Patrick Buchanan: "Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025?"
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-10-25/patrick-buchanan-suicide-superpower-will-america-survive-2025
William Sorenson
Patrick Buchanan is no stranger to controversy. At the 1992 Republican national convention, he described the nation as engaged in “a religious war … a cultural war …for the soul of America.” A decade later, he wrote a book predicting the U.S. would be a Third World nation by 2050. Another ten years, two wars, a recession and a debt crisis later, he says America could now be on the verge of national suicide. He offers a plan to turn the country around, including cutting the military, freezing federal salary and benefits and a moratorium on immigration. Pat Buchanan offers his opinions about the fate of the country.
Guests
Patrick Buchanan
syndicated columnist, former adviser to three American presidents, Reform Party's presidential candidate in 2000.
Related Items
Read an Excerpt
From "Suicide of a Superpower" by Patrick Buchanan. Copyright 2011 by Patrick Buchanan. All rights reserved. Reprinted here by permission of Thomas Dunne Books:
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
I didn't hear the whole interview, but I heard when he implied that Jewish and christian people share the same believes and celebrate same holidays. Which is absolutely false. I felt that he wanted to say that if you are christian or a jew, then you can practise your religion, but if you are a muslim or other then you are not welcomed here. His anti muslim sentiment was obvious. Though in reality Muslims share more common believes with Chritains and with Jews more than common believes shared between christians and jews.
Michael Joseph wrote:
" Again many to of you are proving you are the ones who are narrow minded and intolerant. You can only spew out hate!"
----------------------------------------
PB&J cannot escape from his own past. His own words betray your notion of him as "open-minded and tolerant." If "hate" were removed from PB&J's columns he wouldn't have a reputation as a talented polemicist.
Much of the Southwestern U.S. once belonged to Mexico. After we won the war with Mexico, many Irish Catholics (Saint Patrick's Battalion) who fought for Mexico were hanged! After Catholics conspired to kill Abraham Lincoln, they were hanged! When Timothy McVeigh an Irish Catholic, bombed the Alfred P. Murrah Building in Oklahoma City, killing 168 people, he was put to death. during the Civil War, Irish Catholics instigated the New York City Draft Riots of 1863 because they did not want to fight in the Civil War, during which time many African Americans were killed.
Pat Buchanan is relative to America in the most negative way! He calls America a 'Christian nation," but most of our founding fathers were Deists. America was founded by and for Protestants and Deists.
Mr. Buchanan's talk of "diversity" is very convenient. He should know better, being a Catholic. I am sure there was a time when Catholics were not considered to be part of mainstream America. Just as anyone not willing to consider them as Americans would be wrong then, so too are people like Mr. Buchanan, wrong today. The last thing we need during this time of economic difficulty is someone diverting the conversation to fruitless topics. In my opinion, all Mr. Buchanan is doing is cashing in on the pessimism that is prevalent in America today, and trying to sell copies of his book.
I am an immigrant from India, and I am very familiar with commentators such as Mr. Buchanan. Two decades ago, when India was becoming a part of the global economy, a group of leaders suddenly started talking about how the Hindu majority was threatened by increase in Muslim population and by exposure to the west. Guess what, there was no threat - as usual someone wanted to cash in on the frustration in the society due to inflation, unemployment, etc. and use that to ride to power. Unfortunately, it took India several years to cast off the yoke of these extremists. I only hope that this country doesn't take long to call the bluff of desperate people, such as Mr. Buchanan.
From a posting in Wikipedia an introduction of a classic book published in 1981. Pat's description of events is a continuation of trends of demographics for some time:
The Nine Nations of North America is a book written in 1981 by Joel Garreau. In it, Garreau suggests that North America can be divided into nine regions, or "nations", which have distinctive economic and cultural features. He also argues that conventional national and state borders are largely artificial and irrelevant, and that his "nations" provide a more accurate way of understanding the true nature of North American society.
