Philosophical Conversations Public Opinion Junk for code
parliament house.gif
Think Tanks
Oz Blogs
Economic Blogs
Foreign Policy Blogs
International Blogs
Media Blogs
South Australian Weblogs
Economic Resources
Environment Links
Political Resources
South Australian Links
"...public opinion deserves to be respected as well as despised" G.W.F. Hegel, 'Philosophy of Right'

Mark Steyn's question « Previous | |Next »
August 18, 2006

In the 2006 CD Kemp lecture at the Institute of Public Affairs in Melbourne Mark Steyn says:

The question posed here tonight is very direct: “Does Western Civilization Have A Future?” One answer’s easy: if western civilization doesn’t have a past, it certainly won’t have a future. No society can survive when it consciously unmoors itself from its own inheritance.

What does he mean by that? Suprisingly, Streyn understands it in terms of demography. He presents a Dana Vale type of argument:
Much of western civilization does not have any future. That’s to say, we’re not just speaking philosophically, but literally. In a very short time, France, Belgium, the Netherlands and other countries we regard as part of the western tradition will cease to exist in any meaningful sense. They don’t have a future because they’ve given up breeding.

I guess you call it a materialist approach that counterbalances all the idealist emphasis on values.

The implication of this kind of demography is that:

...large parts of the western world are literally dying – and, in Europe, the successor population to those aging French and Dutch and Belgians is already in place. Perhaps the differences will be minimal. In France, the Catholic churches will become mosques; in England, the village pubs will cease serving alcohol; in the Netherlands, the gay nightclubs will close up shop and relocate to San Francisco. But otherwise life will go on much as before. The new Europeans will be observant Muslims instead of post-Christian secularists but they will still be recognizably European.

That implies multiculturalism is not a good thing, doesn't it? It means that Peter Costello’s le's have babies call – a boy for you, a girl for me, and one for Australia – is, ultimately, a national security issue – and a more basic one than how much you spend on defence. It's a novel way of looking at ciivlization and “family values”, isn't it.

| Posted by Gary Sauer-Thompson at 5:55 PM | | Comments (1)


And he also fails to take into consideration that the entire world has a massive overpopulation problem and the inevitable multi-faceted disaster that that is inevitably going to cause or lead to.
He is not the only pushing this line. The right wing catholics in the USA (those associated with First Things for instance) point to the population decline in Europe as evidence of its "spiritual" suicide.