You have not viewed any products recently.
As Middle America rises in rage against "fast track" and the mammoth Obamatrade deal known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, The Wall Street Journal has located the source of the malady.
Last Monday's lead editorial began:
"Here we go again. In the 1990s Pat Buchanan launched a civil war within the Republican Party on a platform targeting immigration and trade. Some claimed Pitchfork Pat was the future of the GOP, though in the end he mainly contributed to its presidential defeats."
But, woe is us, "the GOP's Buchanan wing is making a comeback."
Now it is true that, while Nixon and Reagan won 49-state landslides and gave the GOP five victories in six presidential contests, the party has fallen upon hard times. Only once since 1988 has a Republican presidential nominee won the popular vote.
But was this caused by following this writer's counsel? Or by the GOP listening to the deceptions of its Davos-Doha-Journal wing?
In the 1990s, this writer and allies in both parties fought NAFTA, GATT and MFN for China. The Journal and GOP establishment ran with Bill and Hillary and globalization. And the fruits of their victory?
Between 2000 and 2010, 55,000 U.S. factories closed and 5 million to 6 million manufacturing jobs disappeared. Columnist Terry Jeffrey writes that, since 1979, the year of maximum U.S. manufacturing employment, "The number of jobs in manufacturing has declined by 7,231,000—or 37 percent."
Does the Journal regard this gutting of the greatest industrial base the world had ever seen, which gave America an independence no republic had ever known, an acceptable price of its New World Order?
Beginning in 1991, traveling the country and visiting plant after plant that was shutting down or moving to Asia or Mexico, some of us warned that this economic treason against America's workers would bring about political retribution. And so it came to pass.
Since 1988, a free-trade Republican Party has not once won Pennsylvania, Michigan, Illinois or Wisconsin in a presidential election. Ohio, the other great Midwest industrial state, is tipping. The Reagan Democrats are gone. Who cast them aside? You or us?
Since the early 1990s, we have run $3 trillion to $4 trillion in trade deficits with China. Last year's was $325 billion, or twice China's defense budget. Are not all those factories, jobs, investment capital and consumer dollars pouring into China a reason why Beijing has been able to build mighty air and naval fleets, claim sovereignty over the South and East China seas, fortify reefs 1,000 miles south of Hainan Island, and tell the U.S. Navy to back off?
The Journal accuses us of being anti-growth. But as trade surpluses add to a nation's GDP, trade deficits subtract from it. Does the Journal think our $11 trillion in trade deficits since 1992 represents a pro-growth policy?
On immigration, this writer did campaign on securing the border in 1991-92, when there were 3 million illegal immigrants in the United States.
But the Bush Republicans refused to seal the border.
Now there are 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants and the issue is tearing the party apart. Now everybody is for "secure borders."
We did urge a "moratorium" on legal immigration, such as America had from 1924 to 1965, to assimilate and Americanize the millions who had come. The Journal Republicans called that xenophobia.
Since then, tens of millions of immigrants, here legally and illegally, mostly from the Third World, have arrived. Economically, they consume more in tax dollars than they contribute.
Politically, most belong to ethnic groups that vote between 70 and 90 percent Democratic. Their children will bury the GOP.
Consider California, which voted for Nixon all five times he was on a national ticket and for Reagan in landslides all four times he ran.
Since 1988, California has not gone Republican in a single presidential election. No Republican holds statewide office. Both U.S. Senators are Democrats. Democrats have 39 of 53 U.S. House seats. Republican state legislators are outnumbered 2-to-1.
Americans of European descent, who provide the GOP with 90 percent of its presidential vote, are down to 63 percent of the nation and falling.
By 2042, they will be a minority. And there goes the GOP.
Lest we forget, the "Buchanan wing" also opposed the invasion of Iraq while the Journal-War Party wing howled, "Onto Baghdad!"
"Unpatriotic Conservatives," we were called in a cover story by a neocon National Review for saying the war was unnecessary and unwise.
Now, a dozen years after the "cakewalk" war, GOP candidates like Marco Rubio and Bush III are trying to figure out what it was all about, Alfie, and what they would have done, had they only known.
