The wisdom of Barack Obama is finally coming into
focus. Conservatives had a field day
pointing out ignorant and inaccurate things Mr. Obama has a habit of saying:
“57 states,” Austrians speaking “Austrian,” Hawaii being “in Asia.” Barry Soetero, ne’ Obama, has demonstrated
rather loose connections to hard facts, but those are not where his ‘wisdom’
lives.
Perhaps his first wise move was marrying Michelle Robinson, by far the smarter of that couple. It is Prudent to assume that Michelle’s advisements to her husband overrode and were superior to many of his own ideas, including with whom to surround himself. We suspect that this included having Joe Biden serve as his Vice-President. Biden would never upstage her husband and would serve to make him seem normal to suspicious Whites. Barry’s wife was/is far more popular than he was… or is.
Barack’s life is mainly a closed book, the details of which
are purposely obscured; Michelle’s is far better understood in comparison. Mr. Obama is unable to even prove his
birthplace after spending literal millions to stop constitutional demands for
that proof. Prudence suspects that there
will eventually emerge proof of non-U. S. birth for this enigmatic man, the
legal implications of which are fascinating.
Back to the wisdom part.
Obama’s wisdom is political, and little else. He’s not an historian or an economist,
certainly no military expert and he can’t throw a baseball, but he understands
propaganda and manipulation, both short and long term. Prudently, he has destroyed the Clintons as
part of his oft-stated intention to “fundamentally transform” the United
States. First, he defeated Hillary head-to-head, but made her Secretary of
State where she could bear the brunt of the wild and wishful foreign policies
he was planning.
In that role, Obama allowed stories to exfiltrate that it
was Mrs. Clinton who pushed for the destruction of Libya, for example, which
hardened feelings against her in some quarters, essentially ruining any
residual veracity she may have had. He
allowed her – possibly helped her – to profit from “pay-to-play” schemes
involving the Clinton Foundation, essentially buying her loyalty. Additionally, he permitted by acquiescence,
her use of an illegal eMail system, forcing her into a legal corner almost
guaranteed to ruin her candidacy for president.
Trump, in reaction to the dangers she finally appeared to represent to
‘normal’ Americans, was the electoral result.
But liberal-socialists need not have worried, the groundwork had been
well-laid in the waning months of Obama’s administration to hog-tie the new
president, and take over the opposition, once the Democratic Party.
To make certain that the Clintons would be destroyed,
Obama’s friends, Jim Comey, Peter Strzok, Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch… and
others, added as thick a patine of sleazy dealings and advantageous treatment for
Mrs. Clinton as could be applied, assuring her electoral failure. That was job one.
Job two is destroying compromise between the two parties
while guiding Democrats so far leftward that there is no suitable descriptive
name for them any longer. In a political
blink of an eye, Democrats have swarmed to challenge Trump with what appear to
be outrageous propositions (in the eyes of conservatives and other ‘normal’
citizens) not least of which is the invasion across the southern border.
Trump, never more than imperfect, somewhat glaringly so in
certain arenas, was elected as much a ‘not-Clinton’ as a recognized expert in
foreign affairs, economics, military power or diplomacy. He has surprised many by persevering through
a mugging of a thousand cuts, and shows some decent instincts, but has yet to
comfort the skeptical. Despite good
approval polling, Trump is made more vulnerable by the nature of the multiple
representatives of socialist idiocy arrayed against him.
The Democrat candidate he will face is not yet in the race, is our Prudent opinion.
One recalls the burst of excitement during the few days that it seemed possible that Oprah Winfrey might get into the presidential race. Finally, supporters thought, a “non politician” we can get behind. They already loved her and Prudence suspects that there were virtually no criticisms of her that would have stuck. She isn’t going to run for president.
Back to Barack Hussein Obama’s political long march to
transform America. He and his backers
have prepared the ground and ‘fertilized’ it well. All he needs, now, is to plant the right
flower. And he will. It is impossible for him and for his fellow
travelers to recede into the background.
Their struggle to overturn freedom is a daily one. The master they serve never sleeps and never
relents. Trump is going to face Michelle
Obama, who will announce with Oprah at her side and a fawning press at her
feet.
Hillary Clinton was a minor quiz; this Constitutional
Republic is about to be sorely tested.
Public discourse has never been as corrupt as can be heard
and read everywhere in 2019. To arrive
at this nadir required leadership and neither “side” in recent elections is
innocent; both deserve their own condemnations… or praises, as each
self-proclaims.
We have arrived at a contest of hatreds, a contest that appears more virulently joined by one of two sides. That side is the ‘attacker.’ The other side is, by definition, the ‘defender,’ insofar as it is not attempting to tear down traditional social norms, but to hold to them. The attackers are motivated, they claim, by hatred of every flaw in the history of America, and they couch their attacks inside nebulous desires to “perfect” her, if not the whole world.
Defenders are automatically defined as reactionary clingers to everything that is “wrong” with America, and therefore somewhat lesser beings than those who have the discernment to see what needs correction. There is no compromise. Defenders cannot stomach facilitating the attackers’ attempts to “fundamentally transform” the United States. Attackers become increasingly hateful of those who cannot recognize how correct the attackers surely are.
The nature of adversaries can be better understood by
examining their allies, and allies of the ‘attackers’ are illustrative. First let’s stipulate that those whose
struggle is comprised of attacking the history, heritage and motives of
America, are on the “left” side of the political spectrum, such that they are
allied with forces of socialism and communism, even if many claim to believe in
‘democracy.’ This position allies
America’s ‘attackers’ with fascism and fascists for whom strict alignment of
corporate power with social policy is preferable to free markets and sovereign
citizens – preferable to ‘freedom,’ itself.
Google, Facebook, Amazon and other cyber-platforms, and many billionaires in other industries are happy to comply with this trend as it helps cement them into positions atop our and the world’s economies; This places them largely atop our ostensibly constitutionally ‘limited’ government, and the marriage between economic and political power is one that fascists constantly propose. Only such an elite form of benign governance can possibly make everything “fair” and safe from “hate speech.”
Interestingly, virtually every ‘attacker’ is strongly in
favor of abortion on demand, many agreeing with abortion up to the moment of
birth. This is a form of hatred: of
motherhood, of fatherhood, even of God, that is as destructive to the rightness
and righteousness of America’s right to exist, as any other social / political
action. Part of the danger on the
attacker side is that its combatants seem to demand perfection of their
targets, whereupon not finding it, they are justified in almost any action to
tear them down. Widespread abortion
would come under the heading of society’s Imperfection
as it destroys its own future, it would seem to Prudent observers.
Indeed, the disintegration and, here and there, re-segregation of society as it tries to comply with ‘attackers’ new rules of correctness and non-offensiveness, are evidence of society’s lack of perfection on Earth, spurring still more radical adjustments of every habit and norm until “perfection” is attained. Oddly, “perfection” appears to mimic the communist mythos, something with which the ‘attacker’ side is allied.
