By Steven J. Grisafi, PhD.
In a recent post to his blog, Professor Lars P. Syll has provided an excerpt from a recent book written by the economics Nobel Laureate Daniel Kahneman. I have previously expressed my opinion that behavioral studies do not belong within a science of economics. Yet, this particular excerpt provided by Professor Syll from the writings of the renowned behavioral economist has initiated a different train of thought within my mind. With regard to the excerpt, one flaw I see in Kahneman’s thinking is that he assumes a heterogeneous society. Within a homogeneous society composed of libertarian thinkers, nobody would feel obligated to correct the errors of others who make bad choices. By assumption, those bad choices do no harm to others. One may argue that such a homogeneous society, has not, nor might never exist. However, the second of two primary definitions describes a libertarian as one who believes in free will. This is the essence of Catholicism. In medieval times, prior to the Protestant Reformation, virtually all of Western Europe was Catholic. Although one cannot preclude the existence of a homogeneous society of libertarian thinkers, it is a moot point whether or not this definition serves Kahneman’s purpose. More important is the recognition that the historical trend within Europe has been more toward fragmentation than consolidation.
I have noticed throughout my youth that Protestants in America seem to think that the concept of free will is part of Protestant doctrine and not Catholicism. Few seem to recognize that several Protestant sects adhere to the concept of Predestination. Those, who do, interpret the doctrine to imply only that “God Is In Charge”. This was the phrase spoken to me by a Presbyterian pastor when I broached the subject of free will during our conversation. I have expressed my views upon the Resurrection, and since the Resurrection is central to all of Christianity, by extrapolation one can surmise my position regarding all of Christianity. However, Christianity has been a part of the heritage of all peoples of European ancestry for so long that it has become part of our everlasting culture. That culture is a meld of both Christianity and the culture of our pagan ancestors prior to the Conversion of Constantine. Former presidential candidate Patrick Buchanan has lamented what he sees as a transformation occurring within the American people tending to degrade our own heritage. One of the instances that he has cited was his observation “that Columbus Day has become an embarrassment to many and an issue of savage controversy ….” I too have seen peculiar instances where others I have known spoke disparaging of Christopher Columbus in what I see as a silly attempt to degrade his achievement. Others would argue, that because the New World continents were already inhabited, Columbus had discovered nothing. This is silly because discovery was not Columbus’ achievement. His achievement was establishing communication and trade to all parts of the world. I understand the derision many Americans show toward President Roosevelt’s granting of a national holiday for the day of Columbus’ landing here in the New World. Yet, one ought to consider why Roosevelt did it. He declared it on October 12, 1940, smack in the middle of World War II, for both the Europeans and Asians, but not yet for the Americans. Clearly, Roosevelt anticipated that he would need the loyalty of the large Italian-American segment of American Society if he intended to bring the United States into the war against the Axis Powers. Perhaps this is overlooked because, as Pat Buchanan suggests, the contempt for the achievement of Columbus results from feelings of guilt Americans have for the treatment inflicted upon Native Amerindians and whose land we usurped. Apparently, Americans want to blame it all on Columbus.
Disregarding Roosevelt’s intention to honor Americans of Italian ancestry, the cities of Seattle and Minneapolis chose to reassign the Columbus Day holiday within their jurisdictions to a Native People’s Day. Celebration of the cultures of the Native Amerindians is to be encouraged. But was it necessary to offend Italian-Americans? Columbus is not responsible for the slaughter of the Native Americans. And slaughter it was. The native peoples survived within the lands colonized by the Spanish and Portuguese, but not in the United States. Americans have created the myth that the native peoples died primarily from disease. Yet, disease did not kill them in Mexico. One can see the ancestors of the native people in the faces of Mexicans coming to the United States. Within the Latin American colonies the native people were seen as souls to be saved by the Catholic Church. In the American colonies they were seen as savages to be eradicated. Columbus and his crew sailed under the sovereignty of Spain, not the United Kingdom. The Spanish, although they conquered the Aztecs and the Incas, do not engage in an extermination of the native people. The worst offenders within the former British colonies, were the so-called The Scotch-Irish. Here within Pennsylvania, the Scotch-Irish frustrated every attempt of the English Quakers to make peace with the Native Amerindians. The term Scotch-Irish is actually a misnomer. They were people from the harshest, most unforgiving, farmlands within Scotland brought to Northern Ireland by the English in an attempt to dilute Catholicism within Ireland. They found the climate and soil in Northern Ireland more forgiving than what they had left in their homeland, but they stayed in Ireland only briefly. With the passing of one or two generations they left Ireland for better lands in America. Perhaps, it would be more correct to recognize that they were not truly Irish, but Protestant Scots: People who believed in Predestination.
In 1942 Americans of German, Japanese, and Italian ancestry comprised nearly one third of the American people. Compare that to today where the approximately two percent of the American people who are of Jewish ancestry seek to persuade the remaining ninety eight percent of us “to fight and die for Israel” (President Clinton’s words). To you, the people of Germany, France, Italy, Spain, etc, I urge you: Do not surrender your national sovereignty to fiscal consolidation of your peoples. You may look upon the fiscal unity of the United States with envy. But the unity you look upon is a mirage. Consider that the largest share your tax money could be diverted to such unwanted purposes as here in the United States. Where the bulk of our tax dollars are spent on an enormous military apparatus that primarily benefits Israel, not the American people. Keep your sovereignty. Preserve your culture. Ignore the American economists.