John Wixted says that Europe is an economic and demographic failure--a cultural evolutionary dead end:

What's wrong with Europe? The same thing that was wrong with states that chose communism as an economic model, though to a lesser degree. The Europeans are not communists, but their generous social welfare state has moved pretty far in that direction. It is not an inherently evil economic approach -- it might even be morally superior in some ways. The problem is that it just doesn't work.

It is important for people to come grips with this reality because Western Europe is the embodiment of the liberal ideal. Even if you think that liberal thinking is morally superior, the empirical evidence would appear to suggest that it is not practical.

...The Europeans are driving off a cliff, but they don't see it coming because they spend so much of their time reveling in their own moral superiority. I believe that, in their own minds, they are on the cutting edge of societal evolution (to borrow a phrase from Rush Limbaugh), but the forces of natural selection would appear to be working against them.

what makes you think europe is coming to a dead end?

Stagnant GDP growth?

Stagnant Demographic growth?

Stagnant cultural growth?

Please define your claim.

Sounds like the blue states to me.

Link's broken.

Anonymous: You do realise that it's not Rand making that claim, right, but someone named John Wixted, that he's linking to?

I ask only because your reply indicates some level of confusion on that point.

Anyway. Re. what he said, it seems to me that a socioeconomic system that doesn't work is not morally superior to ones that do. But I include achieving things as part of the moral calculus of a State system - I mean, if we're going to have a more-than-minimal State (assuming, ala Nozick, that some State is better than Anarchy, plus essentially inevitable anyway), we should prefer one that will at least function, given its necessary evils.

(And yes, this assumes relative parity of other moral values, or at least, that the best of the working states is better than any non-working one.

I explicitly do not mean that an evil state that works very efficiently is preferable, of course.)

Rand, the link in the post links back to www.transterrestrial.com

what makes you think europe is coming to a dead end?

Stagnant GDP growth?

Stagnant Demographic growth?

Stagnant cultural growth?

Please define your claim.

As noted elsewhere, this isn't particularly Rand's claim, but I'm perfectly willing to sign on to Mr. Wixted's thesis my own self.

The answer to your first question may be inferred from my answers to questions 2 - 4; yes, yes and yes, respectively.

European social welfare states are like people who have leapt off a 100-story building, are now passing floor number 75 and are calling out, "Just fine so far!"

Post-WW2 Europeans have elected to eat all 2500 years worth of seed corn accumulated by their ancestors in three or maybe four generations. They are, by my reckioning, about half-way through the meal.

Europe is on a measured recessional march into oblivion.

"Stagnant GDP growth?

Stagnant Demographic growth?

Stagnant cultural growth?"

They are all interrlated.

What "State" ever "chose" Communism?
And, if you answer China or Vietnam, choosing is Mao's barrel of the gun?
That said, one of the best and most cogent posts on the failures of Europe and successes of our Nation.
Tnx for bringing it to my attention.
Mike

Can something be considered morally superior, if, when generally applied in the long run, it leads to the death of your civilization?

I thought morality dealth with behavior that is desirable in the most general and longest term, even if it's costly in the short run?

Personally I think it's a wee bit early to write off Europe - and European decline is our loss as well.

BUT I agree with Aaron: if the European approach or liberal thinking (whatever those terms mean) "doesn't work" and is impractical, how can anyone consider it morally superior? I can't accept as moral any system that requires us to collectively shoot ourselves in the foot. (Think raising minimum wage or universal health care.) I may be showing my Randian roots here, but the moral and the practical coincide - provided one knows what is moral and practical.

Mark