The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPaul Craig Roberts Archive
Have We Brewed a Whirlwind?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

In the United States and throughout the Western World there is public distrust of public authorities and distrust among the public of one another. Public authorities who do not like “conspiracy theories” do a lot to generate them.

We can see the public’s distrust of public authorities in the negligent response to the coronavirus. The refusal of public authorities to stop incoming flights from infected countries has brought the dangerous virus into the Western World where inaction has so far prevailed.

Many virologists and other experts have criticized the inaction for seriously endangering the public. I recently posted some of the expert statements made to public health authorities. See:


Germany: .

The refusals of public officials to take protective steps partly reside in ideological positions. In Europe it is the European Union’s commitment to open borders and one Europe. Closing the borders goes against the ideology that nationalism is the problem.

In other instances, Canada for example, the Prime Minister apparently considers it “racist” to protect Canadians from incoming flights from Iran. See: .

The public sees inaction, disbelieves the feeble reasons given, and takes action to exhaust supplies of protective gear, storable foods, and everything else that disappears in a panic.

As the inaction of public authorities is not understandable, all sorts of explanations arise. For example: The Center for Disease Control (CDC) and the National Institute for Health (NIH) want the virus to spread, because the result will be bigger budgets; the pharmaceutical companies (Big-Pharma) want the virus to spread, because it will bring them profits in mandatory vaccination whether it prevents or aids the spread of the virus; governments want the virus to spread, because it allows them to impose martial law and abolish civil liberties; elites are using the virus to reduce the world population; governments are using the virus to reduce the strain of the elderly on health care systems and save money. You can add to this list on your own.

One consequence of distrust of public authorities is lack of public cooperation in whatever response effort public authorities eventually mount. Another consequence is that this lack of public cooperation justifies more coercion by government in order to deal with the threat. Remember all of the violations of Constitutional protections made by the George W. Bush and Obama regimes in responst to 9/11 and the “terrorist threat.” A big difference is that then there was no pandemic.

Distrust among the public of one another has been fomented by decades of feminist attacks on men and by decades of attacks on white people as “racists.” These attacks have been institutionalized in the educational system. They have been useful to feminist and “racial minorities” for advancement. But they have atomized the population. Where there was once community, no matter how unequal, there is the lack of community.


The “sexist” and “racist” offences are more taught than felt and are reaching the point of absurdity. Every day someone finds a slur in a word that has been part of the language for centuries before the presence in the population of racial minorities. These manufactured “offences” are used to excoriate men and to fire them from jobs and deny them professional careers.

Guillaume Durocher points out that community is also being destroyed by the decline in national community. The core entities that produced national communities or countries are being flooded out by incoming multitudes of immigrants from different cultures and value systems. Many on the left show open contempt for nationhood and national solidarity. Durocher explains the collapse of national community here:

Now assaulting a fragmenting Western World comes a pandemic whose consequences cannot be known. Is there enough leadership to overcome the long-inflicted damages and to pull the people together and to reestablish community? With the Democrats politically weaponizing the coronavirus against President Trump, it does not seem so.

(Republished from by permission of author or representative)
Hide 31 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. The funny thing is that more peopled have died from complications related to common colds and influenza in the same period of time COVID-19 has been in play, but TPTB found it necessary to whip up this firestorm to clamp down on us. Then there’s the resurgence of maladies being brought to the Western World by the new people our “leasership” is importing. One can only wonder.

    • Replies: @Longfisher
  2. One ready to die invites the killer pathogen.
    Corrupt West faces judgment like Lucifer fallen.