There are numerous examples of spirituality being part of
the motivation of attackers as well as of defenders. In this minefield it is critical to choose
one’s allies cautiously, and the ‘attackers’ are “allied” with both militant
atheism and militant Islam, a pairing of qualities that requires the energetic
holding of two antithetical beliefs at one time. Militant atheists, no longer content to not
believe amidst a tolerant, largely Christian society, now have shifted to
denying belief to those same tolerant, albeit, rather weak Christians. Christian displays or symbols must be
removed, apparently, since, to these anti-Christian militants, they interfere
with the eventual perfection of the world.
Their other friends, the militant Islamists, want the destruction of Christianity because it is an imperfection in the soon-to-be purely Islamic world. Atheists and Islamists are comfortable in the big tent of ‘attackers’ of imperfection on Earth, although once either team’s vision of perfection is attained, their alliance may fray.
So, let’s take stock: the ‘attacker’ side in our current
national and societal conflicts is happy with the hatreds embodied
(disembodied) in abortion – which is very anti-Christian, happy with hatreds of
atheist anti-Christians and happy with Islamic anti-Christians. There is a spiritual aspect to all of this
that the ‘attackers’ barely recognize in their zeal to perfect society. How can Christians be a threat to all three
factions of attackers?
Christians are the one tolerant group in the battle, but,
like their attackers, they barely recognize that the destruction of America is
the destruction of Christianity. Indeed,
in an utterly foolish misunderstanding of their own spiritual strengths and
obligations, Christians fail to defend their own sacred office(s) while they
contort themselves to prove their tolerance… to the point of suicide… America
right behind them. There is not enough
wealth – or comfort – in the world to counter the anti-Christians, nor should
there be.
Is there any prospect of ANY government or official organ reversing these multiple trends toward destruction of social cohesiveness? It appears unlikely in a political environment where those who deny their gender have gained exceptional political influence, including transformation of educational standards and cultures. Amidst a current rush toward socialist perfection on Earth, the prospect of rational defense of heritage and liberty seems remote, as well. To whom can we turn? No one. It is a misplaced hope that we will find any “leader” who will “clean up” society or neutralize our attackers.
Without an active, frequently reinforced grasp of American history,
current and recent events appear to be unique, and justification for implanting
new policies for the guidance and “transformation” of the United States. This is a dangerous circumstance, readily
corrected by wise, educated and honest media.
Sadly, we no longer are served by wise, educated and honest journalists,
or by equally qualified managers and owners of “the press.” If we were, political bull-crap would be
challenged without fail by members of the 4th estate who recognize
lies about government and about history, on
the spot!
Instead we see complete capitulation to partisan politics and, worse, ownership of the largest media conglomerates by multi-billionaires whose own partisanship distorts their news as much as their editorials, and whose financial power is used extra-constitutionally to direct public policy against legal activities they don’t approve of. This is no longer capitalism in a constitutional republic, it is fascism outside of and regardless of, elected representation, on which our society depends.
Financial institutions and even specific retailers have
joined in to set “public” policy with regards to guns, for glaring
example. Banks, although tightly “regulated”
and subject to hundreds of laws and rules, have begun to deny legal services to businesses they
disapprove of: firearm manufacturers, gun ranges, ammunition manufacturers,
firearm retailers, large and small. They
are responding by either changing their businesses or offerings, if retailers,
or moving or, for smaller retailers, giving up their small business. Those on the left (exclusively) cheer this as
“woke” capitalism. To Hell with
democracy, or even with representation, when something is “evil,” “the people”
must act. It is all too simple.
Some of the neo-fascists believe that guns are “racist”
because so many blacks are killed by “gun violence,” occasionally when a white
person is wielding the weapon. The more
than 90% of black shootings performed by black weapon wielders do not
count. Some wise and educated journalist
could immediately question their view on many grounds, not least of which the
fact that many gun laws on the books today were part of “Jim Crow” laws aimed
at keeping blacks from owning guns.
The 35 Million black babies vacuumed from their mothers’
wombs do not constitute a racist action: that statistic is living proof (odd
phrase, that) that blacks are enjoying their full array of “civil rights.” No one whose Constitutional protections guarantee
his or her RIGHT to question such dubious views, seems available to actually
raise the question.
Lately – mostly since the democrat-socialists regained a majority
in the House of “Representatives” – there are put forth daily radical ideas for
subverting democracy, if not ignoring it altogether. The greatest of these is nearly 3 years old,
now: the subversion of Donald Trump and others who helped him gain the
presidency. Once the Electoral votes
were tallied in his favor the heavy machinery of a virtual coup d’etat was
rolled into place. Democracy be damned.
This has yielded the hottest complaint against the
constitution: it’s time to replace the Electoral College with “the popular
vote.” A number of states have accepted
simple subversion of the U. S. Constitution by resolving to unseat their own
Electors who are committed to a candidate who did not win the imaginary “popular
vote.” And it is imaginary since the
presidential election is not a “national” election: it is 50 state elections
held on the same day. Choosing Electors
who are empowered to cast votes for President is a function of EACH STATE’S
VOTERS. How callous can elected
officials be to declare in advance that they – not their voters – will determine
if their votes will actually count on election day. That’s an odd mind-set for people who won
election in the United States of America.
Let’s hope cases are making their way to the Supreme Court to put this
unconstitutional plan out of our misery.
Interestingly, however, not a single “journalist” questions
these weird declarations and resolutions.
No one has been smart enough to point out to reckless and/or ignorant
state election officials that theirs are state elections, not national ones. The United States does not hold a national
election at any level.
Another proof of the idiocy of these efforts can be found in
the execution of congressional elections that are held on the same day as the
election of Electors in each state.
States run their own elections for federal representatives, for example,
according to the congressional districts into which the states have divided
themselves. Each district’s voters make their choices and the winner takes the seat. Using the precise “logic” of the Electoral
subverting states, if the number of one party’s voters in one group of
districts – or even a single district – were greater than all of the votes cast
for a different party’s candidate in the other districts, every winner in the
lower-count districts would have to relinquish his or her seat to the candidate
of the opposing party. Only that
undemocratic shift would fulfill the “principle” of the statewide “popular”
vote. “Hey,” the winners’ supporters
might justifiably say, “we voted for the guy who won IN OUR DISTRICT. We don’t care how many votes the gal in the
other district received. This is our
district and OUR VOTES COUNT!”
Is there not a single champion of a free press intelligent
enough to point out the obvious fallacy of the “national” popular vote? Were they all so poorly educated and left to
graduate with only the merest ability to think for themselves, that none can
question partisan stupidity? How is it
that district results are less sacred – or more sacred – than states’
results? Don’t the votes that elected
the winning slate of Electors count, also?
When did any state, or any district, for that matter, gain authority to
discard legitimate votes?
The essential nature of a free and skeptical press is enshrined in the first Amendment. The founders could not conceive of a craven,
dishonest and partisan press as the single source of information for a majority
of voters; nor could they imagine the alternative sources being simultaneously
converted to corporate censors in favor of a single party.
