Beyond this, there comes a time when one just has to figure it out, not to be spoon fed "truth" and be warned against "fake-news" .. once just needs to grow up and be a critical thinker.
We all have our heroes, but even heroes don't get it right all the time (except for Jesus).
Here is one of my heroes .. and I fully understand he did not get it right all the time (but he probably got it right more than I have) .. my favorite quote of his follows his picture:
- Robert E. Lee
Now I have to ask you, have you seen the empire? Aggressive abroad much? Despotic at home? Looks like there should be a warning side on the side of the road the US is driving on that says: "Ruin Ahead". Geez
So when did this all start in this country? Well probably a lot earlier than what most people think .. not the Iraq invasion in 2003, not Vietnam in 1964, not even WWII or WWI or even the most common place people say the American Empire started .. during the Spanish-American War in 1898.
No, this germ is present in all men, as the desire for power and wealth is the defect we all have a degree of since Adam. One can read the Bible's Old Testament and you will agree with the world's wisest guy King Solomon that there is indeed "nothing new under the sun". Yes the names change but the cycle remains, there is evil in this world that seems to transform the good people into bad when power is in their hands. There are exceptions, but this is a pretty solid rule for 97% of people.
While it is clear that the USA had eyes on Canada back in July 1812 and even before that the American Colonial Army invaded Quebec in 1775! (Even the US Southern Confederacy had eyes on Cuba from 1861 until their defeat in 1865) In addition to this was how the USA made treaty after broken treaty with the American Indian tribes ... but I digress.
OK, so there were powerful elements in our own political past that wanted control of peoples for their own benefit .. can we back up on a more local scale and see where society was a bit more peaceful and well-meaning politicians kept their distance and there were more statesmen instead?
Yes, actually during the colonial period there was little "state" (i.e. statesmen (more noble but not exempt from being power-hungry) and politicians (prostitutes for parasites) involvement at the local level .. government money (paper) was not a thing, direct taxes were not a thing (tariff income was gathered at ports) so about the only interaction besides a "Stamp Tax" was the mail rider (forerunner of the US Postal Service).
By as late as the 1950, with the exception of direct taxation (thanks 1913) and direct welfare from a federal level there was a lot less "government" in our lives. Consider this snippet:
"... Different regions of the America had little contact with each other, and almost no influence over one another. The federal government was small and remote. Interstates did not exist, nor of course the internet, nor even direct long-distance telephone dialing. West Virginia, Alabama, Massachusetts, New York City, Texas, and California had little in common, but little conflict arose since for practical purposes they were almost different countries. They chiefly governed themselves. The proportion of federal to state law was small.
It is important to note that regional differences were great. In 1964 in rural Virginia, the boys brought shotguns to school during deer season. Nobody shot anybody because it wasn’t in the culture. The culture was uniform, so no one was upset. It is when cultures are mixed, or one rules another, that antagonism comes. Such shotgun freedom would not have worked in New York City with its variegated and often mutually hostile ethnicities.
Regions differed importantly in degree of freedom, not just in the freedom of local populations to govern themselves but also in individual freedom. It made a large difference in the tenor of life. If in Texas, rural Virginia, or West Virginia you wanted to build an addition to your house, you did. You didn’t need licenses, permits, inspections, union-certified electricians. Speed limits? Largely ignored. Federal requirements for Coast Guard approved flotation devices on your canoe? What the hell kind of crazy idea was that?
Democracy works better the smaller the group practicing it. In a town, people can actually understand the questions of the day. They know what matters to them. Do we build a new school, or expand the existing one? Do we want our children to recite the pledge of allegiance, or don’t we? Reenact the Battle of Antietam? Sing Christmas carols in the town square? We can decide these things. Leave us alone.
States similarly knew what their people wanted and, within the limits of human frailty, governed accordingly..." - Fred Reed ( Abbeville Institute web site )
I do believe this is why all the old people talk about the good old days. Sure they were not perfect, there were problems in each of these regions and states and smaller municipalities .. but there was not the federal micro-management of every aspect of our lives from Washington DC!
Fred Reed goes on to say:
"... the phenomenal increase in the power and reach of the federal government, which really means the Northeast Corridor. The Supreme Court expanded and expanded and expanded the authority of Washington, New York’s store-front operation. The federals now decided what could be taught in the schools, what religious practices could be permitted, what standards employers could use in hiring, who they had to hire. The media coalesced into a small number of corporations, controlled from New Yorkbut with national reach. More recently we have added surveillance of everything by Washington’s intelligence agencies.
Tyranny at home, said General Lee . Just so. This could happen only with the consolidation of the states into one vast empire.