  3. Finance is influenced, and directed, accordingly, by global chess moves, most coincidences and contexts of local having global impact,
    Our elites are dependent on global factors to consolidate power,
    Industrial capitalism is a global affair,
    Migrations are done and undone by local factors impacting globally,
    Foremost, ecological order, or derangement is a global issue, water, air, resources secondary to it, each in turn,
    Let´s say there is such a thing as a global waste-population, a population not needed, not desired, not utilitarian to itself, and only existing and stimulated to cater to elite interests. How on earth, can these cater to above global warfare, adopting myopic tactics and strategy limited to nation. Planetary response, or dead in the water. The context is drawn, the choice is foregone. Itself and it´s outliers, need coordinating globally, time for comprehension only, long gone. The effort is totalitarian.

  4. @The Alarmist

    And, here’s the bitch about your analysis…addition morbity on top of existing morbity should be absolutely controlled. Or, did you not complete your coursework in epidemiology?

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  5. According to Durocher, “from the fifteenth to the twentieth centuries, we observe the steady rise of national identity”.
    During this time, “[t]he nation [became] an existential fact within which one lived and died, and potentially flourished and . . . transcended one’s individuality.”
    Does this “national identity” imply that a nation is a community?
    Sadly, the word “community” is used to denote a wide range of social groupings where the extremes are arguably so different from each other, that to regard them as the same is hard to justify.
    At one extreme is the nation which is extremely large – so large that most people are unknown to [and uninvolved with] most other people belonging to the same nation.
    At the other extreme would be a much smaller group of people who live together and who are required to cooperate with each other in order to meet the everyday needs and wants of one and all. In such a group, interdependence would be very strong. Such a group could be considered as a tribal community.
    Durocher is correct in asserting that national communities “are an existential fact” which the great majority of people are born into and live our entire lives, and die.
    Is it relevant in any way that there is a huge demand in modern societies for anti-depressant and anti-anxiety medications? Likewise for the rates of suicide in modern societies.
    Is it possible that there is an innate need in our species to belong to a group which we care about and which cares for us as an integral part of the whole?
    If so, then is it possible that national communities do not go anywhere near to meeting that need for a large proportion of their citizens?
    Does it matter?
    If so, what needs to be done to remedy this situation?

  6. Franz says:

    The Center for Disease Control (CDC) and the National Institute for Health (NIH) want the virus to spread, because the result will be bigger budgets

    They got a new model hysteria every year — always fills coffers.

    The phony opioid crisis was the money-making event of the last season. And it turns out both public and private interests made a mint. The CDC got to hire more of their well-off cronies to push a completely false narrative. And the Sackler family, turns out, prepared for all this years ago by offshoring and protecting the lions share of their assets… so they are actually not likely to lose anything.

    This year it’s an epidemic. Next year maybe Werner Von Braun’s “alien invasion.” At least Werner was honest enough to tell us it’s going to be phony ahead of time.

    • Replies: @Dutch Boy
  7. @alan kerns

    Sadly, the word “community” is used to denote a wide range of social groupings where the extremes are arguably so different from each other, that to regard them as the same is hard to justify.

    That is the post multicultural definition of community. It was originally a geographic area where people lived and quite often worked, and where their children played, were schooled, and made lifetime friends.

  8. Biff says:

    Think of the fun George Carlin would be having if he were still alive.

    A pandemic hitting America?! The dream comes true”

  9. Roger says:
    @alan kerns

    Out of the whole article, this issue was the only thing that caught my attention. I think you have answered it quite well. Good comment!

  10. @alan kerns

    A question might be: what need does the nation-state serve that is not satisfied by family, religious community, city, ethnic or regional identity? An obvious answer is that a nation can mobilize the resources of a large geological region, under the control of a ruling economic elite, for the purpose of waging more effective thievery (i.e. warfare) against rival combinations of elites, in order to more efficiently steal their valuables.

    Indoctrinate impressionable and naturally aggressive young males to believe that by being warriors they are doing something noble, something beloved by their imaginary tribal deity, something that proves their honor and tests their courage, and there you have a précis of the long, sad story of “civilization.”

    • Replies: @alan kerns
  11. Thomasina says:

    Manufacturing was already slowing down before this Corona virus hit.