“Freedom is never more than one
generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the
bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the
same.” – Ronald Reagan.
Into his simple statement, Ronald
Reagan distilled the greatest threat and the greatest strength of America: the
ideas of it. We could forget them. We could become so enamored of the false
idols of socialism that we finally fail completely to pass along the meaning
and significance of America. The Prudent
observer already recognizes that a large fraction of U. S. citizens are far
down that path.
What makes this possible? Obviously, education is worth examining; so is immigration; so, too, is ghetto-ization. Let’s look at the last. Ghettos form somewhat naturally, primarily for ethnic reasons, which is to say, cultural reasons. They form economically, as well, but where the only shared “norm” is poverty… or substantial wealth.
Religious ghettos are well recorded and well-storied in
history. Most were either harmless or
threatening to a power-structure. Some
were left in peace, most eventually destroyed for their “other-ness,” and the
implied threat that represented.
Most ghettos engender resentment, or cohere because of
it. Shared resentment is a political
tinderbox, to which outside intrusion, however legitimate, can provide the
explosive spark. In and of itself,
ghetto-ization is deconstructive of the greater society, corrosive and
segregationist. There is no good reason
to encourage the growth or even the existence of ghettos – of any sort, at
least not in a democratic, free-enterprise republic.
In its perpetual confusion, religious sectarianism both
creates and attempts to integrate, ghettos.
Part of Judeo-Christian teaching is to “…come apart and be a separate
and chosen people.” It is not dissimilar
to many other faiths. The direction
seeks purity of body, mind and soul.
When the rest of the “world” is deemed impure and immoral, “sickly” in a
sense, quarantine appears wise, and temporarily it is. Enlightened sects both separate themselves
and purposely integrate themselves, hoping to attract some – if not all – of the
impure and immoral to adopt their ways of belief and of life.
Mere enlightenment can easily evolve into messianism,
causing religious groups to send missionaries out to dissimilar, and therefore,
“heathen” lands who are living in sin for no other reason than ignorance of the
one, true path.
But ghettos, religious, ethnic, economic, tend to inhibit
understanding – understanding which is essential to cultural/social survival
based on shared mores and standards, habits and language. Those “inside” tend to mostly talk to one
another, share distrusts of outsiders with one another, hear only opinions from
one another and, eventually, for some, reinforce one another’s hatreds for
outsiders.
Hatred is unhealthy, especially so for relatively “open”
societies, where there is freedom of movement, speech and expression… and where
there are politicians. Hatred spawns a
rotten sort of political power… a sort that is happy to ply ghetto hatreds with
pandering postulates, even to the point of social revolution. That is, every form of “establishment” power
is besmirched and derogated until the cravings of those seeking votes are but a
shade away from the hatreds of the marginalized.
It would seem unwise to spur the creations of more ghettos,
and unwise to feed the ones that exist such that they need not integrate and
come to better understandings.
In effect, the United States has permitted, encouraged and
protected the formation of new ghettos, both through civil tolerance of the
rights of homeless people to remain drugged while living animally on
appropriated public lands, and by importing enclaves of aliens whose cultures
and belief structures are not only unlike our own, but antithetical to our
own. The great “melting pot” of quickly
assimilating immigrants is a quaint notion.
Immigrants today come, in part, to show Americans how inferior our mores
are to their “superior” ones, from which they have fled to our shores. This is unhealthy.
At the same time our social welfare industry strengthens and
feeds the original, “black” ghettos, feeding their politically powerful support
to those in government who feed the welfare industry. More recent ghettos based on Central and
South American attitudes and language(s) actually compete for the support from
the welfare industry that was largely delivered to blacks 50 years ago. The United States literally fights to grow
those ghettos in contravention of our own laws.
This is doubly unhealthy since it cements a disregard for law amongst
our fastest growing minorities, many of whom reside here illegally. Very unhealthy.
Very few within the ghettos described share understandings of our Constitution or of our common law and standards. For these growing sub-cultures, there is no need to forget our heritage: they come or are born without it and there is no requirement to adopt it in order to enjoy our land and protections, legally and honestly or not.
For the rest of us, upon whom the survival of the ideas of America
rests, many of our youth are ignorant of, have forgotten or have been
instructed away from those ideas. One
generation is all it will take to lose everything.
America’s accelerating trend toward denial of reality – and of codified law – is and should be worrisome. Unfortunately, large segments of the polity see no reason to worry because the gulf of unreality has yielded political power, or comfort, and promises more. Confronted with claims of actual, or imminent, damage linked to the rush toward unreality, those who find the unreality comforting are compelled toward hatred of the claimants, even to the point of attacking them. One should wonder whether the trend alluded to is comprised of innocent reaction to “reactionary” opposition to “progress,” or is it the fruit of evil, aggressively transformative attack. Why would the latter be so?
The prime question, of course, is who benefits from the
disunity of the United States and following that, the discrediting and
dissembling of the ideas of
America? The unimaginative can readily
suggest that “the RUSSIANS” or “the CHINESE,” or “IRANIANS,” would want to destroy us, but those peoples
actually like us well enough, and respect and love us enough to come to the
United States for a better life. There
are relatively small subsets of both Russia and China that definitely DO work
toward our failure, but not because of their, or our, nationalities. The forces who would revel in our spiritual destruction are, themselves, spiritually
motivated, unrecognizably in some instances, even in their own mirrors.
America is a spiritual invention. Prudence would cause us to not call it a religious invention, given the many ways
religions have so distorted the inherent purity of spirituality. The waves of peoples who sacrificed to come
to the “New World” to begin America, did so with strong spiritual
underpinnings… essentially Judeo-Christian.
Were they perfect? Clearly not,
as we look back and judge them from today’s sensitivities, but at their times
they were doing their level best as they strove to make a better civilization
than the corrupted ones they left behind.
And religious freedom was – and is – crucial to the new form of
self-government that evolved from their sacrifices, and repeatedly since.
We should wonder why Judeo-Christianity is the prime target
of attack in the U. S. over the past 60 to 70 years. As the basis of our laws and social order –
conscience, if you will – its destruction is the most rapid way to destroy
“America” and all of its quaint ideas of individual sovereignty and
responsibility, private property, charity and sacrifice. Who would want to do that?
If we concentrate on the enemies of America – or of our
Constitution – as competitors for oil, or food, or land or military power… or
competitors for limited budget resources who disagree on how to make life
“better” for all of us, we will miss the point, tragically and
historically. Our misdirected concerns
expose our failure to comprehend American exceptionalism. It exposes, as well, the danger of
relinquishing public education – and much of our administrative ‘state,’ and
even parts of our law-enforcement and judiciary – to people who agree with our
enemies.
“America” does not, and cannot, run or survive on its
own. President Reagan observed that we
are only, ever, one generation away from losing it altogether. This powerful country? With this military? With our wealth? All these McDonalds? One generation? Surely not.