Pat Buchanan doesn't belong on MSNBC at any time. If they want opposing views from the right, there are others who would do a better and more intelligent response. He goes over well with Fox viewers and should continue to spew his idiocracy on their network and NOT NPR and MSNBC.
Rachel Maddow hosting Meet the Press: I haven't watched it since David Gregory was given that prime seat. Sunday morning shows seem to be all about giving the Republicans a platform for their racist and warmongering views, not to say their quest to make Obama a one term president. I would love to see Rachel interview some of them, but they probably wouldn't come on Meet the Press if an intelligent and savvy host such as Rachel would be interviewing them.
FL Liberal wrote:
"You are spot on about Rachel and Meet the Press. I haven't watched it since David Gregory was given that prime seat. Sunday morning shows seem to be all about giving the Republicans a platform for their racist and warmongering views, not to say their quest to make Obama a one term president. I would love to see Rachel interview some of them, but they probably wouldn't come on Meet the Press if an intelligent and savvy host such as Rachel would be interviewing them."
-------------------------------------------
What? Warmongering Republicans? For the last 3 years, POTUS Obama has been in charge of the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, sending air power into Libya, and troops into Uganda.
What Republican has made any racist remarks on Meet The Press?
BTW: David Gregory is another lame stream media POTUS Obama apologist.
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/gregory-defends-obamas-anti-business-record-...
Even Jon Stewart of "The Daily Show" called out Maddow for her incivility.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/11/rachel-maddow-jon-stewart-inter...
FL Liberal, looks like you have some issues yourself!
Pat Buchanan seems to forget the Jews of Europe spent nearly 2 centuries assimilated into European culture and society. Their reward was the Holocaust.
I disagree with just about ALL of Pat Buchanan's theories; however, I have been very interested in this particular show for the "diverse" opinion that he offers from my own. It's interesting that he calls diversity a farce when he himself stands on a platform of a very divergent attitude and lifestyle than MOST of America. He is well spoken and emotionally charged which makes for a good show. Diane was absolutely superb at her questioning and getting beyond his smoke and mirror show of ancient data.
He has an amazing ability to extrapolate small details and controversies to prove his point. Does he really discredit the life threatening struggles of those who fought so hard to desegregate America's schools? "We had a few minor troubles in DC, but we all got over it because we read the same papers, we spoke the same language..." When was he going to say: we were all the same color, we came from the same socio-economic levels.
I was offended by Pat's attempt to quote MLK and manipulate his noble message to mean that our nation should follow a moral code of exclusivity, elitism, prejudice and racism. I am very white, but even I felt attacked by his archaic viewpoint and ignorant politics. I am amazed at how crafty he is at generalizing to the larger population using completely out of context scenarios. Riots in London as an indicator that American streets will brim with violence because of the diverse nature of our "melting pot" ingredients who choose not to assimilate? Really!?! Many immigrants from our very beginnings as a nation have tried to maintain their cultural identity while developing a new "American" persona. Many others have left their homeland to shed its customs and oppressions in order to become American to the core. Either one is valid and should be honored, valued and celebrated. NOT demonized! Different but equal!
Yes, we are all different; but we are all good and great. Our world is better off for the differences that we share as a human race. We all need to respect those differences and celebrate those points, not fear them or extinguish them. "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other." -- Mother Teresa
Pat apparently relishes some joy in interjecting divisveness through the platforms he has been afforded. His comments today reminded me of that niche group of Americans who define American as white, Christian and conservative. The mythical problem he creates of diversity in the US apparently calls out for his mythical solution of demanding that we all attend church, even though the same constitution he supposedly supports, guarantees religious freedom. Unfortunately, as someone mentioned earlier, he may be of a generation which has an unusually high number of people who disdain critical thought in lieu of submission to their ingrained false perception of an America founded and supposedly run by white Christians. I'm only one generation behind him at age 55, but I don't get that mindset and never have.
The relentless attacks on Mr. Buchanan were beneath this usually-upstanding program. He is a political strategist. It was a dirty business in the 70's and it's a business dirty today. He is still one of the best political handicapers in existence, and deserves at least and iota of respect. Your show today denied him that.
