclusion. They basically advocate for the side that is asking Israel to lose their war, because the number of casualties is disproportional. (There's also other bad ideologies, but I'm focusing only on this one.)
I haven't, but I don't see much connection between what you describe and the current conflict. Obviously in our case the enemy does mean harm, beyond any doubt, and we're not dealing with a misunderstanding.
@@BenedictBeckeld The leftist theory about Hummus is that they are just misunderstood and that if we were to cater to their demands, then they would suddenly put down the arms, because at heart, Hummus isn't evil, they're just victims who are acting out of desperation. This is the same thing pushed by the movie when they suggest that they should've assumed that the aliens were simply misunderstood, despite the fact that the aliens attacked earth.
@@BenedictBeckeld The leftist theory about Hummus is that they are just misunderstood and that if we were to cater to their demands, then they would suddenly put down the arms, because at heart, Hummus isn't bad, they're just victims who are acting out of desperation. This is the same thing pushed by the movie when they suggest that they should've assumed that the aliens were simply misunderstood and acting out of desperation, despite the fact that the aliens attacked earth.
@@BenedictBeckeld The leftist theory about Hummus is that they are just misunderstood and that if we were to cater to their demands, then they would suddenly put down the arms, because at heart, they aren't 👎, they're just victims who are acting out of desperation. This is the same thing pushed by the movie when they suggest that they should've assumed that the aliens were simply misunderstood and acting out of desperation, despite the fact that the aliens originally descended upon earth.
@@BenedictBeckeld It's true that the actual intention of the enemy is different, but they didn't know it until the end. Throughout the entire movie they thought that they were fighting for survival. In the end, once they realize that the aliens are nice, they should've concluded "tough luck, we acted based on all available information" instead of "we are bad because we didn't endanger earth for potential peace."
For Europeans there is alays history, which understands and forgives. For Americans, however, there is only sociology, which judges and condemns. This explains the difference I think.
My personal style is to be accessible, and I dislike the academic way of writing that often hides in needlessly complicated locutions the fact that the writer doesn't have much of interest to say. But you won't know until you've tried!
@@BenedictBeckeld I'm going to buy your book in the coming days. I've had it on my list for too long. Are you insinuating that overcomplicated writers like (in my opinion) Nietzsche are overrated?
I appreciate that; I hope you'll enjoy it. No, Nietzsche does not write in a typically academic style; he's one of the best writers of the German language, in my opinion (along with Heine, Kleist, and Mann). But most modern-day academic writers are very bad, yes.
I disagree with your presumption that all (Western?) countries are following the same trajectory and that (Western?) Europe is further advanced on that trajectory. I think America is on a totally different path, largely because of our second amendment. That amendment is the ultimate reason we can be proud of our forefathers, as it is the ultimate source of sovereignty. And that amendment is what keeps the oikophobic tyrants at bay. So as long as Americans retain their People's Veto, I do not believe we are doomed to follow in the footsteps of Europe.
Yes, I certainly agree with you about the second amendment, and I as well am very proud that we have that. And of course I hope you're right that we're not following on the same trajectory as other (Western, yes) countries. But I wouldn't call my opinion a mere presumption, since it's something I've written about extensively. There are differences among countries, of course, but the evidence for the trajectory of oikophobia and the slow collapse of conservatism appear to me to be very similar from one country to the next. If you're interested, I discuss this in detail in my "Western Self-Contempt".
Interesting point, as Dr.B has said previously a German equivalent to your 2nd amendment in the early 20th century would have made the holocaust nigh impossible. From an English perspective it feels that much of our European oikophobia is following in the footsteps of "woke" US trends, I would evidence this with how much British BLM rhetoric against Anglo/European culture seems to site American history, as though Belgium might have been in some way responsible for Jim Crow etc. Also, many anti-woke Brits were wearing MAGA hats during the Trump presidency. For better or worse I think ideological tribalism is becoming more significant than nationalism. Any Brits who know history have a great admiration of the US.
