Philosophy Now Forum

Atla wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 6:48 pm If by huge shift you mean that Trump has further increased support for Israel then yeah.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 7:00 pm There is no Trumpism. What there is is a weariness among Americans and an understanding the 4th Box is very close and unlocked. Americans really don't want to open that box, not here in the states or over there. So, we're desperately tryin' to get a handle on things. RED MAN DEFIANT is part of that effort. And, as I say, the only way he fails is if he deviates from puttin' American interests, as defined by Americans, first.

The immigrants most certainly do.

No, Europe is raising up, quite willingly, a generation of New Men who aren't European.

You're not wrong. The U.S. State, as I posted earlier, is very much the bad guy in multiple ways, across multiple fronts. Americans recognize this (finally!).

Anyway, I've said my piece and gotten the reception I expected, so let me close with this...

Consider the possibility the State (in any iteration) is not synonymous with the nation and that its interests (which it holds to be the nation's) are not synonymous with the nation's.

Alexiev wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 6:36 pm

Why do you see 3rd world "interests" as antithetical to culture and civilization?

Haven't Achebe. Naipal, ishiguru, and Rushdie (and others) benefited English literature, and Western culture?

Who wants a stagnant world, lacking new influences and immigrant energy and innovation?

Try something else.

America has stood alone since its inception. America has been hated since its inception (and not for the reasons you think).

American colonists hoped for possible French aid in their struggle against British forces. The Continental Congress established the Secret Committee of Correspondence to publicize the American cause in Europe. Committee member Benjamin Franklin wrote to contacts in France with encouraging accounts of colonial resistance. The French had suffered a defeat by the British during the Seven Years’ War and had lost North American territory under the 1763 Treaty of Paris. As the French and the British continued to vie for power in the 1770s, French officials saw an opportunity in the rebellion of Britain’s North American colonies to take advantage of British troubles. Through secret agents, the French Government began to provide clandestine assistance to the United States, much of which they channeled through American trader Silas Deane.

As the members of the Continental Congress considered declaring independence, they also discussed the possibility and necessity of foreign alliances, and assigned a committee to draft a Model Treaty to serve as guide for this work. After Congress formally declared independence from Great Britain in 1776, it dispatched a group of several commissioners led by Benjamin Franklin to negotiate an alliance with France. When news of the Declaration of Independence and the subsequent British evacuation of Boston reached France, French Foreign Minister Comte de Vergennes decided in favor of an alliance. However, once news of General George Washington’s defeats in New York reached Europe in August of 1776, Vergennes wavered, questioning the wisdom of committing to a full alliance.

Benjamin Franklin’s popularity in France bolstered French support for the American cause. The French public viewed Franklin as a representative of republican simplicity and honesty, an image Franklin cultivated. A rage for all things Franklin and American swept France, assisting American diplomats and Vergennes in pushing for an alliance. In the meantime, Vergennes agreed to provide the United States with a secret loan.

Despite the loan and discussions of a full alliance, French assistance to the new United States was limited at the outset. Throughout 1777, Vergennes delayed as he conducted negotiations with the Spanish Government, which was wary of U.S. independence and also wanted assurances that Spain would regain territories if it went to war against the British.

Vergennes finally decided in favor of an alliance when news of the British surrender at the Battle of Saratoga reached him in December 1777. Vergennes, having heard rumors of secret British peace offers to Franklin, decided not to wait for Spanish support and offered the United States an official French alliance. On February 6, 1778, Benjamin Franklin and the other two commissioners, Arthur Lee and Silas Deane, signed a Treaty of Alliance and a Treaty of Amity and Commerce with France. The Treaty of Alliance contained the provisions the U.S. commissioners had originally requested, but also included a clause forbidding either country to make a separate peace with Britain, as well as a secret clause allowing for Spain, or other European powers, to enter into the alliance. Spain officially entered the war on June 21, 1779. The Treaty of Amity and Commerce promoted trade between the United States and France and recognized the United States as an independent nation.

Between 1778 and 1782 the French provided supplies, arms and ammunition, uniforms, and, most importantly, troops and naval support to the beleaguered Continental Army. The French navy transported reinforcements, fought off a British fleet, and protected Washington’s forces in Virginia. French assistance was crucial in securing the British surrender at Yorktown in 1781.

With the consent of Vergennes, U.S. commissioners entered negotiations with Britain to end the war, and reached a preliminary agreement in 1782. Franklin informed Vergennes of the agreement and also asked for an additional loan. Vergennes did lodge a complaint on this instance, but also granted the requested loan despite French financial troubles. Vergennes and Franklin successfully presented a united front despite British attempts to drive a wedge between the allies during their separate peace negotiations. The United States, Spain, and France formally ended the war with Britain with the Treaty of Paris in 1783.

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 6:41 pmthe influence of political theorists of the Right who were rarely studied but whose ideas over 12-15 years have filtered into the discourse of present. (Bannon for example as one who has read Evola, Guénon, Coomeraswamy, Jean Raspail, etc., etc.)

Do you pound sand?

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 6:45 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 6:29 pm Also it was the US-Israel that was most responsible for the recent migration crisis —your Republicans in particular.

Atla’s got a point. There is however a huge shift in the “support for Israel” line.

The Christian Evangelical Right, etc.

Tough conversation to delve into however, given the potential ramifications of too accurate speech in today’s climate.

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 6:45 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 6:29 pm Also it was the US-Israel that was most responsible for the recent migration crisis —your Republicans in particular.

Atla’s got a point.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 7:28 pm

Alexiev wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 6:36 pm

Why do you see 3rd world "interests" as antithetical to culture and civilization?

American interests (and European interests) don't jibe with, for example, Middle Eastern interests (not strictly considered 3rd World, I know).

Haven't Achebe. Naipal, ishiguru, and Rushdie (and others) benefited English literature, and Western culture?

Debatable.

Who wants a stagnant world, lacking new influences and immigrant energy and innovation?

Well, there's the controlled influx of folks who can actually contribute, and there's what's goin'' on now which is an indiscriminate flow of folks who don't or can't contribute (economically or culturally). These folks dominate rather than assimilate.

Try something else.

Not much choice in that. The U.S. and European States chose poorly and really all that's left is sumthin' else. No matter what, though, Ukraine is dead (it's State, I mean, the nation will continue). As I ask up-thread: will it die with or without atomic mushrooms sproutin' up?

Alexiev wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 9:24 pm Finally, in any war it seems reasonable to have a goal about the conclusion. Spending billions and still losing doesn't seem a reasonable goal. Some sort of settlement involving Ukraine ceding territory seems the likely solution. Giving up would embolden Russia, and any invasion of the Baltics (who are NATO members) would be terrible.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 6:18 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 6:05 pmYou (k)now f(uck) all about Europe that's for sure.

And you, like most here, don't know jack shit about Americans.

Impenitent wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 10:43 pm maybe Trump can build housing in Ukraine like he wants to do in Gaza....

-Imp

Alexiev wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 9:24 pm …

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Mon Mar 10, 2025 12:19 am

Alexiev wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 9:24 pm …

Might interest you.