Tyranny comes easily when those seeking it need only corrupt a single Congress, appoint a single Supreme Court, or control the departments of one executive branch. In a confederation of largely self-governing states, those hungry to domineer would have to suborn fifty congresses. It could not be done. State governments are accessible to the governed. They can be ejected. They are much more likely to be sympathetic to the desires of their constituents since they are of the same culture.
Aggressive abroad, said General Lee. Is this not exactly what we see? At this moment Washington has the better part of a thousand military bases around the world, unnecessary except for the maintenance of empire. America exists in a state of constant war, bombing Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Somalia, recently having destroyed Iraq and Libya. Washington threatens Iran, North Korea, Russia, and China. Its military moves deeper into Africa. Washington sanctions Cuba, Russia, North Korea, and Iran, to no effect. It constantly tries to dominate other nations, for example adding to NATO.
None of these wars and little if any of the imperial aggression interests more than a tiny fraction of the country’s people. To whom can the war against Afghanistan matter? Libya? Few people have heard of Montenegro. Does its membership in NATO or lack of it affect Idaho?.."
Ya think? What does all this busy work in every one else's backyard around the world have to do with us/US? Geez ..
All this to say is that trust is local .. only when you can physically kick the butt of someone who is not really "serving" you based on the tax money (if public official) or money for services rendered (if private company) has been transacted. I really believe this is why Jesus can as a regular human with no royalty, no significant physical appearance and with no agenda other than to repair the public relations disaster that Israel did to discredit Jesus' Father as being an angry deity that has to be appeased. THAT is religious garbage talk. God is very much misunderstood even now as religious Christianity has also painted God as Someone other than the best Father one could even have.
So where does that leave us in the 21st century? We have wars and rumor of wars as Jesus said .. Jesus has offered to anyone the opportunity for a relationship with Him of which He would consider as a friendship (and not a business relationship where there is a "get out of hell free card included). Jesus has no agenda .. just offers peace in the middle of the storms of life.
Beyond this, as we enter Cold War 2.0, what options does the (dying) American Empire have. Walter E. Block gives his opinion as people have theorized why Trump would increase steel tariffs 25% as a precursor to war (not unlike the Republicans under Lincoln did in 1861):
"... One, the next war, if it goes nuclear, will be over in about 5 minutes. We won’t need any new steel for it. We already have quite enough, thank you, even more than necessary. How many times do we really have to blow up the entire world? .."
True story. Will not need steel factories after THAT kind of war
"... Two, if Trump would stop his bellicosity (the U.S. in now fighting wars in some half dozen different countries, none of which have come within a million miles of attacking us, or even seriously threatening us), the next war would become less likely. He ran for president on almost on a Ron Paulian peace policy; why oh why does he have to keep his promises on protectionism, but not anti-imperialism? .."
Yeah, thinking power has gone to his head .. between his rants with Iran and North Korea AND his latest thoughts on bypassing justice in the case of disarming whomever he chooses ... he is approaching the likes of Abe Lincoln in his tyrant-like character.
"... Three, ditto for pulling all US troops back home; this country has some 800 military bases in roughly 130 countries. All of them serve as potential trip wires and hostages for involving us in a major war with a leading nuclear power..."
Ya think? We have our nose in every backyard and more than once we have blamed someone else for something we did in their backyard by placing someone else's fingerprints at the scene .. (that's on you CIA)
"... Four, let us posit, arguendo, that none of the above is correct. We are now in effect back a century or two in terms of technology. Then, perhaps, yes, we might well need steel manufacturing to protect ourselves. But we hardly need an economically unjustified tariff to attain that goal. Instead, the government in its largesse could subsidize this industry. Not to make steel; oh, no, that would not be needed until and unless war was imminent. Rather, it would be to serve as a fail-safe capacity to produce this good when required. All that would be needed would be a large empty steel mill, sufficient raw materials as inputs, and a very small crew to keep the place well-oiled. I do not advocate any such government initiative. I mention it only to indicate that a tariff is hardly required for national defense even under these heroic assumptions..."
Ya, sorry Walter, you have gone too far. It should be private companies that take steps to be able to produce domestic AND military goods with a slight adjustment of the assembly line OR programming of their 3D printers :)
Russia is in fact a good example of a country who first fixed stuff internally, then took strategic steps to keep itself independent while trading with the world all the while advancing internally for both domestic and military DEFENSE capabilities .. and now apparently threaten a country that spends 14x more than they do on "defense" .. the USA. No wonder we have sanctions on them .. a bully nation (USA) NEVER sees other nations as possible partners .. only as potential good slaves.
American Exceptionalism? That is actually Yankee character version 5.0 gone rogue .. yes Hilliary .. here is looking at you!
Don't trust the state. They don't trust you!
No comments:
Post a Comment