@@BenedictBeckeld I've read a few of your articles over the years, so I'm aware that you have some basis for your belief, and I enjoy your analysis in general, but I'm still not convinced on this point. Prior to the Enlightenment, civilization was "stable" (or, more accurately, "steady state"). Think "empire cycling" or the "Malthusian trap". For 8000 years, human civilizations around the globe followed the same circular path, repeating the same blunders--expansionist growth followed by collapse. There were no exponential "hockey stick" graphs to speak of. But in the last few centuries since the Enlightenment, that train has apparently fallen of its track, as a result of the changing technological landscape--particularly, the introduction of guns. I think the majority of differences between Europe and America today are a direct result of the differences in how 19th century America and 19th century Europe handled that development. In short, America enshrined guns as a popular right. Europe regulated them and constrained their ownership to a relative, privileged few. I think this explains why both world wars started in Europe, for example. I think it explains much of 20th century geopolitics. And I think gun ownership will continue to shape American politics in the way that many Europeans find incomprehensible (a view which I am empathetic to, since widespread gun ownership is not without its downsides). In your November article you astutely use Covid to substantiate your claim that "America is still the freest country". I agree with your conclusion, but I think it has far less to do with philosophy and ideology and far more to do with the simple fact that Americans are better positioned to "veto" any over-reach in Washington (or governor's mansions)... with their guns. I think American political freedom is fundamentally downstream of the physical freedom afforded by ranged weaponry. And that is unlikely to change in my lifetime. And I believe as long as Americans hold on to their guns, they need not ever fear European (or Australian or New Zealander) style Covid policy. Such authoritarian measures, even if motivated by benevolence, are simply untenable in a country where the people's sovereignty is physically secure. (Although drone footage coming out of Ukraine has me wondering if another technological revolution is around the corner...) Anyway, thanks for entertaining me and I love your work. Have a productive 2023!
@@baltvdb I agree about the American influence on Europe you're discussing. I'd distinguish there between a broader historical and a more immediate level. In the here and now, there's no question that the U.S. is indeed having an (in this case negative) influence on Europe. But on a broader historical level, the spread of oikophobic ideas took place in Europe long before it reached the U.S. (this is outlined in my book). I didn't know, however, that one would see a significant number of MAGA hats in Britain; interesting to hear.
@@sterlingveil Thank you, I appreciate your readership! The book contains a lot more detail than the articles, however, as you might expect. The lack of guns in private hands being partial causes of war and tyranny in Europe is in fact a point I discuss in my video on American freedom. As for my November article that you mentioned, half of that article was originally devoted to the guns issue you're discussing, but the editors would only publish if I cut that out. But I think we're also getting slightly off topic. Political tyranny is far unlikelier here for the reasons you say - agreed - but cultural oikophobia is spreading. But, in any case, as I said before, I hope you're right! And I really appreciate your kind words. Have a great 2023.
This just makes me respect the AMERICANS more than the Europeans. The Europeans have become like docile tamed animals of different kinds in a fenced-in pasture. You can see different formerly distinct European cultures slowly ceding their individual identities and beliefs for peace and safety and predictable outcomes in life. While the Europeans are alive, the Americans truly LIVE.
I couldn't agree more, and I say that as someone who has spent about half his life in America and half his life in numerous European countries. (That's why it saddens me when I see America become increasingly similar to Europe in some respects.)
Thank you for sharing the fruits of your genius!
Thank you for partaking!
Thank you for making these videos that really helps to give people that don’t have a lot of learning about these issues. Be able to form a general understanding or better understanding of what is going on. I thought it was really interesting how you made such a fascinating point about how something can look like one thing on the surface, but actually be completely different or even the opposite when examined deeper.
Thank you, I'm glad you're enjoying them!
Thanks,Dr Ben.A fascinating analysis that really helps comprehend the collapse of conservatism and the oikophobe phenomena.
Thank you! Later this year a book chapter by me on the collapse of conservatism and the rise of pseudo-conservatism will be published.
There's so much to explore in this line of thinking. To an extent the founding of the EU was an expression of an assertive, top-down, delusion of European elites to do away with the dark, unmentionable, legacies of nationalism, imperialism, colonization, and in a sense a branding exercise against the US - rough, uncultured, a bit stupid, and unpredictable. The supra-sovereign delusion was driven by cultural self-loathing. The 90s Balkans conflict was also an irruption of that barbaric nationalist sentiment. The Europeans were embarrassed and ashamed by US air power acting decisively in the Balkans. And then outraged that the sanctified UN was bypassed in the Iraq context. So, time and time again European self-identity expressed in opposition to the US version of modernity. The US hubris in liberal interventionism is paralleled by European hubris that Europe had a sacred duty to clean up after US-led wars in the Middle East. And that it would succeed. (Succeed how? Has any mass migration EU state ever set success measures or metrics for the way the policy is going? Most seem terrified to even collect statistics.)
