Archive for the ‘Comparing History’ Category

Chamberlain_and_Hitler

What refusing to call evil by its name looks like.

Have you ever read a newspaper from the months and years before a catastrophic event?  In college, when I was studying in the library, I would occasionally take a break and look up some old newspapers from the 1930s from before WWII.  It is eerie how similar in tone stories from that time are to the tone of current news stories.  Today we are sitting on the precipice of a cataclysmic war, and far too many of our family and friends don’t see the historical trends from the past being replayed before our eyes.  Every day media and political elites dismiss what may well be coming.  Today, as it was then, people have endured years of war.  Just as Americans in the 1930s, we are all sick and tired of the tragedy, hardship, and conflict.  As Neville Chamberlain did then, Mr. Obama and other Western leaders repeat the same mistakes.

Mary Ramirez, a contributor for the Blaze  recounted how during the run up to WWII, progressives, led by British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain refused to see or acknowledge that fascism was about to plunge them into another horrific war.  The stories of the time were about the Reischstag fire, concentration camps, and Kristallnacht.  There were accounts of Unrest in Spain, Stalin’s purges in Russia, Arabs attacking Jews in Palestine and Nazis attacking Jews in Germany.  China was invaded by Japan, and of course, in 1938 stories of Germany occupying Austria and Czechoslovakia dominated the headlines.  I am sure that people in the 1930s were as concerned then as we are today, and yet they allowed Nazi Germany to become so powerful that freedom almost did not prevail.

Netanyahu-Speech-Congress

Click to hear speech

The question is will enough people today have learned the lessons of the 1930s?   A few months after the Nazis occupied Austria, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain declared he had “achieved peace in our time..” in September of 1938.  A year later Britain entered formally into a fight for it’s life.  In today’s world, the American President, Mr. Obama adamantly refuses to characterize Islamic Fascism as being what it is, evil.  How many times has he downplayed the capability of ISIS?  He has depicted them as the junior varsity, and he has claimed to have decimated their capability to fight.  Today, Mr. Obama’s negotiations with Iran will likely result in Iran obtaining nuclear weapons.  I would suggest that today, as in the 1930s we may come to regret his actions.

A couple of weeks ago, Benjamin Netanyahu spoke before the American Congress to warn U.S. lawmakers of the dangers inherent in Iran’s chase for nuclear power.  Americans are witness to news story after news story of the most horrific of monstrous atrocities committed by ISIS against Christians.  In Paris a few weeks ago, the world watched as Islamic terrorists killed innocent people.  Earlier this year over 15,000 Nazi’s marched in Germany.  In Greece the Neo-Nazi Golden Dawn party, won third place in recent elections.  In Europe, the rising hatred of Jews in Europe has become epidemic.   Zach Noble from the Blaze wrote of Jews in France, once estimated at 500,000, is now closer to 400,000 and getting smaller every day.  In many places in the Middle East, Christians are literally being hunted in to extinction.  Will a student a hundred years from now, look back and wonder why we allowed a holocaust to happen again?

No rational human being wants war or the heartache that goes with war.  The key is to know when a fight is inevitable and how to properly frame the struggle so that citizens understand clearly why they are sacrificing.  The U.S. is over 18 trillion dollars in debt and the economy has been week for years.  Americans are highly polarized.  A real war must not be undertaken lightly.

I would suggest that most Americans, if they are paying attention at all, recognize that hard times are coming.  ISIS must be eliminated, not appeased, and certainly not accommodated, but to eliminate ISIS – to put Americans solders into harm’s way – it is imperative that the nature of this enemy must be clearly painted for the American people.  Any leader thinking to undertake a war for civilization must firmly understand that this is not just another police action.  While the elimination of ISIS must be done, I do not think Mr. Obama capable of leading such and endeavor.

The 2016 election promises to give us a typical field of candidates, yet many Americans, even those aware of the dangers facing us, remain unwilling to vote for principles over party.  The question is, will America continue to follow the same establishment party leaders until tragedy is unavoidable, or will they recognize the world for what it is and act accordingly.

Eric Lawson, author of the “In the Garden of Beasts,” showed how Germans In the 1930’s embraced Adolf Hitler.  Will Americans face our challenges today as men and women determined to live free or will we seek easy answers and continue living in denial?

Danielle Profile Pic - Thumb 2 http://www.LoneStarNovel.com/ Danielle on Facebook  / Danielle on Twitter

 

Advertisements

PUTIN-YELLS

People, it seem, tend to embrace leaders they perceive can provide them with security when faced with economic and societal stress.  When our lives become too broken in too many places, it is only human nature to want someone to help when we are overwhelmed.