In my previous comment (12:24 p.m.), I did not mean to say, or imply, that Pat is himself advocating that the tools that he believes advanced assimilation in the past (enforced common language, homogenous institutions that one had to join for personal survival) are to be used as the "gold standard" for evaluating whether we are a sufficiently unified nation to continue to exist as a nation.
I can see that it is difficult for people who are used to simplistic explanations of the past or present to understand existence as that existence becomes more complex, diverse, representative and inclusive.
But I don't personally think Pat is that naive. I think he has learned to disguise his true views with "code", and when I listen carefully, he takes no responsibility for the conditions he describes (whether they are accurate or not), nor for the way that his code is likely to be interpreted by those who read the code and agree with his "exclude diversity or destroy the country" line of thought.
Since Mr. Buchanan referred to Martin Luther King, I would like to point out another quote of MLK where he said that the U.S. is "the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today." He also noted "a nation that continues year after year to spend more on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death." I would suggest that the evidence is very clear as to why our nation is in dire straits, and that is an allegiance to the corporate/Wall Street/military/media complex by the ruling elite, which dismisses the social realities of most people, and that favors the very wealthy.
Mr. Buchanan's thesis is informed, based on historical precedent, and well reasoned (unlike many of the comments posted here, which are simply emotional reactions). It is my opinion that we ignore his warnings to our own peril. And, as he himself said during the show, "I hope I'm wrong."
The Constitution guarantees us the right to worship (or not worship) as we please, but there is plenty of documentation indicating that the Founding Fathers placed great value in the role of religion in society. It is unfortunate that this generally is ignored in contemporary America.
It is apparent to me from reading these comments that many of the posters here have totally missed the point that Pat is trying to make (and attempted to drive home several times during the broadcast): There is nothing wrong with diversity per se. However, historically, America has derived it's strength from it's unity--those values, customs, practices, etc. that all of us, from whatever culture we originated, share in common. In our current exuberance over "diversity," that which unifies us has at best been neglected, and at worst cast aside. Case in point: Several years back during protests over immigration policy, one initially saw seas of Mexican flags being waved. Someone wised up, and in subsequent protests, it was American flags being waved. Pat cited the "balkanization" that occurs in highly diverse Los Angeles, where various cultural groups tend to self-segregate; I can speak firsthand of the same thing occuring in Queens, NY, where I grew up. In contrast, I have observed greater assimilation of ethnic groups taking place in the Midwest, where the large ethnic pockets generally are absent. Maintain and celebrate your heritage, but value unity.
I do not deny that Mr. Buchanan is intelligent, but he is clearly out-of-touch with modern life in America and abroad. His language smacks of cloaked racism and fear. I understand the anxiety of white, conservative America; seeing the country evolve into a more diverse and inclusive mix than his 1950's rigid mind-set allows him to envisage. Too bad. We have many problems ahead of us, but diversity and the blending of our cultures is the power of America, and its strength.
it's true alienation [neglected geo-history/expose di-normal-mention of anything wrong... is already too late , but quantifying inter-contention as the very dynamic notches on the key of america [and freedom! reel to real estate to state, and Honestly, "I wish" {P.Pan} I WAS DEPORTED! from California/west america as a political protege of geo-cultural information and intonation, but "winners" feel they must win before before they leave [guide, grip] strait for the door, and into better destiny.
Diversity is great! when geo-cultural [trad-winter: cultUre-scope-sumer] adult immigrants with classy tradition bound [psych]fortification and how they had it on "arrival" and YET! their "1st gen" children [DO NOT "depart-tour"??!lib AND just?] have supplimentary exposure, but commplimentary need, become, invisible. nevermind Kurt Cobain, think of vtech, and how the strait-escape of America blessing liberation, automatically; say nothing.