    Before Trump’s tariffs on China went into effect, U.S. multinational corporations and U.S. importers had tried to outsmart these tariffs by getting out ahead of them, ordering and stockpiling huge inventories. Trucking, rail and shipping were going nuts trying to keep up, as were the manufacturers in China.

    They subprimed a lot of this product, but eventually demand went down (ran out of suckers). What happens when you get a glut of supply and not enough demand? Well, prices begin to go down. Millions of cars sitting in surplus lots begin to get old, for example.

    Chinese factories were still running at full capacity and they were told to put on the brakes: “Whoa, we don’t need any more inventory. We can’t sell what we have. Slow it down.” But Chinese factories can’t easily slow down or lay people off, not if these owners and managers want to live. These Chinese people have taken out loans on concrete condos and they are going to riot if they don’t have money coming in. What to do!!!

    Well, you create a virus, a threat to people’s very lives.

    No one can blame you for a virus.

    This way China can safely shut down its manufacturing for awhile without causing a riot (in order to deplete excess inventory in the West).

    And the West gets to pretend there’s a “supply” problem (“Oh, we can’t get parts from China”) in order to keep prices up.

    It’s always about economics.

    P.S. I’m not saying there isn’t a virus. I’m sure there is. But it’s being played up in order for the globalists (the multinational corporations and China) to get out of a bind.

    Globalism versus nationalism – you’ve got to love it!

  12. @alan kerns

    If so, what needs to be done to remedy this situation?

    One should seek one’s own survival. One should be aware that pointing fingers and blaming distracts from the task at hand.

    No one can make chicken salad out of chicken shit.
    No one can pick up a turd by the clean end.
    No one can devise a way for 8 billion humans (let alone 10 billion) to prosper on this earth.

    Life will go on for the survivors, probably it will be even better.

    The future belongs to whoever shows up.

  13. nsa says:

    A worst case analogy from history would be the Influenza Epidemic of 1918 (misnamed the “Spanish Flu”). It first showed up in Haskell County, Kansas, as a virulent flu and a recruit on leave is thought to have spread it to nearby Fort Riley where conscripts were housed in squalid overcrowded conditions, where the virus is thought to have reshuffled into a more virulent form. The medical authorities at the time recommended quarantine of the camp, but instead the warmonger Wilson and his generals reassigned these troops all over the US, the effort to murder Germans trumping all medical considerations. The disease went into hiding for a few summer months and then reappeared in its more virulent form at camps all over the US. Sick troops were packed on troops carriers to cross the Atlantic, and died like flies on the way, and “buried” at sea i.e. tossed over the side without ceremony. Wilson and crew knowingly spread the disease into Europe and throughout the US, ultimately killing an estimated 100 million all over the world. Yup, Wilson and his flunkies managed to kill more humans than all the popular villains (Hitler, Stallin, Mao) put together. The saddest part is that whole isolated Eskimo villages would receive a supply ship (and the virus). Later supply ships discovered just bones…..they died and were eaten by their dogs.

    • Agree: Kratoklastes, sayless
  14. Dutch Boy says:

    Because of agency capture, the CDC and NIH are just functionaries of the pharmaceutical industry (which is a collection of serial killers, in the words of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.).

    • Agree: Kratoklastes, Franz
  15. @Observator

    I agree with your ‘précis of the long, sad story of “civilization.”’
    Indoctrinate = brainwash
    Is it possible to brainwash young people to resist brainwashing? Warriors dedicated to reasoning why doing battle with warriors who believe they know why. What are the odds?
    Likewise, a nation not ruled by a monetary elite coexisting among nations ruled by a monetary elite. What are the odds?
    What better example of brainwashing than the ridiculous belief that money is a store of value?
    The story is indeed long and sad.
    I imagine that the monetary elite imagine that there will be no escape – for us ordinaries – from their 5G and their viruses and their vaccinations.
    Thanks for your thoughtful comments.

