I found the article mostly accurate and thought provoking, but it overlooks a crucial dimension: how Europe arrived at its current political form in the first place. Without that, any discussion of Europe’s geopolitical identity is incomplete.
The turning point was not post-1945 American dominance, but something earlier and more fundamental: the American rejection of monarchy as a legitimate source of authority. The founding of the United States was the first large-scale political experiment built explicitly on replacing inherited hierarchy with popular sovereignty. That ideological rupture inspired radicals in France, which triggered a revolutionary chain reaction across the continent.
The 19th and early 20th centuries did not gradually refine this new order—they violently completed it. The First World War, followed by its continuation in the Second, eliminated the last major European monarchies that had acted as anchors of continuity. By 1945, Europe had effectively abolished its own civilizational operating system.
As a result, today’s political landscape reduces everything to a binary within the same principle: democratic capitalism versus totalitarian socialism. Both claim legitimacy “from the people.” They differ only in the mechanics of how that supposed will of the people should be expressed. The article critiques Europe’s relationship with “the West,” but misses the deeper point: Europe is trapped in a framework it adopted when it dismantled its traditional hierarchies.
This matters, because geopolitical identity cannot be separated from political anthropology—the way a civilization understands authority, order, and legitimacy. Europe’s current confusion stems from the fact that it abandoned its own model and replaced it with an ideology that did not arise organically from its history.
If there is a way out of this cul-de-sac, it may require Europe to reconsider what it discarded. Monarchies provided a natural, organic hierarchy—one that emerged from cultural evolution over centuries and is so deeply embedded in human imagination that even children’s stories are structured around it. This does not imply a return to absolutism, but it does mean acknowledging that stable civilizations tend to grow from inherited authority, not perpetual reinvention.
You begin your article by spewing contempt for MY ancestors! [I always thought they were brave to come here (starting in the 1620s) when there were no welfare wagons to greet them & hand out free stuff. The English ones really did object to The Church of England. One of them, a nonconformist pastor, refused to pay for a license to preach in England and was fined. So he came to America.] You don't know anything about the kind of people who settled America - you just read about it in a writing by someone who despised America and you adopted the other person's thoughts as your own.
"when there were no welfare wagons to greet them & hand out free stuff. The English ones really did object to The Church of England. One of them, a nonconformist pastor, refused to pay for a license to preach in England and was fined"
- exactly his point, the selfish individualistic "nonconformist" (as if that's necessarily a good thing) attitude
My ancestor was faithful to the PRINCIPLE that one doesn't need permission of the State to preach the Word of God.
Some 35 years later, John Bunyon (Pilgrim's Progress) was put into prison for 11 years for holding services outside of the Church of England. Dissenters from the Church of England often came to America. It would have been so much easier to just get a license! But no, these were men of PRINCIPLE: one immigrated to America (then a wilderness) and the other went to prison. These are heroes - not whining "selfish" loosers.
Interesting article but "the West" includes more than just the UK and America. France, Germany, northern Italy, Switzerland, and the Dutch countries are also included. All of these countries are products of the Latin speaking western half of Christendom after the schism of 1054. Eastern Europe, on the other hand, is largely (though not completely) a product of the culture of Orthodox Christianity whose center moved from Constantinople to Russia after its invasion by the Turks in 1453. That is ultimately what accounts for the cultural differences between the two halves of Europe. America is still the most religious country in the West even though Christianity is going through a rough patch due to its flirtation with "Christian" nationalism. But the West is still a beacon of hope for oppressed peoples all over the world. Hence, the "immigration crisis."
Immigrants no longer come to the US believing that America is "the land of opportunity" - it hasn't been that for a long time. Immigrants come here because of the welfare - the US's astonishingly generous welfare system is a huge magnet. And the US opened its borders as it agreed to do in various UN & other treaties & agreements. So Peoples flooded in and none of them showed any papers.
But the military age & violent men who have flooded the US in recent years were deliberately imported by evil forces inside the US gov't who plan a coup d'etat against the United States. The "working class" and Black People in America are not oppressed - they would not join a coup to overthrow our government. So the evil forces must IMPORT VIOLENT THUGS to make war on Americans. So they have come to rape & kill us and meanwhile, they get large welfare benefits.
Fortunately, Americans are armed. This is a tradition which began during our earliest days in the early 1600s when we were colonies - every able-bodied free man was expected to be fluent with a rifle and prepared at a moment's notice to defend his Family & Community. It is said that during World War II, the Japanese said they'd not invade the US because behind every blade of grass was an armed American.
The above statements are true. When Europe finally arrives at full re-martialization (i.e. the true meaning of virtue) along with demographic and cultural recovery: will Europe simply discard European America?
Since Antares mysteriously deleted his comment, I'm deleting my response to it in fairness to the readers. Why preserve a response to a comment no longer there? Thank you.