exposure in crucially defined age groups for a "normal_America" where you look closely and find no raw nerves nor wrong grooves ,or incorrect-moves. the key is so complex, like imagining George Washinton in SOCalifornia [Calypso?] and C. Columbus Bearing polar Passages, rites and civility. The thing is Christ and Islam are on par for ambition and ambiguity is the master key, intell-lies and sweet conspiracy. Pushing a compression cylinder without a vent of preintent-post content G.Dom.Happiness {domicile EKO-nominal dimentions} [weee, lol,] but really, absurd grooves define the Key through America, t lock's on any chains, seen or not, are chip or 2-D chart Y?N.soul-element
The pawns shadow -the deadly geo-guilt trip- unlocks greatest justice, really! These "prime case" post-geography diss-normal social-cancers, are highly opperable, the shadow and the object is different, the longitude also different, IQ's and lattitudes are the justice vs struggle that represents, prosperity or dispair, and when the season chang- the time is niegh.
Mr. Buchanan seems to suggest two things that I find objectionable. They are:
1) that unless you are a white Christian you are not moral. He ignores the fact that all of the world’s great religions, including the Muslim faith, are based on the same basic moral principles. A society doesn’t, and individuals don’t, have to be Christian to have a strong sense of community and morality.
2) that a more brown United States would somehow be inferior to an all-white nation. How insulting to the many brown, black and Asian people in this country who attend worship services, help their neighbors, excel in school and jobs, pay taxes and are upstanding citizens, sometimes even leaders in their communities.
Should we protect the racial purity of our country or the civil rights our country was founded on? Wouldn’t it be a beautiful if the citizens of our nation valued a person’s honor, honesty, hard work, love of country, and contributions to their communities and to society as a whole rather than their pedigree, ancestry or the color of their skin. This truly would be a moral country then.
We could start by stopping the spread of fear and hatred of anyone who is not a white Christian. Fear, hatred and violence toward anyone who is different is one of the things that destroys society, not diversity. To condone those destructive actions is what is truly suicidal for a nation. We should strive to be a more compassionate and civil country.
I had to turn this off after about 5 minutes. Diane, you let him rant on and I waited for you to challenge him. When you let him go on about how wonderful this country was when we where all one religion, come on, that has never been the case, maybe his wishful thinking.The melting pot has always been a myth. This is the drivel of an old man who wants his misperceived childhood back. I hope you eventually called him out. I will have to sit down and take the pod cast in small bites. So much hate is hard to chew at one sitting.
This man is undoubtedly a Washington "good ole' boy" who is obviously attempting to exploit middle class America for its "melting pot" demographics. His claim that multi-culturalism is a threat to the vitality of America is a clear indication of his underlying racist context. He claims that people who live in multi-cultural centers such as Los Angeles are mindless people who "watch their television sets too much". So do whites who live in "acceptable" places like Kentucky not spend hours a day watching Fox News, Fox Business, or NFL Football?? This man, no matter his prior experience, is clearly not realistic in his claims. People called in to inform him that people were saying the same things about assimilation of cultures during the early 20th/ late 19th century. Mr. Buchanan I am afraid that these folks are correct when saying that MOST of America's great history involves an assimilation of different cultures, and that the period in American history that you so diligently hold on to is of the past and the mentality associated with this era has now evolved into a more diverse, loving, and sensible dialect. You may seek to preserve this minor period in American history that you just happened to play a major role in, but the fact is that the only thing driving the mentality of your time was a Nationalistic reaction due to WWII and the mass Cold War brainwashing techniques that were so prevalent during your time. We as a people have, thank God, moved past the dredges of racism and sexism, and today our generation begins a new fight against overwhelming corporate influence in our political system. Your racist undertones are quite sad, and I pray that you will receive love and compassion for your apparent hatred.
Dear Ms. Riehm, when you asked Mr. Buchanan, "How would you feel about having a Mormon president," he quipped, as part of his reply, "Aren't all Mormons Republican?" I wish you had pointed out that Harry Reid, the speaker of the Senate, is a Mormon and a Democrat. And what on earth did your question have to do with the rest of the interview?
