relationship between the European and non-European worldsrnhas almost been completely reversed. The shattered self-confidencernof even the victors in World War I made the liberation ofrntheir colonies a foregone conclusion, the only real question beingrnone of timing. When the liberation came, during the ColdrnWar, the non-European world generally sided with either thernUnited States or the Soviet Union while the outcome was inrndoubt, but this only temporarily masked a deeper reality, whichrnis now coming to light: that the non-Western cultures are nornlonger cowed by Western technical and military superiority.rnPerceiving our moral weakness and their demographic strength,rnthey increasingly see European wealth and land as a prize to bernexpropriated: in short. The Camp of the Saints, or what myrnfriend has called the candy store with the busted lock. Ourrnhegemonist elites seem to believe that man does live by Big Macrnalone, and they delude themselves with the specious idea thatrnour culture (by which they mean our movies, our rock music,rnour fast food) is all the rage from Beijing to Bujumbura. Andrnfinally, there is only a dim recognition that in the centuries-oldrnstruggle between Cross and Crescent the latter has decisivelyrnreturned to the offensive after a hiatus of some three centuries.rnWhen future generations look back on today, they will seernthat the United States’ emergence as the world’s only superpowerrnis one of the biggest and crudest practical jokes inrnhistory. For if there is one country that is uttedy incapable ofrnperceiving its interests and constructively acting upon them, itrnis the United States. This is due partly to our national temperamentrnand institutions. Some of these may have their roots inrnthe founding of the country, but the focus here is on contemporaryrncharacteristics that are relevant to the political elite’srnability to manipulate a people into supporting a globalist agenda.rnFor example, of any European or derivative people, Americansrnare most ignorant of their own history and know even lessrnabout other peoples. Historical knowledge is mainly limited tornethnic or hyphenated Americans, who are familiar with theirrnown distinctive tribal renditions: black Americans, who knowrnthat we had slavery and Jim Crow; and some white Southerners,rnwho can recite in minute detail the particulars of the great LostrnCause. Other than that, the American store of history consistsrnof the latest O.J. story, some sports statistics, and the completernlyrics to the theme songs to The Beverly HillbiUies and GiUigan’srnIsland. We have forgotten who we are, and when our hegemonistrnelites decide to bomb or starve some other people, werndo not know who, let alone where, these people are.rnUntil the Civil War, American national consciousness wasrnprimarily regional and local; shared ethnic origins in thernBritish Isles was assumed. In retrospect, we can now say thernheyday of a unified American identity was the interval betweenrnthe end of Reconstruction and the end of Wodd War II; thatrnidentity was defined by ethnicity (Northwest European) andrnreligion (Protestant), as well as by shared historical experience.rnImmigration during this period was almost exclusively European,rnand to the extent that it increasingly consisted of Easternrnand Southern Europeans and non-Protestants, the immigrantsrnwere expected to Americanize, that is, dress, talk, and act likernWSPs. Today, we give lip-service the WSP principles uponrnwhich this Republic was built while vilifying as racist the notionrnthat WSP ethnicity has any relationship to American nationality.rnThe result is progressive Balkanization: the multiculturalismrnof the left and the pluralism of the neoconservatives,rnwhich, as Joe Sobran has noted, arc pretty much the samernthing. In short, we have accepted the notion that the UnitedrnStates is not the home of a distinct people but a community ofrnshared ideals, as interpreted by the elites—ideals that are availablernfor export.rnUnlike European countries, we have never had a monarch, arnnobility, an established church. We really do believe in everyrnman a king. Among the consequences is the fact that suchrnelites as we do have tend to exercise their power not by open appealrnto their legitimate authority (because they cannot) but byrnmanipulation of images: Joseph Goebbels, meet Madison Avenue.rnWe are suckers for the claim that any social institutionrnbased on privilege, tradition, or, worst of all, discriminationrnmust be destroyed. When the internationalist elites call forrnmaking the world safe for democracy, they are singing our song.rnWe are ever ready to “level the playing field” on behalf of thernlittle guy, the underdog, or the victim, a propensity artfully mobilizedrnfirst by the Croats and then even more effectively by thernMuslims in the Yugoslav war. In its extreme, this phenomenonrntakes the form, as Joe Sobran has described it, of an inversion ofrnsympathies, an altruistic identification with the other againstrnone’s own: the alien against the native, the non-Europeanrnagainst the European, the non-Christian against the Christian.rnAmericans like to bask in their self-image of rough-andready,rnfree-living individualism: Don’t tread on me. Howeverrnaccurate that might have been at one time, it is not so now.rnDespite the fact that Americans are increasingly suspicious ofrntheir public institutions and are increasingly aware that theirrnlaws are made not by elected representatives but by nonelectedrnjudges and bureaucrats, it would seldom occur to most Americansrnto disobey their illegitimate edicts. Indeed, the more fundamentallyrndecent and traditionally-minded Americans arernprecisely those who are most obedient to commands from onrnhigh that undermine their core values. Their respect for thernlaw, ordinarily a virtue, is used against them by the lawless.rnThis phenomenon is particularly evident among Southernrnfamilies with strong traditions of military service, whose sonsrn(and now daughters) are sent abroad to risk their lives not forrnthe defense of their homeland but for a globalist agenda.rnEven as Americans have abandoned Puritanism for hedonismrnas their guiding principle for good living, they have notrngiven up their assumption that the essential question in anyrnconflict is figuring out who are the white hats and who are thernblack hats. This tendency, coupled with a naive faith in ourrnown national righteousness—truth, justice, and the Americanrnway—plus ignorance of the outside world, plays into the handsrnof the hegemonist elite.rnIn general. Congress—members and staff of both establishedrnparties—might be seen as occupying a middle groundrnbetween the people and the political elite. Some of the inhabitantsrnof Capitol Hill fully share in the dominant internationalistrnmindset, others are fellow-travelers, and still others attemptrnto oppose it, usually unsuccessfully. Three influences onrnCongress, as well as the Executive Branch, deserve mention.rnAmong the two most potent foreign lobbies on Capitol Hillrnare those pleading the causes of Israel and the pro-WesternrnMuslim states, notably Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf oilrnmonarchies. It is often wrongly assumed that these lobbies arernmutually antagonistic, when in fact their interests, while certainlyrnnot identical, are often congruent. This congruence wasrnmost evident during the Persian Gulf War and has affectedrnAmerica’s pro-Muslim policy in the Balkans. The latter reflectsrnthe obvious sympathies of our Muslim client states, the cynicalrnJUNE 1997/29rnrnrn