The 2016 election promises to give us a typical field of candidates, yet many attentive Americans aware of the dangers facing us remain unwilling to vote for principles over party.  The question is, will America continue to follow the same establishment party leaders until the current paradigm fails or seek another way.  If there is a failure, how many busy, distracted Americans would consider a strong authoritarian leader when that person promises security?

At the close of the 19th century, economic and military competition between European nations grew steadily.  People wanting self-rule conflicted with nation states seeking ever-increasing power and prestige.  The old ways of doing things were fading away as industrialization took hold.  World War I began when the systems of the day failed to accommodate societal needs.

Eric Lawson, author of theIn the Garden of Beasts,” showed how Germans In 1930’s Germany embraced Adolf Hitler when he promised he would be a strong leader and solve their problems.  Germans were angry with their more moderate leaders following World War I.  They wanted and found a charismatic man of action.  Unfortunately, in any era, ceding responsibility for convenience and sacred rights for perceived security rarely works out well.

Americans gazing out at our world today see circumstances that appear to be unworkable.  After 13 years of fighting, Islamic terrorists continue to routinely commit acts of horrifying barbarism.  The U.S. national debt is over $18 trillion and it is growing rapidly.  Illegal immigration continues to be a problem with thousands of immigrants illegally migrating into the U.S.

Jews in TroubleIn Paris, the world watched as Islamic terrorists killed innocent people, offended by inflammatory speech.  A few weeks ago, over 15,000 Nazi’s marched in Germany and Greece’s Neo-Nazi Golden Dawn party, won third place in recent elections.  Last week, Glenn Beck interviewed Noreena Hertz, a professor at the University College London, who spoke passionately about the rising hatred of Jews in Europe in recent years.  Zach Noble’s article on the Blaze noted that Jews in France, once estimated was 500,000, is now closer to 400,000 and getting smaller every day.  Old solutions are new again, it seems.

The thing about events such as what happened in Paris last week, is that they remind Americans of our own tragedy’s and vulnerabilities.  Life in the modern world can be more of a treadmill than an adventure.  With work, PTA, and getting our kids to soccer practice, it is understandable how reality bias can set in.  It’s easy to just let the so-called experts handle our problems.  In theory they know what they are doing, and besides, we are all too busy to think about it anyway.

Human nature being what it is, is it all that surprising when human beings today react to tragedy the same way their grandparents did?  Europeans are reacting to difficult times in much the same way as Europeans did leading up to World War I and then World War II, two decades later.  In both cases people who just wanted to live their lives were hampered by economic and societal distress.  Then and now, people often opt for blindly following those promising easy answers.

Jewish owned shop in Berlin circa 1930 – Holocaust Education & Archive Research Team

Last weekend a dear friend invited me to attend the play, Cabaret, with a group of friends.  While I am far from being a sophisticated connoisseur of the theatre, I do enjoy a good story.  Moreover, this particular play, Cabaret, by Christopher Isherwood, really speaks to me in the ever-increasing irrationality that is our world today. Although I would never claim to be a film critic, I would be remiss not to mention that director, Derek Whitener did a superlative job.  The cast were all professionals and although I expected it to be good, I didn’t expect the story to grab me emotionally and not let go.  As a writer and a freedom activist, I consume far more of the tragedies and insanity that embody the daily news cycle.  The talented cast of musicians and actors flawlessly executed a story arch that took the characters and audience alike from a world of escapism that was the late 1920’s into pre-war Berlin on the verge of embracing Adolf Hitler’s militant fanaticism.  Not only did individual characters grow and change along with the times, emotionally, I found myself grieving for the Berliners from eighty-five years ago as they lived through the event’s first hand.

Rachael Robertson as Sally Bowles – Photo Credit: Michael Foster

The Cast really did a wonderful job, but in particular I was impacted by a few characters in particular. Emcee, played by Mikey Abrams was the central figure in the story and as such, it fell to him to carry the story from scene to scene.  I found him to be creepy, funny, frightening, and the end of the story tragic as events washed over him.  Mr. Abrams is clearly a talented young man.  Lindsay Hayward played an older woman, Fräulein Kost, who simply wanted to hold on to the world she knew. Like many Americans today, she was too afraid to risk what little she had to really live her life.  In a sense, she was a prisoner of her own reality bias.  How many of us simply refuse to accept the truth before us when that truth implies that everything we hold dear may likely be lost.  Finally, Sally Bowles, portrayed by an immensely talented Rachael Robertson, and her on-stage love interest, Clifford Bradshaw played by Billy Betsill depicted the quintessential questions we face today. What impacted me was most was the raw emotional surrounding the decisions faced by the couple as they did their best to cope as society fragmented around them.  Several days later and I still find myself reliving a gut-wrenching scene when Sally Bowles is devastated by events, and like so many of our neighbors, family and friends, she simply refused to accept that profound darkness was descending upon them.  For his part, Billy Betsill did a great job expressing his frustration at being unable to get those around him to realize what was coming.