How can this all happen, and continue for almost 10 years? A disastrous policy is usually overturned by voters after a couple of electoral cycles. I have a hunch it lies in the supra-sovereign delusion - that the connection between voters and governments, and between governments and the EU, means European policy is completely detached from voter sentiment. Voters are also detached from policy, and detached from any lingering sense that they may share responsibility and accountability for the policy.
I've always thought that politics - as in electoral politics - is downstream from culture. That suggests some long and arduous years of stasis, before crisis finally changes the game.
Have you ever read the book or watched the movie Ender's Game?
I just watched it, and it feels like an Oikophobic mess.
It almost seems like it was based on the current Israel war, although it was made far before it.
Spoilers:
It basically teaches that even if we are faced with what is seemingly an existential threat, we should not fight back, because there's a chance that the enemy doesn't mean harm and is just misunderstood.
If we didn't know this, and if we acted as if the enemy truly was a threat, and we then inflicted major casualties on what turns out to have been a misunderstood group, then we forever bare the guilt for our crimes (again, despite the fact that we acted in self defense based on all available data).
In the movie, they call this ultimate battle "the battle to end all battles" or something like that.
This refers to their goal of completely neutralizing the threat, not because the threat deserves to go, but because the threat is too dangerous.
This sounds a lot like the Israel war, but instead of coming to the conclusion that we must sometimes do extreme things (like the nuclear bombs in Japan) to end war, they come to the opposite conclusion.
They basically advocate for the side that is asking Israel to lose their war, because the number of casualties is disproportional.
(There's also other bad ideologies, but I'm focusing only on this one.)
I haven't, but I don't see much connection between what you describe and the current conflict. Obviously in our case the enemy does mean harm, beyond any doubt, and we're not dealing with a misunderstanding.
@@BenedictBeckeld
The leftist theory about Hummus is that they are just misunderstood and that if we were to cater to their demands, then they would suddenly put down the arms, because at heart, Hummus isn't evil, they're just victims who are acting out of desperation.
This is the same thing pushed by the movie when they suggest that they should've assumed that the aliens were simply misunderstood, despite the fact that the aliens attacked earth.
@@BenedictBeckeld
The leftist theory about Hummus is that they are just misunderstood and that if we were to cater to their demands, then they would suddenly put down the arms, because at heart, Hummus isn't bad, they're just victims who are acting out of desperation.
This is the same thing pushed by the movie when they suggest that they should've assumed that the aliens were simply misunderstood and acting out of desperation, despite the fact that the aliens attacked earth.
@@BenedictBeckeld
The leftist theory about Hummus is that they are just misunderstood and that if we were to cater to their demands, then they would suddenly put down the arms, because at heart, they aren't 👎, they're just victims who are acting out of desperation.
This is the same thing pushed by the movie when they suggest that they should've assumed that the aliens were simply misunderstood and acting out of desperation, despite the fact that the aliens originally descended upon earth.
@@BenedictBeckeld It's true that the actual intention of the enemy is different, but they didn't know it until the end.
Throughout the entire movie they thought that they were fighting for survival.
In the end, once they realize that the aliens are nice, they should've concluded "tough luck, we acted based on all available information" instead of "we are bad because we didn't endanger earth for potential peace."
Oikophobia, in my opinion, hasn't won in Europe is just currently noisier. As always very thought provoking, thanks.👍
For Europeans there is alays history, which understands and forgives. For Americans, however, there is only sociology, which judges and condemns. This explains the difference I think.
Is your book an easy read, or is it complicated philosophy, like Nietzsche (which I can't understand)?
My personal style is to be accessible, and I dislike the academic way of writing that often hides in needlessly complicated locutions the fact that the writer doesn't have much of interest to say. But you won't know until you've tried!
@@BenedictBeckeld I'm going to buy your book in the coming days. I've had it on my list for too long.
Are you insinuating that overcomplicated writers like (in my opinion) Nietzsche are overrated?
I appreciate that; I hope you'll enjoy it.
No, Nietzsche does not write in a typically academic style; he's one of the best writers of the German language, in my opinion (along with Heine, Kleist, and Mann). But most modern-day academic writers are very bad, yes.
@@BenedictBeckeld Alright, makes sense.
I'm just really struggling to read Nietzsche. I understand his philosophies, but I can't read his books.
Thanks for telling a good story. 🤭😉
I disagree with your presumption that all (Western?) countries are following the same trajectory and that (Western?) Europe is further advanced on that trajectory.