Our agenda in that decade was—stay out of wars that are not our business, economic patriotism, secure borders, and America first.
The foreign debt and de-industrialization of America, the trillion-dollar wars and the chaos of the Middle East, the shortened life span of the Party of Reagan, that's your doing, fellas, not ours.
Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority. To find out more about Patrick Buchanan and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Web page at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2015 CREATORS.COM
Pat, An old Jesuit once told me that dishonest questions do not deserve honest answers. Why in the hell are you still defending yourself? Truth is not the objective in American politics. The duopoly will tell any lie, use any means and bear any burden to get what they want. They have the new theology of cash, media, educational institutions, the cultural bias and a fierce determination to impose ones will. Some of us have pitchforks and fewer still some remnant of the theological gifts of faith, hope and charity. This is the triumph of ignor
Pat- The Neo-cons believe they can defy the lessons of history by replacing us with the legal and illegal barbaric hordes. Endless wars to distract the masses while feeding the military industrial complex.
"is it really our fault". In a way it is. Americans want goods and services as cheap as possible. It doesn't matter that our nation is a debtor to every nation we trade with. Many people could care less about decisions that are made in Washington - as long as it doesn't affect them. Many are unaware of the potential threat to our nation due to outside entities.
Of course you were correct, Pat! Indeed, the Buchanan movement of the 90s was literally the last chance to save something resembling the historic, Founders' America. If a President Buchanan in 1997 had used a considerable portion of his political capital to deport the illegal aliens, militarize the border, and achieve a 90% or greater reduction in, and skills-based reconfiguration of, annual legal immigration, there would have been a long-term chance to realize the conservative vision for America. But Pat was not elected, nor was any other American patriot. Now, after another two more decades of mass immigration combined with a likely permanent "non-enforcement" of our illegal alien statutes (not to mention another two decades' worth of leftist indoctrination in the schools), can traditionalists finally acknowledge that our country has been "conquered" by internal traitors in league with foreign colonizers? And once that admission is made, can we start on an entirely new line of political analysis, one which recognizes that the old conservative dream of restoring the Constitutional Republic is D-E-A-D, and that our new task consists of a) developing Middle American nationalist organizations to fight for OUR PEOPLE'S interests in this no-longer-American America, and b) commencing the even longer term task of readying our people for eventual ideo-geographic secession from the US[S]A? For though we conservatives are now in the clear minority of the country, we are also its backbone. The welfare parasites, foreign settler-colonialists, and their liberal enablers need us to survive; WE DO NOT NEED THEM, and, as should be plain, would be better off without 'em. If we can no longer have all of America, we can yet take a sizable chunk of America for our own people and purposes, and it's past time to begin the struggle for this goal.
Mr. Heller, I don't know whether you meant "secession" in terms of geographic reconcentration of favorable demographics, but if so, that would be both unnecessary and counter-productive. Here's why: food doesn't come from Safeways in the 'hood. It comes from farms owned and operated by white farmers, and driven into the cities in trucks by white CDLed drivers. This gets back to the point that "they need us; we don't need them."
The price of tiny co-ops in major urban centers gives a distorted view about the value of real property. Its *actual* value is determined by its real productive capacity per acre multiplied by the acreage, nothing more. American urban property had real value back when the American city was a nexus for an industrial powerhouse; not anymore.
And this is key. Whites must own at least 95% of the privately-held acreage in the U.S., must own probably about the same proportion of the firearms and are definitely overrepresented in the military. These are the only numbers that matter. Why do you think the ANC went after these points in priority? The ANC is evil, and on average stupid, but there is a cadre of Mandelites that is far from stupid.
And that's also the reason why our legislative priorities have to be the second and fifth amendments. Intuitively we probably have at least ten years before they can mount a substantial assault against those, so it's really a question of whether the spark to set off the gunpowder (probably in the form of a massive financial crash resulting in an immediate cardiac arrest of most public services) will be set before then.
To comment on this article, please find it on the Chronicles Facebook page.