They say that history repeats itself. Stories like Cabaret illustrate that in spades.  Director, Derek Whitener really did a wonderful job bringing those truths out in a way that emotionally connected with the audience.  I often say that art is the way to reach people.  This kind of story can inspire Americans to wake up to the abuses we are seeing by elites in Washington DC, even if only subconsciously.

The story is set in late 1929 – early 1930, only a few short years prior to the event which literally lit the fuse to full scale totalitarian rule in Germany. After the February 1933 Reichstag Fire, Hitler eviscerated freedom of the press, requiring all news to be approved by Joseph Goebbels’ Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda.  Goebbels aim was to ensure that the Nazi message was successfully communicated through art, music, theater, films, books, radio, educational materials, as well as the press.  In today’s world we have leaders from both political parties working very hard to erode free speech in America with bills like the “Free Flow of Information Act” designed to give political leaders the authority to decide who may cover them and what can be said near an election.  In our America of 2014, how important would you say pleasure seeking is to the average citizen?  Obviously there are millions of concerned citizens from all political perspectives, but we have all cringed as we watched late shows doing so-called man on the street interviews.  Entertainers like Jimmy Kimmel asking people what they thought of the president’s State of the Union Speech, before it happened, and actually getting answers from people is really funny, but at the same time, tragic.  In Cabaret, Clifford Bradshaw has a great moment, where in frustration he asks the Sally if she ever read a newspaper. The truth is that like the characters in the play, too many Americans just want to tune out and leave politics to the politicians.  There are always so-called experts with impeccable credentials more than willing to tell us what must be done.

Rachael 2

Mikey Abrams – Emcee – Photo Credit: Michael Foster

While there is certainly nothing wrong with entertainment, how like Sally Bowles are so many of our neighbors, so unconcerned with the real issues of the day. After a hard day at work who could blame us for just wanting a little diversion.  The riots in Ferguson give us a hint at the underlying tension and division in the country.  Our Elections from this past century reflect this division.  The vitriol in the country continues to increase every year.  Political leaders will say and do almost anything to win.  Like Sally Bowles, Many Americans choose to be ignorant of the tough issues of our day.  The last two presidents have borrowed and spent vastly more money than all previous presidents combined.  While ISIS establishes a Caliphate in the Middle East, we have a border crisis with tens of thousands of people pouring into our country illegally, government abuses of our Bill of Rights, and the militarization of the police go unnoticed as emotionally detached citizens sit in front of their favorite television shows.  In a word, so many of our neighbors, family, and coworkers simply don’t care.  Life is a Cabaret, after all.  Leaders in both parties realize we no longer have a stake in defending our own freedom.  They know full well how easy it is to manipulate a witless population into promoting their agenda by convincing us to turn on each other, Republican versus Democrat, black against white, or men against women. Where will our apathy lead?  Sadly, as Clifford noticed in the play, apathy inevitably takes us to where it always takes us, into a period of profound darkness.  The question is, are Americans like Fräulein Kost, fatalistic with good hearts, but unwilling to stand up for what we know is right?  Are we willing to look past the hyped up, or even manufactured differences, with our neighbors to seek common ground with our neighbors?  Are we willing to live like men and women determined to be free!

 

In the Garden of Beasts: Love, Terror, and an American Family in Hitler’s Berlin, By Erik Lawson

Additional Resources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Flow_of_Information_Act

http://www.businessinsider.com/jimmy-kimmel-pranks-pedestrians-on-obamas-state-of-the-union-2014-1

 

Battle of Lepanto

The Battle of Lepanto – Podcast, by Buck Sexton

A little over a week ago I posted a historical perspective of how Western nations in conflict with the Islamic Caliphate have led us to where we are today, with ISIS on the march in the Middle East, once again seeking to regain a Caliphate.  I get that many people find history to be boring and to have little relevance in today’s world, but regardless of American’s non-existent attention span, these events, lead us directly into the events we face today.  Some may say that things were different in the 1500’s.   This is very much a true statement, yet the overall sweep on history is undeniable.   We live in a modern world, and in the West, at least, citizens are typically quite tolerant.  In contrast however, Islamic extremists are killing men, women, and children on a daily basis, in pursuit of a world that is very based on the primitive societies dating back to the beginnings of the Islamic world.