    • Replies: @Kratoklastes
  16. @another fred

    Thanks fred.
    Not sure about chicken shit. Judiciously used as soil fertilizer may actually contribute to making chicken salad.
    Even so, I take your point that civilized life is impossible without civilization.
    Life for the survivors will probably be “even better”?
    Do you mean even better than the Great War which never actually ended until who knows what is going to eventuate?
    We like things to belong to us.
    The future – I think – will belong to nature – whatever that is.

  17. @another fred

    The present belongs to whoever does not show up?

    Because then they cannot be exploited by corporations, churches, and militaries.

    I think Jesse Ventura has the right idea.

  18. I think what you have correct here is the impact of careless immigration policy.

    Hmmm . . . I don’t buy the “racist” rant that white people are being denied. That is the wrong approach. The advent of technology has just provided a broader access to information that had been previously left out of the narrative. The use of the same technology has provided some disturbing truths that indicate that whites have manufactured a system to benefit them — now that may hurt. And hard to face and it may be difficult to reckon with but the evidence is strongly in the advocates favor.

    there are several responses

    1. deny it and the dominant population has the numbers to continue that narrative by misapplying the stats, broaden the narrative, but in a strange wierd response

    2. deny and claim that it is genetics

    3. acknowledge the data and claim it is genetics

    4. deny, acknowledge, claim genetics, manipulate stats, broaden to change the subject — in other words really muddy the water

    5. claim that is merely a guilt false advance and add 1-4

    But at the end of the day there are institutional consequences for how any nation socializes, some positive and others not at all.

    For my part, I have always thought the issue was nationalism. And importing people to replace, undermine, or otherwise defend the privilege turf is what is really eating the country. And importing people who expect accommodation as opposed to accommodating.

    the other issue is permeated in the majority of the comments — the organization and application of market forces — the economy.

  19. @alan kerns

    Is it possible to brainwash young people to resist brainwashing?


    If parents systematically refuse to indoctrinate their children, and take pains to point out things that are widely-believed but false, the kid grows up with a healthy skepticism about belief systems. If the kid is cognitively normal-ish, that ought to be enough.

    As a young kid I had quite a few friends who were crestfallen when they discovered the awful truth about the Easter Bunny.

    The really smart ones were also angry: it wasn’t just that a fun thing was shown to be fake… the worst thing was that their parents had systematically lied to them for the whole of their lives to date – about at least that one thing.

    Brainwashing does not – can not – work on people who know that someone is trying to brainwash them.

    Encourage children to be epistemic thinkers rather than doxastic thinkers and the job’s more than half done. Teach them the difference between knowing something, and simply believing it.

    Instead, the last half-century or so has seen children being taught that a strongly-held belief is better than a weakly-held one, regardless of the factual basis (or absence thereof) – that zeal is more important than knowledge. (St Gretchen Aspberg is a cardinal example of this phenomenon).

    In 2 generations, sociology – and nonsense built thereon – has undone three centuries of Enlightenment progress.

    • Agree: PhysicistDave
  20. @another fred

    No one can devise a way for 8 billion humans (let alone 10 billion) to prosper on this earth.

    Whatever gives you that idea?

    We are nowhere near any constraints – population and dwelling densities are very low; access to fresh water and sanitation will be a solved problem by the end of the 3rd quarter of this century.

    The system that we currently have produces abundant food – so much so that the problem is increasingly not a problem of getting enough calories, but a problem of getting too many.

    For the ‘bottom billion’ (almost all of whom are in Africa), the deliberate discouragement by the West of key agricultural technologies (specifically, phosphate fertilisers) has been sand in the gears of progress for almost 50 years.

    Africa could easily replicate India – which went from widespread food precarity to complete internal food security (and food exports) in the 1970s, due to reforms in agricultural practice, including a huge increase in the use of fertilisers.

