1/ To characterize Pan-Europeanism as a rootless American idea or the lust of the "cultureless American" is simply to be ignorant of facts. Pan-Europeanism has its origin in Europe having been espoused by figures as various as Victor Hugo & Nietzsche and practiced by figures as

2/ various as Julius Caesar, Charlemagne, Napoleon and Hitler. Naysaying Pan-Europeanism as impossible is also ignorant or disingenuous. Any successful nationalism is necessarily extra-nationalist in order that it may vie successfully on the global stage for its place in the

3/ world. To avoid being ruled by invasive, uncompromising, ever encroaching globalist powers it is required to dominate them. Hence healthy nationalism is invariably expansive, "imperialistic," culturally, politically, financially and, if required, militarily. The conditions of

4/ the day gratefully force us to develop culturally, politically & financially. This means "conservatism" doesn't cut it. We are blessed with the task of being culture creators & not merely curators and archivists. The myths of the past become a matter for this, but not things

5/ to be merely regurgitated perfunctorily. The backward looking instincts of much of the AR/DR suggest a lack of imagination & a feminine timidity with regards to the future. They suggest the clutching at an old life, not the excitement in a new one, they suggest rigor mortis.

6/ Spengler's most important insight was one of his simplest: that which does not grow, dies. That ideas that Guillaume Faye, Nietzsche, Spengler and presumably Bowden agreed on are now being cast as "Spencerism" reveals the ignorance and illiteracy of one portion of the AR/DR

7/ & the disingenuousness and calculated malevolence of another portion. Regardless "Spencerism" is correct and RS should be happy to be associated with ideas that are, in the end, not high falutin philosophical ideas but common sense. Then again only men truly relate to them.