As I noted in previous articles, while all Muslims are certainly not radical extremists, radical extremists exist in every corner of the world, including in the United States and Europe.  The notion of Muslim conquest in today’s world is just as real as in centuries past.  In fact, Jihad by Muslim radicals, is historically undeniable.  Christianity has it’s own brutal past, but the difference today is that Muslims have yet to have a reformation, moderating primitive instincts.  While listening to Buck Sexton’s rendition of the Battle of Lepanto, one cannot help but see the similar imperatives Jihadist seek today.  This is truly a wonderful bit of very relevant history.

Enjoy!

 

Demonstrators celebrate in Tahrir Square in Cairo, Egypt, Friday Feb. 18, 2011. Tens of thousands of flag-waving Egyptians packed into Tahrir Square for a day of prayer and celebration Friday to mark the fall Hosni Mubarak.(AP Photo/Khalil Hamra)

If one recalled nothing else about the Roman Empire as it began to decline it was this, Roman citizens loved a good show. The spectacle and the grandeur of gladiators battling to the death, or perhaps the horror of watching Christians being eaten by lions was nothing if not visceral and gripping.  The escapism offered by up by Roman rulers to quell public appetites were as epic as they were debauched, assaulting the senses, tearing at people’s emotions.  Today’s debauched drama is about ISIS and the war in the Middle East.  It is a serious business, and certainly not orchestrated by the President, but like the Roman spectacles held in the coliseums of antiquity, today’s spectacle is nothing more than theatre to make Americans believe that their government is doing something about this planet’s decent into chaos.

In this modern world, Americans are all busy with their lives. Today, Americans go to work, care for the families and do their best to raise their children and expect government to protect its citizens, but what if the government is either unwilling or unable to confront the evil consuming the lives we witness on television?

ISIS Fighter on Sykes-Picot Agreement  – Warning!  Graphic content.

President Barack Obama claims the atrocities committed by ISIS, (Islamic State in Syria) or in his words, ISIL, (Islamic State in the Levant,) are unacceptable and will be resisted. What the president will not say is what he really means.  The truth is that he is categorically unwilling to do what would be required to end the atrocities by ISIS.  The truth is the US population, like the populations in many Western nations is deeply divided on most issues concerning the Middle East.  Citizens in Western nations are war-weary; still, the vast majority of people in the West are horrified and sickened by the brutality displayed by ISIS.  When ISIS beheads a Western reporter or aid working and posts the video for everyone to see, it shakes civilized people to their core.  When we hear that thousands of women and children are being raped, crucified, and beheaded it shocks us to such a point we demand action.  What is a president to do?  Short of all-out war akin to the effort of the Allies in WWII by a united and committed West on the Middle East, nothing will change.  There are hundreds of millions of people in the Middle East.  Regardless of sect, tribal, or ethnic divisions the vast majority of this population is antagonistic to the West.  It has been this way for centuries.  As Americans, we think we are so modern, and we are by comparison, but the world-view of the West is only half of the equation when discussing violence in the Middle East.  There over three-hundred-million people in the Middle East who look at things very differently.  While Europeans and Americans think about the problem in terms of years or even decades, for Arabs, the perspective is much longer.  Last week ISIS put out a video talking about the Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916 during WWI.

This agreement was designed to accomplish one important goal, to divide Arab tribes and to keep them fighting amongst themselves, so that the imperial powers could maintain their trade routes. At the same time Colonel TE Lawrence, (Lawrence of Arabia) promised the Arabs that the West would support them in their goal to replace the Caliphate ruled by the Ottoman Empire with a new Caliphate centered in Syria, if these tribes would fight with the British and the French against Germany, Austria-Hungary, and The Ottoman Empire. Obviously, the West lied.  The ISIS fighter in the video pointed to one of the artificial national boundaries created by the French, Britain, and Russia.  He pointed out that the border no longer exists.  In other words, ISIS is erasing the Sykes-Picot Agreement on the ground.