    For Africa this is being prevented by European bureaucrats, who think that food security would result in a population explosion in SSA and a Black Tide flowing into Europe – despite food security being strongly accompanied by rapidly-reduced TFR, everywhere that the two have been measured.

    So for the longest time the Europeans have tried to restrict African access to phosphate fertilisers – which is a double-whammy because SSA soils are generally phosphate-poor.



    Humanity produces so much grain, pulses and legumes that 30% of production is used feeding livestock: later this century that industry will go the way of buggy-whip manufacturers, which will free up vast amounts of land, and huge quantities of calories, for humans.

    Once lab-cultured meat is perfected and costs drop below the cost of industrial animal processing, the positive ramifications for land use, effluent contamination of aquifers, and aggregate human nutrition will be staggering. (And the livestock industry is the main source of antibiotic-resistant bacteria).

    This planet could easily support a population 40% greater than we have now, at a higher average standard of living (and a vastly higher standard for the bottom quartile). Even more than 40% higher if a very large chunk of global productivity was not taken by government grifters and and transferred – upwards – to their cronies.

    The great thing is – it won’t have to support a higher population for long: population will stabilise at ~9.5-10 billion mid-century, and will decline thereafter. Nothing slows human reproduction faster than material abundance.

    And just like it’s been for humanity since the Industrial Revolution, every generation will be better off than their forebears (the ‘default’ for humans since the late 1700s, except for periods when governments went on killing rampages).

  21. @Kratoklastes


    Western Sahara in Northwest Africa has huge phosphate deposits. Top dressing fertilizer can also be made from petrochemicals derived from oil and natural gas of which Africa has plenty.

    The dilemma is ineptitude.

    In contrast the whites of South Africa made up for the lack of petroleum and poor soils by making fuel from coal using the Fischer–Tropsch process (gas-to-liquid) that was pioneered in Germany.

    • Replies: @Kratoklastes
  22. @Kratoklastes

    (more on how much of a difference fertilisers could make to SSA)…

    This piece is reasonably informative – Fertilizers in Sub-Saharan Africa – , although it is absolutely silent on the role played by European politicians in deliberately discouraging fertiliser imports (including refusing to specify fertiliser as an approved material for aid expenditure).

    The brutal fact is that the Charity Vampires – global NGOs and their ilk – have no interest in using their budgets to help increase SSA’s agricultural productivity, which could easily double with minimal tweaks. Output per hectare in SSA is roughly 1/6th of Western levels – roughly the same as the US in the 1950s before the US’ own ‘green revolution’ really took off.

    To the Charity Vampires, Africa’s endemic political instability, corruption, food insecurity and lack of basic hygiene infrastructure are all features, not bugs – and it’s no coincidence that all of those things tend to keep TFR high.

    If local pro-development movements ever finally manage to get the political parasites to allocate even 1/10th of their grift to a genuine attempt at reform, Africa (and SSA in particular) has a chance to ‘leap-frog’ in the same way that it did with telecommunications – where Africa skipped the requirement to build expensive copper (or fibre) networks, and went straight to mobile telephony.

    People who are worried about a Black Tide sweeping into Europe from SSA, should be vocal supporters of a coordinated attempt to raise the standard of living in SSA: stagnant living conditions are a driver of migration.

    Helping make Africa richer will be less expensive than increasing expenditure on border control – because you only have to make them richer once, and that sets up dynamics that encourages them to stay where they are.

    Conversely, if you try to do it by border control, you have to do the same spend every year until conditions improve in the source countries.

    That last para sounds like something that a border control bureaucrat might favour: bureaucrats fail upwards, since they always frame failure as being due to insufficient budgets.


    My favourite evidence for bureaucrats failing upwards is government funded education.

    Kids in the West are leaving school less competent, despite real expenditure per student having more than doubled since 1970, and despite the median student undertaking more years of schooling (in 1970, only 45% of kiddies did more than 4 years of high school and the average kiddie did 11.1 years of schooling; by 2015 ~90% of kiddies completed high school).