Let’s open our eyes.
America can survive only so long as its citizens believe in
it… simple. We have to believe in our
Constitution, in our founding, in personal liberty as well as personal
responsibility, and in what we term, “Judeo-Christian” tradition. Unfortunately, as more and more people are
attracted to dis-belief in God, they are encouraged to disbelieve in the United
States. No one outside of the United
States is going to carry the burden of believing in the ideas that sustain it
for us. It is our test of citizenship
and no one’s else.
“We the People of the United States, (they were people with quite similar moral compasses, if not religious upbringings)
in Order to form a more perfect Union, (consider
the capitalized words to this point: We, People, United, States, Order, Union)
establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,
(sic) promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to
ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain (wonderful
choice, there) and establish this Constitution for the United States of
America.” These words cannot be improved
upon.
The intent of Americans, then, was incontrovertibly NOT to
create a more powerful central government… or to create a new monarchy…
certainly not to establish a theocracy or an aristocracy of inherited baronies
and dukedoms. It wasn’t even to create a
more powerful military. Americans wanted
to live and let-live; develop their nation and prosper without wars. Wars have always vexed the “New Jerusalem,”
some completely from outside, some as would tear us asunder, but all that was
desired for the first 8 generations or so was a “return to normalcy” after each
conflict was over.
For a like period “we” had no interest in dominating other
peoples or re-shaping their societies and governments for them. But almost from the start, and more
specifically following the second Civil War (“The” Civil War), forces – or A
force – has arrayed itself against the ideas
of America, against the dream of e pluribus unum. Why?
Who would care how we live or govern ourselves? And even if “they” didn’t like how we chose
to do things in our own country, what would prompt “them” to infiltrate us and
attempt to tear us apart? Something,
apparently.
Is it not apparent that “they” are not simply envious
churls? Looked at from a position of
Prudence, the impetus to destroy the first nation founded on anti-tyranny seems
spiritual, not material. Indeed, the two
competing philosophies, or faiths,
dare we say, if one is represented by the ideas of America, would be
essentially Judeo-Christianity and socialism-communism. Which, from a broad perspective, still begs
the question: why bother to destroy America?
Socialism has proceeded on its destructive path quite well despite the
presence of the United States.
In a way we are engaged in the ultimate, and perpetual,
struggle between darkness and light, good and evil. Our enemy can survive only by weakening the
strong, sapping our strength. It
behooves us to acknowledge that we have the seeds of “goodness” and the
strength of Light, and that it is high time we reinforced and nurtured those
things, and defended them against all enemies, foreign and domestic, rooting
out the latter.
The ability to “conduct” politics is critical to the survival of democratic republics, most specifically, to the survival of this one, into which we have been most fortunate to be born or naturalized. Prudence teaches that, as Benjamin Franklin wisely observed following the Constitutional Convention, we have “…a republic (only) if you (we) can keep it.” What is required for a citizenry to “keep” its republic?
First, obviously, is citizenship, itself… a fascinating
quality, uniquely so for the United States of America, and the most valuable
quality for the nation’s education system to impart. Before joining a political party, our citizens should all be members of the “U.S. of
A. party,” in effect. That is, we all
should share the principles of “America.”
How is that accomplished?
First and foremost, we must agree on the meanings of words
and, simultaneously, on the meaning of laws, starting with our bases of right
and wrong. Just suggesting such a
radical idea will generate heated argument, if not violence in certain venues,
today. Here in 2019, just 220 years
since the Constitution was ratified, Americans no longer agree on very basic
word definitions, starting with “nation.”
Those who now want to defend the borders of their “nation”
are called “nationalists,” a term so pejorative as to be synonymous with
Nazism. Clearly the use of the word
“nation” is close to the word “national” and the NAZIs were “National”
socialists, meaning that they were transformed from socialists into
right-wingers bent on either lynching a brown person or gassing some Jews. I mean, “Duuuhhh.” It is the same as owning slaves to be a foul
“nationalist.” It’s just like, ummm…
Republicans.
So, principled conversations have become both tedious and
more difficult. Another bad word is
“abortion” or, even more prejudicial: “infanticide,” or, “life,” itself. Abortion is the epitome of goodness and deep
caring about civil rights, in today’s lexicon, when it used to mean the
premature and usually violent ending of the miracle of life in the womb. So clearly it can neither be worried about or
discussed, since it is settled civil rights “law.” People with the temerity to question the
beauty of abortion or who might suggest that the effects of rampant,
profit-making abortion could be somehow bad for the “nation” or for our social
communities, can be attacked physically, spat upon, kicked, thrown down to the
ground and even worse. No one will make
much of a stink.
Governments have even created safe zones around abortion
mills (sorry), “clinics,” so that those preparing to accept the sacrament of
ending their child’s life, will not, themselves, be made uncomfortable. I mean, “gosh,” after all.
States are finding their voice regarding abortion, passing
various restrictions on when it is legal to kill unborn children. One is based on whether a heartbeat has
reached detectability, which is somewhere around 6 weeks after conception. Others use a “principle” called “viability,”
which is when modern technology can enable the fetus to survive outside the
womb, generally successfully, while the, now, baby completes gestation and is
able to mature with normal maternal care at home. Viability seems to be around 24 weeks after
conception, or two-thirds of a normal pregnancy “term.”
Opponents of these concerns, and these are among the most strident of advocates America has ever heard, pooh-pooh all of these calculations about life, and insist that death is somehow better and better serves everyone involved, but to do so they have to change the definition of “life, unborn, baby and offspring.” Those words are relatively meaningless if the confused or weak-minded “mother” doesn’t “want” the child, baby, offspring.
Consequently craven politicians make what they think are
legal laws based on the feelings of the weak-minded or weak-hearted proto-mothers. The ramifications are grievously
complex. In the case of a new mother who
takes her baby home from the birthing center but, for some reason, loses
control under the new stresses of motherhood and kills the new child: she has
committed a crime and will be arrested.
But, in the case of a new mother whose child survives abortion, which
happens when abortion is performed late-term by a “doctor” who hasn’t practiced
snipping the baby’s spinal cord before complete delivery, for example, she has
no responsibility to the baby who, despite his or her automatic citizenship,
may be allowed to starve to death on a table someplace near where it was
delivered and NO ONE has any criminal liability.
Prudence wonders if those tables have a special, descriptive
name, like every other piece of “medical” equipment.
At one time, doctors swore to “first, do no harm.” Indeed, they became doctors and joined an industry the mission of which used to be helping people overcome… oh, injuries, diseases, old age and other life-threatening conditions. Unfortunately, politicians are unable to allow big economic functions to carry on successfully, and this politicization of medicine is reducing the money that can be made doing all the things we thought doctors were sworn to do. The big money is in abortion, now. Politicians are urging each other to send more money into the abortion industry, and then fight off every attempt to limit abortions, while placing restrictions on top of restrictions for the life-saving arena of doctor-activities.