Sykes Picot Map 1916 - worldbulletin.net

Sykes Picot Map 1916 – worldbulletin.net

These facts on the ground bring us up to the term ISIL that President Obama uses instead of the more common ISIS. The term ISIL, (Islamic State in the Levant), includes territory all along the eastern end of the Mediterranean.  The Levant is the territory once ruled by the Ottoman Empire.  It includes Jordan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, and parts of Egypt.  It also precluded the existence of Israel.  Look at those names on the map.  How many of these countries have already been destabilized.  President Obama, Senators like McCain, Graham and others from both parties spoke in such glowing terms about the Arab Spring.  These men couldn’t wait to go to war in Lybia.  Just this year, Mr. Obama pronounced a red line related to Libya’s chemical weapons and moved to go to war over Syria, only to be rebuffed by overwhelming opposition by the American people.  A CNN/ORC International poll written about in September of last year shows that eighty percent of Americans believe that regardless that Bashar al-Assad was gassing his citizens, a strong majority opposed Congress passing a resolution authorizing a military force against him.  The article states that over seventy percent doubt that such strikes would accomplish the goals set out by the administration and believe it is not in US interest to get involved in the Syria’s civil war.

Now, after the barbaric beheading of two Americans and the atrocities being committed daily, the President has what he wants, a pretext to arm the so-called moderate Syrian rebels.  In all honesty, Americans know that there is nothing moderate about the groups fighting in the Levant.  Mr. Obama and his Republican friends are bending over backwards to give weapons and support to people whose primary goal in life is to put an end to Bashar al-Assad and to promote the reestablishment of the Caliphate.  Consider this, after Bashar al-Assad has been deposed in the coming months, how likely it is that these so-called moderate Syrian rebels will fight ISIS?  How sure can American leaders be that these so-called moderate Syrian rebels are not themselves sympathetic or actually part of ISIS?  How likely is that they might make an accommodation with ISIS or perhaps then turn on Jordan?  After all, Jordan is the only remaining state in the Levant other than Israel that hasn’t yet been destabilized.

Most Americans realize that Islamic extremism has been a reality for as long as Islam has existed but whether radical Islam is an existential threat to Western Culture has been as dependent on the West as it is on radical Islamists. In other words, when Western Culture is strong and Islamic extremism is disheartened and without support, the threat is more of an irritant than a fundamental threat to other cultures.

What popular culture fails to make common knowledge is that while typical Americans think of North Africa as being the seat of Islamic culture, it was home to Christianity, with some of the oldest Christian communities in the world. Obviously Islam not only dominates the Middle East, but has spread in force to the Pacific Rim in countries like Malaysia, and into Europe, South America, and even into the United States.

While there are millions of Muslims who are happy to live and let live along side of other cultures, Islamic extremism is a constant aspect that goes wherever Islam goes. One can go back centuries into the past, even before the Pope Urban declared the original Crusade in 1095 to see Islamic conquests.

Islamist, like their progeny today held prisoners for ransom and beheaded their enemy’s. During the late 700’s Muslim conquests had pushed almost as far as Paris and might well have taken over Europe had Charles Martel and his son Charlemagne not repelled them after the fall of the Western Roman Empire.  It’s fair to say that the Islamic threat was nothing if not an existential threat to the European way of life.   As history continued to unfold, the West, fueled by technology and a culture of enlightenment outpaced the extremists, becoming relatively stronger than the Muslim states opposing them.  While Islamist extremists attacked Christians visiting the holy sites in Jerusalem during the High Middle Ages, leading to the Crusades, the conflict in no way threatened the way of life in Europe.  Jihadists have always been a threat, but only in recent years have they begun to become a threat to Western Civilization.  The United States faced radical Islam for as long as we have been a nation.  President Thomas Jefferson oversaw the creation of the first American Navy because our sailors were being captured and the Jizyah, (ransom) was just too expensive for the young nation to afford.  President Jefferson sent the United States Marines to crush the extremist.  Even as a young nation, America was able to keep the Islamists at bay.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Barbary_War

In our world today, whether to obtain cheap oil, to buy off Arabic leaders from whom we wanted something, or to buy friendship from Arabic leaders to promote us in our dealings on the world stage, we have transferred trillions of dollars in wealth to the Middle East. These dollars have then in turn been used to fuel radical Islam all over the world.  Considering Western dependence on oil, and the debt levels in the West, how secure to you currently feel that Europe and America remains capable of a robust defense of our culture?

Considering where the world is today, the West has fueled Islamic extremism with petro-dollars and economic aid for decades. While the world has witnessed, or if you prefer Mr. Obama’s term, “managed” Islamic extremism throughout history, the real question is this: Are Europeans and Americans too war-weary, too divided, and too in debt to repel the current conquest by Islamic extremism?  No one wants to consider if radical Islam is coming for them, but if one considers the radical Islamist’s perspective, is there a time in recent history when the West was weaker or radical Islamists were stronger?  If you are the enemy and want to see a Caliphate come to pass, if not now, when?