    And yet US 16-24 year olds perform worse on PIAAC than US adults overall (and US adults overall perform worst in the Anglophone OECD). 64% of US adults have some tertiary ‘education’.

    So more is being spent, for longer, and the result is worse.

    Bureaucracy fails upwards.

  23. @Amerimutt Golems

    First: SASOL’s a very very bad N=1 sample, and SAfr as a nation is a perfect example of why fertilisers are so important (the corollary – that it is a moral wrong to deny fertilisers to the rest of SSA as a matter of international policy – is left to the reader).

    SASOL got its start in life from the apartheid era government (it was Suid-Afrikaanse SteenkoolOlieenGasmaatskappy) as a state-owned enterprise.

    Since SAfr was, and is, part of the Commonwealth, this gave its SOEs almost ‘first-world’ levels of access to capital markets (which was never the case for the ‘darker’ bits of SSA and still isn’t) – up until the world changed its mind in the mid-70s and limited sanctions were imposed in the mid-80s (which was opposed by anyone who thought about the issue sensibly – Rothbard, Thatcher etc).

    It became a public company in 1979 (listing on the JSE) – the largest JSE listing to that point.

    SASOL’s output mix was extended to phosphate fertilisers very shortly afterwards in the 80s – as a direct result of financial incentives put in place by the (still apartheid) government as part of its policy of ag reform.

    From that time until this, SAfr exports of fertiliser (of any type) amount to fuck-all – mostly because SAfr costs of production were not (and are not) competitive.

    Nowadays they export some to the SADC countries (mostly ZimZam – Zimbabwe and Zambia – but also MoZAMbique) – prices are still not competitive on a global scale.

    If you look at data from the SthAfr Dept of Ag, you’ll notice that while they export significant amounts of to ‘Africa’, almost all of if goes to the SADC.

    South Africa was, and is, a net importer of fertilisers.

    There were very good reasons for them to not export to SSA while SAfr was transforming their ag sector (“feed yourself first”), and there are good reasons not to export to SSA now (mostly because SAfr production prices are not competitive).

    Much higher rates of fertiliser use is one of the key reasons why their yields are twice the SSA average FFS.


    As to phosphate deposits in Morocco: how would you propose getting those to the other side of the Sahara? You realise that’s where SUB-Saharan Africa starts – hint’s in the name.

    By sea it’s a pretty short run to the Left coast, but a very very long run to, say, Tanzania. And forget about offloading it in, say, Angola and freighting it overland to Malawi.

    The lack of internal freight infrastructure is being remedied (finally) – China’s in there writing cheques left, right and centre.

    Importantly, the ongoing global decline in gobal fertiliser prices is not reflected in prices in Africa: imported fertiliser in Africa costs upwards of 50% more (FOB) than in, say, Thailand – at the port.

    Now although the costs of inter-regional transport are high in SSA, the FOB differentials reveal there’s a POLICY problem: a lack of desire by producers to sell to Africa. FOB price differentials are the evidence: bulk fertiliser headed to SSA is priced as if there’s a tariff (there can’t be a risk premium; there can’t be a freight-cost premium either: those aren’t part of FOB prices).

    If a major aid org stepped up and bribed the right people, they could get shipfuls of fertiliser to key SSA ports (that’ll be China’s next step after they build an internal rail network in SSA – you watch). Let internal markets work from there and SSA will be away in gig.


    Although I despise all politicians with equal and adamantine fervour, I am in the middle of a minor countervailing bromance with Chink technocrats, who appear to have a few clues.

    They can see that given a modest (50bn) infrastructure nudge, SSA productivity will explode upwards.

    It’s literally the last “low hanging fruit” for economic development.

    I am not naïve enough to think that yon Chinkee is doing this out of altruism, or to make amends for colonialism (KEK). It’s pragmatic business sense for which yon Chinkee is renowned.