Doctors, of course, worked their fingers to the bone, so to
speak, to become doctors, and figure that the rewards should be commensurate –
they’re not stupid, obviously.
Consequently, many are learning and practicing how to help the
almost-born overcome LIFE. Life is now a
disease that doctors can cure. What did
you think you knew?
Fascism and Fascist are two words we can’t seem to agree upon
the meanings of. Those who are acting
exactly like, umm… well, fascists, seem to believe that they are courageously
fighting fascism. This disconnect
interferes with useful discussion and, unfortunately, interferes with sworn “peace
officers” actually defending public order when faced with “Antifa” chaos, lest
they “enflame” the situations. When
government policy is senseless, the sensible are left speechless.
Some Americans – and other residents – are unable to accept
the meaning of “immigrant.” While it is
true that native-Americans (which is a meaningless term, itself; indigenous
peoples got here before Europeans did, but there was no “America” then, making
the term, “aborigines” the only accurate one) were able to roam around as far
as their war-making prowess enabled, they had no concept of “immigration,”
today a distinct and legal condition.
They understood “invaders” though, by whatever words they described
unwelcome “others” who threatened their lands and way of life. They understood ethics better than many “others”
do even now, and the concept of “theft.”
“Others” stole their lands and lives and very ways of life, often by creating treaties that aborigines agreed to, but which were quickly abrogated by their “other” treaty-creators. Those sensitive to honesty, today, are painfully aware of the lies told against aboriginal peoples. Lying is the distillation of not agreeing on word meanings, and it can threaten everything a people holds dear. Back to “immigrant.”
We no longer live in a society where people can just slide
onto one another’s land or appropriate their means of living. The concept of private property is the basis
of economics and social order, itself.
The need to strive to obtain the means to survive, protect and shelter
oneself and one’s family, also provides the opportunity to be charitable toward
others – often to sacrifice for others.
In order to “emigrate” to another country, a person must accommodate the
legal strictures of his or her intended new home country and, in some cases,
the strictures of his or her present country.
It is part and parcel of adopting a new “citizenship” which carries with
it significant legal sanctions and benefits.
It is not a simple condition of location.
So, an “immigrant” must have a status defined in law, else
he or she is simply a law-breaker… which is to say, a criminal. The legal adjudication of that criminal’s
status is a matter for the illegally adopted country to perform. Otherwise, that person is not an “immigrant”
at all, but a thief.
These are but a few examples of words the definition of
which – specifically the disagreement over those definitions – threatens the
existence of the United States and some other nations, as well. Words have meaning, tied to the meaning of “truth.”
One other example is the word, “racism.” Racism is a social concept that is based on
an undefinable term, thus yielding a meaninglessness that enables the epithet, “racism”
to be used with little connection to any of the circumstances that inspire its
use. Racism, epithetically, infers some
group membership, of those so accused. That
is, the accused must be prejudiced against another group, presumably based on
surface, observable traits.
Usually this refers to “white” people who are accused of a variety of wrong feelings, or thoughts, toward, usually, brown-skinned people. Now, brown skin covers a broad swath of human beings who cannot by any measure be considered racially singular. Anthropologists have tried dozens of ways to “define” races and every classification system immediately is challenged by freshly observed biological distinctions that must be shoe-horned into the supposed standard classifications. In short, there certainly are biological “races” but it is nearly impossible to identify them, so “racism” is reduced to mere political advantage, today.
This is not to say that terrible actions haven’t been taken against people – of all shades of skin color – by countries, states, counties, towns, mobs and, in truth, individuals. But, except for individuals , official, legalistic discrimination and worse bad actions have ceased in the United States. Why has “racialism” increased? Why have the accusations of “racist” and “racism” become more commonplace? Politics – not logic, not biology, not science, not group connection – politics, through which racialist grouping by the most superficial of distinctions, can produce a sort of “groupthink” that yields “group-voting.” For shame.
Our Constitution embodies the greatest spirit of individualism ever made nationally
foundational in human history. Individuals are required to be responsible to
themselves and to others, a radical idea.
It marked the intentional, codified rejection of serfdom… the rejection
of monarchy… the rejection of tyrannical control of others, altogether. In other words, individuals are sovereign
under the Constitution. As a result, the
government was formed by communities of individuals, each of whom relinquished limited amounts of that sovereignty so
that all may benefit. The government was
formed to serve its sovereign citizens, and
not the other way around.
Now, we see our democratic, individual political powers being defined by false connection to
arbitrarily defined groups. Nothing more
threatens our national cohesion and our nationally protected individual liberties. Group membership yields group responsibility,
the fundamental destruction of individuality and individual
responsibility. It is antithetical to
our Constitution. Billions call it socialism.
Following the news over the past, well… 30 years…, no, 38
years, yields an overarching sense of unease, at least, or sadness. On the other hand, there is a lot that was
and is good about the period, although the risks to the nation have, in fact, increased.
Recently we attended an award ceremony honoring police
officers, firefighters and emergency medical technicians. Lots of plaques were handed over, many
political citations delivered, photographs taken and hands shaken. Great descriptions were spoken by proud
chiefs of departments, of the events, both heroic and heart-warming, that
spurred the recognitions and the great banquet we all attended. America is rather special in the world of
celebratory and honorary plaques. Not
simply sports trophies, including individual trophies, but plaques and awards
for individual excellence in every field, including abundant charitable acts
and volunteerism, are presented / awarded in the millions every year in North
America.
Such was the focus of the banquet noted above. As in every year, individuals and small teams
of police, firefighters and EMT’s, responding to emergencies large and small,
performed extremely well, usually saving lives or injury, restoring safety or
comforting those affected. We have come
to expect such excellence and we’re happy to recognize it publicly. Private companies proudly provide financial
support so that hundreds both within and without the departments represented,
can join in recognizing the “heroes amongst us.”
Where do they come from, these men and women of excellence? Meritocracy: a tradition of testing and
performing to standards that should at least make excellence likely, if not
guarantee it. High, even sacrificial
performance, does not derive from social egalitarianism; it derives from
individuality and the beliefs of the individual. It derives from an inner sense of sacrifice
for others… even others one does not know.
If such true servants were assigned their duties, proscribed
by rules and threats of loss, the acts of heroism would be much rarer, the acts
of charity unknown. The innate belief in
a purpose for life that is transcendent, spiritual, if you will, is required to
act selflessly. Humans, inherently
capitalist as they are, will not risk comfort or safety without some reward,
spiritual or otherwise. Where the
spiritual aspect is destroyed, only personal wealth, money, sex, or other
worldly riches suffice.
The men and women honored earlier this year received no financial reward. I can’t state any evidence of greater safety for any of them. They didn’t get raises, although their dinners were free to them. The sponsors presented plaques of recognition; various state senators and representatives provided citations from their respective legislative chambers, and mayors and town managers chimed in, too. But, no wealth.