I found the article mostly accurate and thought provoking, but it overlooks a crucial dimension: how Europe arrived at its current political form in the first place. Without that, any discussion of Europe’s geopolitical identity is incomplete.
The turning point was not post-1945 American dominance, but something earlier and more fundamental: the American rejection of monarchy as a legitimate source of authority. The founding of the United States was the first large-scale political experiment built explicitly on replacing inherited hierarchy with popular sovereignty. That ideological rupture inspired radicals in France, which triggered a revolutionary chain reaction across the continent.
The 19th and early 20th centuries did not gradually refine this new order—they violently completed it. The First World War, followed by its continuation in the Second, eliminated the last major European monarchies that had acted as anchors of continuity. By 1945, Europe had effectively abolished its own civilizational operating system.
As a result, today’s political landscape reduces everything to a binary within the same principle: democratic capitalism versus totalitarian socialism. Both claim legitimacy “from the people.” They differ only in the mechanics of how that supposed will of the people should be expressed. The article critiques Europe’s relationship with “the West,” but misses the deeper point: Europe is trapped in a framework it adopted when it dismantled its traditional hierarchies.
This matters, because geopolitical identity cannot be separated from political anthropology—the way a civilization understands authority, order, and legitimacy. Europe’s current confusion stems from the fact that it abandoned its own model and replaced it with an ideology that did not arise organically from its history.
If there is a way out of this cul-de-sac, it may require Europe to reconsider what it discarded. Monarchies provided a natural, organic hierarchy—one that emerged from cultural evolution over centuries and is so deeply embedded in human imagination that even children’s stories are structured around it. This does not imply a return to absolutism, but it does mean acknowledging that stable civilizations tend to grow from inherited authority, not perpetual reinvention.
Roman-style Republic/Empire > British Monarchy of merchants
You begin your article by spewing contempt for MY ancestors! [I always thought they were brave to come here (starting in the 1620s) when there were no welfare wagons to greet them & hand out free stuff. The English ones really did object to The Church of England. One of them, a nonconformist pastor, refused to pay for a license to preach in England and was fined. So he came to America.] You don't know anything about the kind of people who settled America - you just read about it in a writing by someone who despised America and you adopted the other person's thoughts as your own.
Shame on you.
"when there were no welfare wagons to greet them & hand out free stuff. The English ones really did object to The Church of England. One of them, a nonconformist pastor, refused to pay for a license to preach in England and was fined"
- exactly his point, the selfish individualistic "nonconformist" (as if that's necessarily a good thing) attitude
My ancestor was faithful to the PRINCIPLE that one doesn't need permission of the State to preach the Word of God.
Some 35 years later, John Bunyon (Pilgrim's Progress) was put into prison for 11 years for holding services outside of the Church of England. Dissenters from the Church of England often came to America. It would have been so much easier to just get a license! But no, these were men of PRINCIPLE: one immigrated to America (then a wilderness) and the other went to prison. These are heroes - not whining "selfish" loosers.
I’ll take the “freedom to buy, sell and consume” over socialism any day. Thanks anyway lol.
Interesting article but "the West" includes more than just the UK and America. France, Germany, northern Italy, Switzerland, and the Dutch countries are also included. All of these countries are products of the Latin speaking western half of Christendom after the schism of 1054. Eastern Europe, on the other hand, is largely (though not completely) a product of the culture of Orthodox Christianity whose center moved from Constantinople to Russia after its invasion by the Turks in 1453. That is ultimately what accounts for the cultural differences between the two halves of Europe. America is still the most religious country in the West even though Christianity is going through a rough patch due to its flirtation with "Christian" nationalism. But the West is still a beacon of hope for oppressed peoples all over the world. Hence, the "immigration crisis."
Immigrants no longer come to the US believing that America is "the land of opportunity" - it hasn't been that for a long time. Immigrants come here because of the welfare - the US's astonishingly generous welfare system is a huge magnet. And the US opened its borders as it agreed to do in various UN & other treaties & agreements. So Peoples flooded in and none of them showed any papers.
But the military age & violent men who have flooded the US in recent years were deliberately imported by evil forces inside the US gov't who plan a coup d'etat against the United States. The "working class" and Black People in America are not oppressed - they would not join a coup to overthrow our government. So the evil forces must IMPORT VIOLENT THUGS to make war on Americans. So they have come to rape & kill us and meanwhile, they get large welfare benefits.
Fortunately, Americans are armed. This is a tradition which began during our earliest days in the early 1600s when we were colonies - every able-bodied free man was expected to be fluent with a rifle and prepared at a moment's notice to defend his Family & Community. It is said that during World War II, the Japanese said they'd not invade the US because behind every blade of grass was an armed American.
The above statements are true. When Europe finally arrives at full re-martialization (i.e. the true meaning of virtue) along with demographic and cultural recovery: will Europe simply discard European America?
Since Antares mysteriously deleted his comment, I'm deleting my response to it in fairness to the readers. Why preserve a response to a comment no longer there? Thank you.