I think America is on a totally different path, largely because of our second amendment. That amendment is the ultimate reason we can be proud of our forefathers, as it is the ultimate source of sovereignty. And that amendment is what keeps the oikophobic tyrants at bay.
So as long as Americans retain their People's Veto, I do not believe we are doomed to follow in the footsteps of Europe.
Yes, I certainly agree with you about the second amendment, and I as well am very proud that we have that. And of course I hope you're right that we're not following on the same trajectory as other (Western, yes) countries. But I wouldn't call my opinion a mere presumption, since it's something I've written about extensively. There are differences among countries, of course, but the evidence for the trajectory of oikophobia and the slow collapse of conservatism appear to me to be very similar from one country to the next. If you're interested, I discuss this in detail in my "Western Self-Contempt".
Interesting point, as Dr.B has said previously a German equivalent to your 2nd amendment in the early 20th century would have made the holocaust nigh impossible. From an English perspective it feels that much of our European oikophobia is following in the footsteps of "woke" US trends, I would evidence this with how much British BLM rhetoric against Anglo/European culture seems to site American history, as though Belgium might have been in some way responsible for Jim Crow etc. Also, many anti-woke Brits were wearing MAGA hats during the Trump presidency. For better or worse I think ideological tribalism is becoming more significant than nationalism. Any Brits who know history have a great admiration of the US.
@@BenedictBeckeld I've read a few of your articles over the years, so I'm aware that you have some basis for your belief, and I enjoy your analysis in general, but I'm still not convinced on this point.
Prior to the Enlightenment, civilization was "stable" (or, more accurately, "steady state"). Think "empire cycling" or the "Malthusian trap". For 8000 years, human civilizations around the globe followed the same circular path, repeating the same blunders--expansionist growth followed by collapse. There were no exponential "hockey stick" graphs to speak of.
But in the last few centuries since the Enlightenment, that train has apparently fallen of its track, as a result of the changing technological landscape--particularly, the introduction of guns. I think the majority of differences between Europe and America today are a direct result of the differences in how 19th century America and 19th century Europe handled that development.
In short, America enshrined guns as a popular right. Europe regulated them and constrained their ownership to a relative, privileged few. I think this explains why both world wars started in Europe, for example. I think it explains much of 20th century geopolitics. And I think gun ownership will continue to shape American politics in the way that many Europeans find incomprehensible (a view which I am empathetic to, since widespread gun ownership is not without its downsides).
In your November article you astutely use Covid to substantiate your claim that "America is still the freest country". I agree with your conclusion, but I think it has far less to do with philosophy and ideology and far more to do with the simple fact that Americans are better positioned to "veto" any over-reach in Washington (or governor's mansions)... with their guns. I think American political freedom is fundamentally downstream of the physical freedom afforded by ranged weaponry.
And that is unlikely to change in my lifetime. And I believe as long as Americans hold on to their guns, they need not ever fear European (or Australian or New Zealander) style Covid policy. Such authoritarian measures, even if motivated by benevolence, are simply untenable in a country where the people's sovereignty is physically secure.
(Although drone footage coming out of Ukraine has me wondering if another technological revolution is around the corner...)
Anyway, thanks for entertaining me and I love your work. Have a productive 2023!
@@baltvdb I agree about the American influence on Europe you're discussing. I'd distinguish there between a broader historical and a more immediate level. In the here and now, there's no question that the U.S. is indeed having an (in this case negative) influence on Europe. But on a broader historical level, the spread of oikophobic ideas took place in Europe long before it reached the U.S. (this is outlined in my book). I didn't know, however, that one would see a significant number of MAGA hats in Britain; interesting to hear.
@@sterlingveil Thank you, I appreciate your readership! The book contains a lot more detail than the articles, however, as you might expect.
The lack of guns in private hands being partial causes of war and tyranny in Europe is in fact a point I discuss in my video on American freedom. As for my November article that you mentioned, half of that article was originally devoted to the guns issue you're discussing, but the editors would only publish if I cut that out. But I think we're also getting slightly off topic. Political tyranny is far unlikelier here for the reasons you say - agreed - but cultural oikophobia is spreading. But, in any case, as I said before, I hope you're right! And I really appreciate your kind words. Have a great 2023.
We all detest colonialism though, must be why the 1984 levels of spin is needed. And we all need to be pre-bunked.
Americans culture war is out of control.