Pinkerton’s romantic call for a Western war of survival

I look forward to reading James Pinkerton’s long article in The American Conservative, “The Once & Future Christendom,” in which he invokes Tolkien’s War of the Ring to inspire Westerners to defend our civilization from Islam. What Pinkerton seems to have in mind is a kind of Separationist strategy, in which the West disengages Islam from itself and itself from Islam. Glancing through the piece, I notice that Pinkerton pointedly includes Israel under the protective umbrella of a renewed Christendom. Evidently TAC editor and publisher Scott McConnell, an inveterate enemy of the Jewish state, felt he could not turn down such a rich and interesting article, notwithstanding its support for Israel’s existence.

- end of initial entry -

Joseph C. writes:

The article by Pinkerton is thought provoking. He too identifies many who sound the alarm bells of danger but fail to propose solutions.

I have read several thousand pages on this topic, and your strategy of separationism is the one that I think is best. And that is indeed a sub-current of the Tolkien work: Good seeks to get along with Evil, but evil seeks to annihilate Good. Since Good can never have absolute power, Good must separate itself from Evil to the greatest extent possible.

I advocate a strategy of separationism, not only for Christians in dealing with Muslims, but in democratic and capitalistic states dealing with Third World pisspots. I have no desire to transform the Mexican government, or any government in Africa for that matter. I do have a desire to co-exist with them—i.e., they in their land, I in mine. If we need to trade with them, then stop at trading. I often shop at stores where I do not like the proprietor/workers, but I do not invite them to come stay at my house, or tell them how to run theirs.

The problem is that the relevant novel in today’s world is not Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings, but Mario Puzo’s The Godfather. There is one crucial point in the book where Don Corleone wishes to go it alone, not lend himself a party to the narcotics business, staying with his “harmless vices” such as gambling and prostitution. But Don Barzini and others say that he cannot—that we are all in this together and must act in accordance with the good of all. That is the philosophy of interdependence—the siren song of all globalists, who use economic needs as a battering ram to force the shotgun marriage of incompatible cultures.

I truly wish America would adopt a strategy of separationism. (In fact, within America I wish the traditionalist could separate from the liberals). But as desirable as it is, it cannot be done without explicitly and unapologetically renouncing the doctrine of interdependence. Or, more pungently, stating that America will go it alone, seal its borders, and not care about the impact of its actions on the internal security or stability of the Muslim or Third World nations. Europe would be wise to do so as well.

Russell W. writes:

I’ve come very much to appreciate Pinkerton’s manner of bringing up these topics. It’s very welcome the way he, someone with mainstream credibility, has been able to talk somewhat frankly about things like Europeans needing to regain a sense of racial consciousness (in his “National Suicide” piece for the AmConMag). Though he doesn’t make clear what his own beliefs are, he seems temperamentally inclined towards a sort of traditionalist mindset by the fact that he has an appreciation for things as they are. That is, he seems to understand that human beings and human societies are not, to paraphrase Mao, blank sheets of paper upon which the enlightened elites can write beautiful poetry.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at September 15, 2007 01:59 AM | Send