Yes, the West has seen Islamic extremism before in the world, and the West was able to defeat it. However today’s world is different.  Today Western nations are all but bankrupt, and like Rome in antiquity, the West has over extended itself.  Americans and Europeans do not wish to engage in a battle of civilization.  For this reason, instead of facing the world as it is, Mr. Obama choses to put on a dog and pony show.  He puts on a play for the world stage designed to give comfort and to assuage Americans demand for justice.  Unfortunately, if you look at the world from an Islamist’s point of view, Islamic extremists have never been stronger, and the West is divided and weak, unwilling to do what it takes to defend itself.  If the American way of life is to survive, Western nations will have to become serious about the threat we all face.  Western nations must become energy independent, and we must be realistic about the threats we all face.  To win a battle for civilization, the West will have to find a way to unite on key concepts, namely that a battle for civilization is being waged and to retain freedom the West will have to fully engage in the battle to win it.

Additional Resources:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/09/18/the-100-year-old-agreement-you-need-to-know-about-if-you-want-to-understand-whats-driving-the-islamic-state/

http://www.ancient.eu/article/635/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWHn96DXRDE.  Warning – Graphic Content

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/09/politics/syria-poll-main/index.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Barbary_War

 

 

 

Photo Credit: Submitted by Brandon Smith of Alt-Market blog,

 

Like most Americans, I spent the last few weeks watching the drama of events taking place following a police officer killing an unarmed black teenager in Ferguson, Missouri.  On the surface this story is about race and police brutality, or perhaps it is about the militarization of the police, but these topics are not what are actually driving this story.  What if the drama we see unfolding has a root cause that goes deeper than what the pundits tell us the story is all about?  What if the events we are following on TV and social media indicate something about the nature of each of us that is leading us into a time of profound darkness.  America has always been great because America has been run by decent hard working citizens.  Today far many Americans abdicate our responsibilities to the so-called experts.  Today, our declining faith in God, our inability to even hold a debate about important topics, and our loss of trust make tragedy all but inevitable.

A few months ago the drama playing out before Americans was the stand off at the Bundy Ranch.  Before that Americans were witness to the drama of Occupy Wall Street.  Obviously, there have been similar events throughout U.S. History.  In the nineteen-sixties, I would even offer that the level of anger exhibited by citizens was as serious and wide spread as it is today.  Bill Clinton had Waco and the LA Riots surrounding the acquittal of a police officer for the beating of Rodney King.  George W. Bush had his war protests.  American history is full of strife including a civil war.  The question is how mush stress can the culture take before tragedy occurs?

Disgruntled Americans making their feelings known is part of American culture and American history, and our constitution guarantees our right to assemble and to petition the government.  It’s perhaps easy to believe that these issues today, Occupy Wall Street, the Bundy Ranch stand off, and the Rioting in Ferguson are simply more of the same and don’t indicate anything special.  Perhaps these events don’t portend anything dire awaiting America, but how sure are you that the fabric of our culture and our legal system will remain intact?  All things being equal, these events are not any worse on their own than other events in history that the nation has successfully navigated and survived to tell the tale.  On the other hand, I would like to point out that the history now taking place concurrent to these events may be of some concern.  The fabric of any culture can withstand only so much stress before it tears.  The protestors in Ferguson say they are angry at the injustice of a white cop killing an innocent, unarmed, black teenager.  What will happen if the facts determine that the teenager was the aggressor and that the officer acted appropriately?  I think most Americans would acknowledge that additional riots are possible, if not likely.  If the officer is innocent, will he receive justice, or will corrupt officials sacrifice him to maintain peace, or if you like, will he receive social justice?  If he is innocent and sacrificed for the sake of the collective, how willing will other officers be to do their jobs?  Unlike past events our nation has survived, the challenges occurring today are happening at the same time as multiple serious challenges to our way of life in the United States.

Western nations, including the United States are all but bankrupt.  The US is over seventeen trillion dollars in debt and has had to resort to relying on the Federal Reserve to create money out of thin air.  The Federal Reserve then turns around and buys US treasuries with these fictional dollars.  According to a US Border Patrol support group, over six million Illegal immigrants are flooding across the United State’s southern border every year, In the Middle East today, a well funded, well armed, Caliphate is being formed regardless of western nations spending trillions of dollars to plant the seeds of freedom in the region.  As you read this article, psychopathic fascist Jihadists are murdering, raping and torturing men, women, and children in appalling numbers.  Israel, as is so often the case in modern history, at war with an enemy who’s only real demand is that Israel not exist.  In Europe, the Russian Federation under Mr. Putin has invaded and taken over the Crimea from Ukraine, regardless of treaties guaranteeing Ukrainian sovereignty.  Russian soldiers are now firing artillery shells from Ukrainian soil at Ukrainian military units.  At home in the United States, government officials, supported by the media tell Americans not to worry about these things, while at the same the very same government officials violate existing law to promote a statist agenda seeking to make Americans dependent on government to survive.  According to the Senate Budget Committee approximately one in six Americans are now on food stamps.  The American President actually brags about this statistic as if it were a positive indicator.  The household income of Americans is falling while the cost of energy, food, education, medical care, and housing are increasing.  The federal government takeover of the health care industry now requires that Americans have medical insurance that costs dramatically more that most families can afford.  These new policies have deductibles that make the policy all but worthless to those who need it.  This insurance is of course subsidized by the government.  The truth in America is that the prices for the basics of life will continue to rise, how will Americans like those protesting in Ferguson react when they no longer afford that which they must have?