The honorees consider that they were “just doing their
jobs,” and that no awards were needed.
Yet they could have each “done their jobs” with less effort, less risk,
less imagination or innovation. Each
might have done the minimum necessary to pass the standard tests, to attend
required training, or even to take that training very seriously. But they didn’t. Each seems to carry in himself or herself, a
sense of duty to something greater than one’s self gain. Each seems to excel when he or she might do
something lesser.
Their communities do the right thing to provide recognition,
be it a plaque, a certificate or simply deserved thanks. Prudence says it’s a shame more citizens
don’t take part.
“Doctors” learn this procedure from one another to become “good” at it.
The battle over a “border wall” on the southern, Mexican border is a symptom of larger and more significant hatreds motivating a large minority of American residents. One hopes, and prays, that those same will step back and reconsider their desire to feed such ugly motivations. Led by Democrat leaders like Nancy Pelosi and Charles Schumer, Barack Obama and now, Andrew Cuomo, and many others, these new political haters appear to share several common traits:
They hate the Constitution as it was designed
and written. The intent of the founders
cannot be accepted, in their views, because some of them owned slaves, a
grievous custom, without question, but totally irrelevant to the ideas and
philosophies they espoused. In fact, the
designers and compilers of the American ideas were ALL opposed to slavery and
did their best to help it phase out of American life. Read Frederick Douglass; he understood.
They are deeply ignorant of American and of
European history, and of the Bible, itself.
The underpinnings of American
culture are ignored by them, even reviled.
The institutions of government are trusted by
them more than any individual’s motivation, and the seeming ability to
legislate or regulate – doesn’t much matter – people to act as their fellow
thinkers wish, is so tantalizing as to distort the presence or even the
perception of liberty.
They view America’s existence as an affront to
all non-white, non-European people, and therefore not deserving of defense,
even of its borders, and that the history of America should be erased from
people’s minds and certainly from educational systems so that America’s
evilness and corruption can never again interfere with universal sharing of all
wealth or with individual freedoms to play, fornicate and indulge as Gaia
intended, under the careful watch of the Smarter Ones. They’ll identify themselves.
So, politics is not the actions of a free people to choose
their leaders and governing philosophies; it is the benign control of wages,
prices and production so that everyone is EQUAL, with brownish people being more
equal than white people. Skills-based education
will no longer be required for most students, so long as there are enough very
smart people who should be compensated for making everyone else comfortable.
The quaint chaos of individuality and “freedom” can be
avoided.
The majesty of American citizenship is unique in the
world. There is no system like
ours. Anyone… anyone, anyone who can
honestly swear to uphold the Constitution, obey civic law, pay his or her bills
and act responsibly, can become an American – an actual, living, breathing,
American. One wishes those born here were held to the same
standards, but still, it’s impossible to sign up for a French residency and
ever, ever become, well, French. The
same is true for Japan, China, Japan, Korea, or India or virtually any ethnically defined country.
You might get to live in other countries legally, but you’ll never
become one of them. America, including Canada, is different. America is defined by the ideas that formed
her, and by geography. That’s it. No matter how hard racists of every shade
attempt to say America is defined by white skin, it has never been so.
This is not to say there haven’t been some terrible ideas
held by “Whites.” There are terrible
ideas held by every race. The tendencies
to gain power or wealth or women by whatever means can be devised, legality and
justice be damned, is pretty much universal.
The religious / ethical belief structures that lead us to contain those
desires, to channel them for greater goods, to construct families that produce
good adults from the children they are responsible for… those we are tearing
down by every means possible, even through new laws that give status to the
most twisted perversions and hatreds.
Hatred of America is readily evidenced by laws – LAWS – that permit partial-birth “abortion” and even infanticide for the most temporal purposes, even convenience. Since Roe v. Wade was given Supreme Court justification, we have killed-off 61 million Americans while importing 30 million non-Americans to “pay for our Social Security.” The trouble with Americans is they might become infected with individuality, Constitutionalism, responsibility and freedom! So, we destroy those who might make America stronger and import, illegally, those more likely to be dependent upon the whims and pleasures of the Smarter Ones, made widely known by their widely parroted self-declarations.
Trump, for all his flaws and imperfections, is trying,
almost alone, to restore the mighty engines of freedom. If we are waiting for perfect, flawless leaders to
arrive before we follow them away from rot and debauchery, we’ll wait forever
while the last great hope of mankind is pissed away.
I had a short sit-down with a most charming and intelligent lady recently – very Prudent in my judgment. We agreed on nearly everything concerning her professional expertise and shared each other’s reminiscences from too many decades. At a couple of points she had alluded to being “very liberal” without it influencing our discussions, while describing how her work improved individual performance for business leaders and managers. At that Prudence suggested that she probably is not as liberal as she thinks. We never did get into either of our social views, but before parting it became very clear that conservative news sources could never be trusted while “liberal” ones always could.
In the end I opined that I wasn’t sure that President Obama
was a natural born American, that his released birth certificate was forged in
some way and that he was the only person in his administration who ever claimed
he was born in Kenya, and I cited a statement on a “book jacket.” She was able to name everyone related to or
near the president in any way as scurrilous in the light of “more than 30
indictments,” for Heaven’s sake. I
suggested that they weren’t connected to Russian involvement with Trump and she
listed a couple where people had been working for Turkey (Flynn) who later lied
about meeting a Russian, and Paul Manafort, of course.
I was wrong about the “book jacket” reference: the claim was
made by Obama’s literary agency in a booklet it used to promote books to large
buyers, but Obama, himself, never challenged it until a couple months after
declaring himself in the running for the Democrat nomination. The literary agent lady claimed it was her
personal mistake and that Obama himself had never told her personally that he
was born in Kenya. She probably derived
the “belief” in his place of birth from the information in the Harvard Law
School yearbook that listed the very same Barack Hussein Obama as having come
from Kenya. The very same Obama hadn’t
challenged that, either, after having certainly seen it, he being the first
African-American editor of the Harvard Law Review, after all. So there is some validity to Prudence’ having
formed a belief about his Kenyan origins.
Harvard, of course, “corrected” the yearbook entry after the controversy
became news in 2007. Lots of mistakes
connected to one little-known individual’s demographics.
The idea of Obama’s grandmother, in Kenya, having been
present at his birth, there, however, is not substantiated. One of Obama’s half-brothers, among others,
tried to float a fraudulent claim about a Kenyan birth certificate, which
muddied the waters even more.
To the lady’s credit, despite rattling off every “Trump”
negative possible in a very brief couple of sentences, there are many questions about Trump’s
associates, himself, and even about his relatives – but it seems Prudent to
await some sort of proof of the many embellishments certain media layer on to
every indictment that has emitted from the Mueller operations.
Prudence would indicate that most of those who voted for
Donald Trump don’t like him, particularly.
(See http://www.prudenceleadbetter.com/2017/11/29/trumpism-is-a-ghost/) Many obviously do, imputing to him the
persona of “one of the guys” even though he doesn’t drink or smoke. They like the way he says what he thinks,
even without the politically correct filtering.