Buchanan got away with one lie, which continued to propagate a fallacy about the 1960 election. He stated that Kennedy stole Illinois and this was necessary for him to win the 1960 election. While it may may arguable whether Kennedy was the legitimate victor in Illinois, he had enough electoral votes without Illinois (279, 18 more than half of the 522 total in play). So he would have won the election with or without Illinois. Buchanan has to know he is lying- and if he doesn't know, what credibility does he have?
I'm sorry, Diane. After ten minutes of your guest's rant. I had to turn off your show. Pat Buchannan's vision of how we were magically assimilated was prepsterous. Assimilation of an immigrant group takes at least one generation. Moreover, the history of immigration shows that assimilation happened quickly when ethnic voluntary associations and ward captains worked to get newcomers settled. Throughout the land until World War I it was common for shop keepers to have signage in at least two languages. These things don't happen overnight. Moreover in the good old days in the southwest, well-heeled whites found it politic to speak Spanish. The glorious American education system required high schools to teach other languages.
Then there was this rant about common faith and common cuisine. The catholic Buchannan should know that catholicism is still considered heresey by protestants. And common food? Nothing says cultural diversity more than what one has on one's dinner table. Pat might be surprised to learn that pasta, pizza, gyros, tacos and bratwurst aren't the stuff of nativist culture. Buchannan's book is bad history and his vision for America's future only stirs up fear.
Michael Budig wrote:
"Buchanan got away with one lie, which continued to propagate a fallacy about the 1960 election. He stated that Kennedy stole Illinois and this was necessary for him to win the 1960 election. .. he would have won the election with or without Illinois. "
-------------------------------------------------------
Then why did Papa Joe insure his boy would win Illinois? It's OK to influence a presidential election by stealing the popular vote as long as you have the electoral vote? OK. How about JFK stealing the Democratic primary election?
"During the Democratic primaries for the 1960 presidential election, JFK's most important victory came in West Virginia. Large sums of Kennedy money--at least $2 million ($116 million in today's dollars) and possibly twice that--bought votes. The paymasters included JFK's brothers, Bobby and Ted Kennedy. The primary was effectively stolen from Hubert Humphrey."
"In the 1960 presidential election, Joe Kennedy made a deal with Sam Giancana. This former Al Capone hit man was the most influential gangster in the powerful organized crime syndicate in Chicago. The deal was for Giancana to get out the JFK vote among the rank and file in the mob controlled unions and siphon campaign funds from the corrupt Teamster's union fund. What Giancana would get in return is unknown. JFK's stolen win in Illinois was crucial to his narrow general election victory of less than one tenth of one percent of the popular vote."
Diane -- you deserve sainthood for treating this guy with respect. Your producers deserve a piece of coal for giving airtime to a racist, nativist man who hides behind the Catholic faith. Giving him the honor and stamp of approval of appearing on your show is outrageous.
I listened to parts of the show this morning in my car and could hardly believe that Pat Buchanan was on the Diane Rehm show. I hope he doesn't return any time soon.
Surely there are other new books that deserve airtime -- and I can't believe that he was the choice for fundraising week. I doubt that he gained any new members for npr stations -- and may have even driven some to at least turn off the show today.
Thank you always for your courtesy and knowledge. I am a fan of your show.
I couldn't believe it when I tuned in to the show today and heard an obvious nut case talking. I didn't know at first who it was and when I found out I was dumbfounded! What were you thinking? Buchanan belongs on Fox news, not NPR. I know you're trying to be balanced, but Pat Buchanan is such a well-known racist/sexist/whatever-ist that he shouldn't even be considered a legitimate guest. I changed stations after a few minutes.
At the very end of a very long hour, Buchanan had the gall to state that, within the Roman Catholic tradition, the Pope was not infallible when speaking of social justice because he was not making a statement about "faith and morals" -- which is totally in line with the christianist cant that "morals" is about sex and not about society.
I am, in his terms, a "lapsed Catholic" because I decried the move from social justice enshrined in many papal documents. As has happened with so many immigrant groups, once they make it, they make it about the next wave and forget their cries for justice for them and their group.