My point, you ask? America has always faced challenges and there have even been times of great strife in our history, but rarely have we faced this great a number of threats at the same time.  In the 1860’s and a hundred years later in the 1960’s the country faced simultaneous challenges that threatened our way of life in the US.  The country survived the Civil War, but at what cost?  The conflict caused the cultural fabric of the country to tear resulting in hundreds of thousands of American casualties.  How willing are Americans today to endure that high cost.  Even during the 1960’s America came uncomfortably close to disaster.  One might make the argument that we are still seeing the results of that conflict today as many of the same leaders still agitate for their collectivist and anti-American agenda.

60s RiotsThe riots in Ferguson paled in comparison to riots taking place in the 1960’s, but the underlying tension and division in the country is clearly in place for a disaster to occur.  Recent elections reflect this division.  The vitriol in the country continues to increase.  Political leaders will say and do almost anything to win an election.  I postulate that our governmental institutions are becoming more and more illegitimate every day.  Man on the street interviews reflect citizen’s apathy.  Many Americans are simply ignorant about key issues today.  Far too many of our country men and women are in fact emotionally detached from the country.  In a word, they simply don’t care.  Many Americans no longer believe in the great experiment that is the American Republic and they seem to no longer have a stake in defending their own freedom.  Our leaders know how easy it is to manipulate a witless population into promoting their agenda, so more and more, they put out propaganda that sounds good but resolves nothing.  The corporate – political elites know that the truth is irrelevant.

In an environment where trust is steadily being destroyed by the unreported stories, misrepresentations, and blatant lies of the media, government, and various civic leaders, low information citizens who only know that things are messed up, react badly when agitated by their media puppet masters.  They can see for themselves that their government violates its own laws with impunity.  They can see some citizens getting special privileges.  Americans know we are being lied to, but far too many of us still blame those the puppet masters tell us to blame.  We see the lies, but we dismiss them as routine.  We just don’t yet realize that leaders we identify with are part of the problem.  The risk present in today’s environment is that unlike previous times of great tension.  Americans no longer believe or trust anyone, and fewer and fewer Americans have faith in God.  We don’t trust the government or the police, we don’t trust business, we don’t trust the media, and we don’t trust each other.  This is a real problem because where there is no trust, and we have no faith that even our government will keep its word, how can we work together to resolve our differences?  When opposing sides in a debate cannot communicate, pressure builds and conflict becomes inevitable.  The problems we face in today’s world are not new, but they are serious. As Alexis De Tocqueville said, “America is great because she is good.  If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”  Today, American’s declining faith in God, and our loss of trust are like gasoline.  The only question is which of the many sparks will ignite a conflagration.  The only way to avoid tragedy is to care enough to look past the agendas and talking points, not only of our opponents but past the agendas and talking points of those we support also.  We must regain our faith in a creator and we must find ways to love each other before all is lost.

Alexis_de_tocqueville

Zero Hedge’s article, “When ‘Anti-Government’ Violence Erupts, Who Is Really At Fault?” really is a must-read. If we are to avoid the dystopian future I wrote about in Phoenix Republic from becoming fact instead of fiction.  We must understand where we are on the road to some really dark outcomes.

john-cornyn-reuters

 

Following the Nazi seizure of power in 1933, Hitler established a Reich Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda headed by Joseph Goebbels. The Ministry’s aim was to ensure that the Nazi message was successfully communicated through art, music, theater, films, books, radio, educational materials, and the press.

While nobody that I am aware of is making the case that the United States Government has a “Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda”, many people from both the political left and from the political right acknowledge that on average Hollywood leans decisively to the left. Progressives in music and entertainment routinely support a collectivist point of view. In fact, unless you are already a huge star, holding conservative points of view will get you fired. Furthermore, late last year Chucky Schumer and Lindsey Graham proposed their “Free Flow of Information Act” which recently passed the Senate Judiciary Committee. Looking at the title of the bill it looks great. Who couldn’t be for the “Free Flow of information” after all?