Those who don’t “like” him also appreciate his willingness to throw out
his opinions and willingness to call people out for their bad acts, lies and
falsities of various sorts. It doesn’t
help that he is reckless in many of his statements to the point of stating his
own falsities, but in most cases it doesn’t sound like “lies,” in the sense of
malicious mendacity. Opinions vary. Still, a majority of states wanted the degree
of change Trump would bring, regardless of his “baggage.” Prudence agrees.
It is obvious, Prudence would indicate, that the creation of
Fox News dramatically altered the “news” business, perhaps on a par with the
creation of CNN. The challenge to the
amorphous leftism of, first, broadcast networks and then cable networks, caused
those outlets to sharpen their stances and to attack “right wing news.” With so few right-leaning networks, right-leaning
politicians have naturally hewn closer to Fox and a handful of independent
“blog,” YouTube and “Podcast” sources for “alternative” news and opinion… and
confirmation.
CNN and others turned to spend more and more time and
content in sharply partisan “reporting.”
The news business is now not just corrupt, it is failing its vital role,
guaranteed to it in the First Amendment.
Government types are delighted to be allied with the “press.” It removes all that “truthiness” pressure.
However, the slippery immersion into partisan defense by
most media, is not only destructive of our separation of powers, but an abject
disregard… a besmirching of the role of a free press – not “free” to pander but
free to be honest, something
journalists in many countries die for.
Of all the ills America suffers today, the loss of an honest, free press
may be the worst. For shame, and shame
upon the magnates and business titans who own various outlets of partisan
claptrap. Who is watching the watchers?
The biggest watchers, today, are the largest cyber-media
monsters: Google, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and others. In the span of fifteen years, virtually
everyone who utilizes the internet for communication or information, has
adapted to obtaining both through one of these companies. It is the most rapid transformation of human interaction…
and most rapid concentration of power – power over human knowledge – in all of
history. Only now is the danger and
threat of this concentration being recognized.
-Google, in particular, is succeeding at convincing schools to forego books and other paper media for everything from studies, assignments, homework and testing. Kids who spend excessive hours on screens for games, Facebook, Twitter, You Tube and Snapchat, have been shepherded onto screens for even more hours per day! Worse, they are being taught from the youngest possible ages that truth may be found on a Google screen. Except that, now we learn that Google has a very specific view of what truths are find-able on those very screens. Can democracy survive this evil filtering of facts?
Indeed, not even Constitutional republicanism can withstand
it. Have we the necessary vision and
courage to reverse this extra-constitutional threat?
Things just aren’t the same, anymore… have you noticed? On the other hand, it’s not Prudent to say
they ever were – the same I mean. Strong
societies like the United States, remain strong because some things are the
same, in fact; to protect ourselves, our grandchildren and their grandchildren,
the strong fibers in our culture must be defended and inculcated in our
children as well as in ourselves. There
are too many who should understand their presence and purpose but appear
ignorant of them.
One such fiber is our Constitution. Conservatives revere it; leftists unceasingly
circumvent it. Since its adoption the
Constitution has held strong, but has no effect on national direction when
governance simply steps into the shadows and ignores it. Most of that determined ignorance includes
big tax-funded payoffs to politically significant segments of the citizenry,
cementing the synthesis, into the new
thesis that the Constitutional limitation on this or
that governing act actually could be interpreted in a different (socialistic)
way. Later there is always the new antithesis that, couched in terms of “equal protection
under the law” and “non-discrimination,” must, “constitutionally” be applied to
still more segments until there’s a permanent acceptance of that much socialism
by the very conservatives who believe they are defending the Constitution! It’s a strong, inelastic fiber that’s been
stretched, nevertheless, over the past 150 years.
Conservatives believe that pulling back from the severe
strains on the Constitutional fiber, is the only long-term solution to the
survival of the American idea.
Religion, churches (church-communities) and religious
education form a fiber that is perceived as “quaint” by the leftist elements on
the East and West coasts and urban pockets in between. Anti-religion is strong on college campuses,
as it is in public grade and high schools.
Being at least agnostic, if not atheistic, is worn as a badge of
intellectual status, certainly since the 1960’s; those still attending are being taught that
the Bible and the words of Jesus somehow fit socialism. In response, churches are failing to define
the difference between worldly comforts and holy purposes of life. Government, under a Constitutional guarantee
of non-interference in and by religion itself, has proven feckless and works
harder to divest itself of moral responsibility at every level. This “fiber” is threadbare and undependable.
Family cohesiveness is the core strength of any society. In no culture has the strength and identity of mores and traditions been separated from widespread, if not complete, adherence to the family “pattern,” until the degradation of “Western,” culture, now entering its seventh decade. It is quickly becoming America’s greatest weakness and we have repeatedly elected representatives who facilitate it with misguided welfare programs. Without succeeding generations of “America”-acculturated citizens, there will be no “nation” and worse, there will be no one to defend it. Electronics and computerized health-care are not substitutes for strong, morally straight families, for only they form the “fiber” of freedom and self-government enabled through the Constitution.
Public education is the second greatest acculturation
mechanism and process we have. By
default public schools and teachers are charged with the responsibility to
educate succeeding members of our society and culture: new “Americans,” in truth. Since the 1970’s, certainly, teachers and
their unions have cemented themselves into codified bailiwicks where they can
teach almost anything without fear of being fired, while rewarding those
elected “representatives” who protect their “bailiwicks,” with solid political
support. Unthinking – or lightly
thinking – citizens vote for said “representatives” and vote further to
“support” public education with tax increases and overrides to prove their
great morality in defense of an American tradition. Meanwhile, “teachers” are increasingly
producing less-literate graduates who distrust, if not hate, the United States
and the true traditions of sacrifice, thrift, personal responsibility and
Judeo-Christianity, while embracing socialism, of all things the most
antithetical to American success and strength.
As a culture we are failing miserably to make the fabric of our nation
stronger, and we grin as we reward those who facilitate our internal
weakness. This “fiber” is now almost
invisible, maintained mostly in private, church-connected schools, and not all
of those.
Finance and wealth creation have been, and should be, strong
fibers in the fabric of industrialized societies, of which the United States is
one, like it or not. Both are tightly
connected to honesty in our legal structures, honesty in our contracts, honesty
in our “money,” fair debt creation and destruction, and private property. In short, the economics of the Bible, both
old and new testaments, like it or not.