    Once SSA rises, there will be a billion new people with (limited) disposable income… who will know that their new standard of living was bootstrapped by the Chinks.

    The Chink technocrats know that this will work, because they are fully aware of a very good example where a subsistence-agriculture, low-productivity, low-education, 90%-in-poverty rural workforce was bootstrapped to a quadrupling of their standard of living in a decade and a half.

    The example: CHINA.

    • Replies: @m___
  24. m___ says:

    The Chink technocrats know that this will work, because they are fully aware of a very good example where a subsistence-agriculture, low-productivity, low-education, 90%-in-poverty rural workforce was bootstrapped to a quadrupling of their standard of living in a decade and a half.

    With all due respect, is this desirable? Desirable in the interest of the long term future of homonims? Has it an emotional response that answers Western individualism?

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
  25. @m___

    What do you mean by “homonims”? Are you saying that the improvement of the lives of people could……what?

  26. @Kratoklastes

    Whatever gives you that idea?

    The limiting factor is human behavior. Even if we are able to avoid disaster, which is possible, we will stop reproducing at a rate high enough to sustain a larger population. Advanced societies are already doing this.

    It would be nice to avoid biowar or nuclear war, but I’m not sure we can muster the behavioral wherewithal to do it. The Chinese are the most crowded of our species (large scale) but were on the verge of slow degradation until the US foolishly moved most of its production over there. That play has run its course for us both.

    One could write books and debate endlessly, but, in short, I believe it is behavior that will ultimately limit human population.

  27. nickels says:

    I think the expression is ‘you have sown the wind, now reap the whirlwind.’

  28. And Roberts avoids The Question:
    Who is this We?

  29. Wantoknow says:

    Perhaps it is just best to let the country come apart. Let the survivors pick up the pieces or let the pieces lie. It seems to me PCR is just whining about a lost past and an impossible present. People who no longer believe in each other have no business listening or speaking to each other or even attempting to do so.

    Why care if liberals want to call white people racist? The important thing is to put liberals into a position where their opinion is irrelevant. Why go on talking to or about people you hold in contempt? Just do something about it. If the population divides into armed camps that still seems better than whining about the unanswerable.

    The US lost its way at the beginning of the 20th century. The country was founded in an age of settler colonialism and for the first hundred years plus of its history it was about European settlement of the New World. It had an overriding goal which motivated the arriving population: the settlement of North America.

    With the closure of the frontier around 1890 this goal came to an end. The country was settled and that settlement became in the 20th century increasingly obvious to all. The frontier became a Hollywood myth and eventually petered out with the end of the Kennedy Administration, The New Frontier and the death of John Wayne.

    Instead social justice which came in with the Progressives at the turn of the 20th century became, at least in hope, the new overriding goal of the US, but it never worked. Social justice divided rather than united the country. It required a fundamental division of oppressors and victims. Instead of a population united in the settlement of North America we now had a population divided against itself chasing insults. With the waning of the mythology of the American Frontier we produced a waxing new mythology of good and evil based on class, race, and gender which has only been destructive to public unity.

    The US has lost its historical mission through the success of that mission. It has not found another. Unless it can find another that will unite rather than divide, the country will likely only continue a drift towards dissolution.

  30. Richard B says:

    As the inaction of public authorities is not understandable, all sorts of explanations arise. For example… You can add to this list on your own.

    One obvious explanation for the elite’s lack of reaction is because they know the virus is fake.

    And they know that because they created it.

    They could create and unleash a fake virus, spread it through their control of the media, even getting more responsible commentators like Tucker Carlson to report on it as if it’s real (what else can he do?) and they could still profit from it as mentioned in the article.

    Who would put it past them?

    I mean, they’re not called the hostile elite for nothing.

    Fake or real, this is going to hurt everyone.

    Including them.

    So maybe some good will come out of this afterall.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Paul Craig Roberts Comments via RSS