Proto-socialists rail against “unfair” wealth “distribution.” They are simultaneously right and wrong. Wealth is not “distributable,” per se, and
“fairness” is irrelevant, but the accumulation and possession of “wealth,” is
certainly uneven, leading to strong feelings of envy and raw hatred of the “greedy.” These feelings are political minefields and
rich fodder for politicians whose beliefs are fundamentally anti-American… or
anti-family: same thing. But back to
“money”:
Financially, the federal government is a failure, unable to maintain its own household within a budget and even to create an honest budget through anything close to honest legislation. Because the Congress can, and the U. S. is in a global position to enable it, the federal government borrows more than it can (ever) repay, every fiscal year. Despite these well-known facts of financial incompetence, American voters continue to elect “representatives” who believe – and require by legislation – that more and more of every American’s personal financial security should depend upon or be in the hands of, the federal government. This “fiber” is a misconstrual of the “strings” that federal intrusion always includes – strings that could strangle us.
Debt is a tool of growth, investment, liquidity, defense, achievement, construction, infrastructure, public health and more, much more. Yet it is also a weapon, threatening and weakening whole nations, indeed, every nation. Instead of leading the world economically, proving the superiority of free enterprise and freedom itself, the United States has succumbed to banking globalism and to the blandishments of socialism, under which “investments” are made in daily necessities for large fractions of our population. Economically there is no “R.O.I” – return on investment – where debt is incurred in the furthering of dependency. The U. S. carries a “current” debt liability that is approaching annual G.D.P. Our productivity cannot generate sufficient surplus to even “service” that debt (pay the interest on it) without borrowing other debt to do so, given the nature of our entitlement budget and bloated pension commitments. Weapon-wise, debt allows international banking to FORCE the U. S. to borrow to meet its commitments for interest payments. Every dollar of debt is a dollar of weakness, not strength; of obligation, not freedom. Our “representatives” are doing this type of budgeting “for” us since it’s too complicated for us to understand.
Money is real. That is, “money” has intrinsic value: gold, silver, platinum or other “hard” currencies, or the notes that stand for a set value of real money so long as those notes may be traded for real money on demand. We don’t have “money” any longer, although we have currency that we are still willing to work for, sell for, buy with and “save up” for those rainy days. Written on the notes in our pockets are official dictates that this or that piece of paper shall be accepted as “legal tender” in all transactions, public or private. Someone famous and/or important has his or her name printed nearby affirming the quality of the banknotes we hold. They are no longer U. S. Notes, they are Federal Reserve Notes, a private bank with a public name. Instead of having the U. S. Mint simply print U. S. Notes when we need more liquidity in the economy, we incur a debt to the Federal Reserve bank, and others, including foreign countries – debts we have no hope of repaying in principal, while our obligation to “service” those debts is unending. The government prints U. S. Bonds, however, which are accepted as good instruments for the loans their purchasers are making to the United States. The question, is, therefore, if the bonds are good, why not skip the growing interest cost and just print our own money? Hmmmnnnhh.
So, our money is not honest. It is, instead, merely confidence notes that we and most of the world, accept. Federal Reserve Notes may be exchanged at any so-called bank only for other Federal Reserve Notes… not for gold or silver or anything of intrinsic value except, if inclined, for modern pennies, the content of which cost more than 1 cent. Melting them down for the intrinsic metal value is a crime, of course. More and more we exchange our “cash” for magnetic bubbles on a hard drive, trusting the federally regulated “bank” to protect the record so that we may access it at gasoline pumps, hardware stores and websites that will trade books and electronic gizmos for a share of those magnetic records. We are now a couple of layers of separation from real-value-money and yet fully confident that “our” money is both safe and safely “ours.”
Our entire economy is based on, and priced on, debts and interest. Think about it. Our rush to “cashless” commerce carries a very high price, whether one makes use of credit cards or not. First, the merchant/ restaurateur who accepts your card, must pay the transfer or remitting agent a fee for that privilege – a fee based on a percentage of the transaction amount, including taxes. This may be 1.5%, 2%, 3% and occasionally more depending on total flow of “credit” transactions for that single location or for the total transactions for a chain of locations. Many card-holders use “Rewards” cards to obtain fractional cash-back or “miles” or other goodies marketed as though free, simply as a thank-you for using the card. In reality those “rewards” raise the fees to the vendor/merchant for the privilege of accepting the card. Those costs are recouped entirely from the cost of goods sold – there is no free lunch. Later, the card-holder receives a bill from the “credit-card company” (bank) for all the stupid latte’s, Big Macs and smoothies he or she has enjoyed during the month preceding. Smart card-holders pay that bill in total the minute they receive it, but a large and growing percentage do not, allowing some of the balance to carry over to the next billing cycle, incurring upwards of 20% or more interest! Some even pay only the minimum suggested to keep the collection process at bay – this figure leads to maximization of the total interest the cardholder will eventually pay to the bank that has, in effect, loaned him or her enough money to buy lunch… or gas… or movie tickets… or even subway rides. As above, so below, when it comes to debt-consciousness. In effect then, our entire retail economy and large segments of wholesale purchases carries a “vig” of 2% or more on average; that is, 2%, say, on about $6 Trillion in retail sales and 25% or more than that in wholesale/raw-materials sales. The interest cost on costs of goods, is approaching $200 Billion. Where does that money go, one wonders? We’re all paying for it.
The once-strong thread of thrift and sacrifice has
disappeared, leaving all of us – and our supposedly “rich” nation, indebted for
life, our children’s lives, their children’s lives and the lives of further
generations than they. What an
inheritance.
Suffice to say that our nation is adrift. One political party/movement: liberal,
progressive, socialist, Democrat, is prostrating itself before the twin altars
of unrestricted abortion and legalizing drugs and other crimes, and the altar
of outsiders: non-citizens unwilling to provide for themselves or to follow our
most basic national laws. The other is
tripping over its shoelaces trying to remain relevant to media that share the
liberal, progressive, socialist, Democrat viewpoints – and philosophies – while
trying to overcome 60 years of feckless education (also liberal, progressive,
socialist, Democrat-leaning) that has separated 3 generations of Americans from
their history, heritage and founding majesty.
Politicizing, even codifying, every feeling and hatred, has
not rendered ours a happier or more cohesive society. Indeed, it is not even “fairer.” Politics that channels hatreds requires the
aggravation of envy and jealousy; it requires the accentuation of differences
between groups rather than between individuals.
So-called “identity politics” leads to identifying each group’s enemies
and resisting, if not attacking them.
Civility as a tool for nation-building is not simply unemployed, it is
mocked.
When differences between individuals is dealt with – usually
in small, civil steps – what usually develops is an understanding of how much
more similar they/we are, than different. Individuals don’t usually hurl epithets at
unrelated, unconnected individuals, it takes a mob mentality to do so, and then
it is done in order to or because of some perceived membership in a mob-hated group.
Civility, and civilization itself, takes work, commonality, leadership,
both individual and social. A
Constitutional Republic like the United States is based on individual, not
group responsibility; it is based on self-control and individual
responsibility, not group control or group responsibility. Keep this distinction in mind. One need not be Christian to appreciate that
the New Testament was a covenant with individuals and not with tribes or
peoples. Ours is a “Christian” nation in
that our Constitution enables individual success and failure, and individual
responsibility to one’s community, family and self for the consequences of
one’s actions… and, perhaps, to God.