Of course, as with most things emanating from Washington D.C. one must be very careful about what is in the fine print. What elitist progressive political types like Chucky Shumer and Lindsey Graham, who co-authored the bill don’t want Americans to realize is that they are not really all that interested in the free flow in information. What they are keenly interested in is the ability to say who might be anointed to watch over them and report on their activity. It is, after all, really inconvenient to have real investigative reporting about the epic failures they call policy; or have their self-involved, corruption brought to light by heroes like Michelle Maulkin, or Dana Loesh.

michelle-malkin 

 

 

 

Senators Schumer and Graham’s bill, if approved will exempt anyone who is considered a “covered journalist” from subpoenas and other legal efforts to require that they expose their confidential sources. For anyone supporting freedom of press, protecting whistle blowers is a good thing, but sadly it is far outweighed by the idea that government is the entity that decides who is an “approved” journalist. How convenient is that? If government officials don’t want to have their corruption exposed by an aggressive investigative reporter all they have to do is designate or license who can be a journalist in the first place.

Gobels

After the February 1933 Reichstag Fire, Hitler eviscerated freedom of the press, requiring all news to be approved by Joseph Goebbels’ Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda. Surprisingly, today’s mainstream press seem to have no issue with this bill, but my question for them or for any American for that matter who claims to support freedom is this. How is government having approval authority over who can be a journalist any different than actually having approval authority over a news story that journalist might write. Goebbels required that anyone involved in media sign loyalty oaths to the Nazi Party. If you didn’t care for these restrictions you could be imprisoned or executed.

While in today’s world the progressive movement is smart enough not to actually require loyalty oaths, do you notice how quickly the progressive thought police turn on anyone who dares to state an independent opinion. Juan Williams was a senior news analyst for NPR until he stepped outside of progressive orthodoxy in October of 2010 for his comments on Muslims. Regardless of consistently supporting progressive positions, the man was unceremoniously fired for not adhering to progressives fascist talking points. Similarly, just this week there is a controversy involving Juan Williams’ son, Raffi Williams. In this case, Raffi Williams, who is a conservative, was vilified because he dared to have a conservative point of view as a black man.   Similarly, Dr. Ben Carson was also excommunicated by progressives in February of 2013 for daring to politely and respectfully disagreeing with President Obama’s policies.

My point here is that it isn’t necessary to have a mustache twirling Snidely Whiplash type of character like Joseph Goebbels approving stories. All progressive elitists require is to set up a process that achieves the same result. Republican Senator, John Cornyn told Breitbart News “They want to pick and choose which journalists are covered. In other words, if you’re a blogger they might not cover you, but if you work for the New York Times they might. Given the changes in the way we get information and the way we consume news, that really smacks to me in essence of government licensing who’s an official ‘journalist’ for the purposes of a shield law and who’s not. If there is one thing I can glean from the First Amendment, it is that government should not be in the business of licensing the news media.”

Bloggers are a existential threat to progressive control over the narrative that the general public is presented. Progressives are far from stupid. The new media is quickly supplanting the old centralized model of network television news. If progressives wish to retain control over the conversation they must eliminate dissenters.

Additional Resources:

The Phoenix Republic, The Lone Star Gambit

Phoenix Banner 10.09.13

http://personalliberty.com/2014/03/28/bill-authorizing-government-to-define-legitimate-journalism-a-political-albatross-for-rinos-democrats/

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/03/26/Exclusive-Cornyn-Rips-Schumer-s-Media-Shield-Law

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005202

 

 

Photo Credit: George Roelofson

When nations are faced with the ramifications of catastrophic economic collapse, things can become dicey for citizens.  Let’s face it, life today is pretty hectic.  Typically, both parents in a family have to work full time to make ends meet, and that is assuming there are two parents and not only one.  In our routine day to day lives, we have kids and their school activities, social obligations, and of course family who require out attention.  It is easy to get lost in the day to day and not have the time or energy to take a step back to see the macro view of our lives.  It is easy to just accept the cliff-notes view that is handed to us by the mass-media.

Consider, if you will, a nation that has out-of-control spending and ever-increasing regulation.  This nation had suffered a financial collapse with ever-increasing unemployment, and as a result, it repeatedly attempted to use “shovel ready” public projects to get its citizens working again.  A recovery could not be achieved, so this nation’s leaders felt they had no choice but to begin printing more and more currency to artificially prop up the financial system.  As always occurs, this led to unprecedented levels of inflation.

This scenario above depicts a nation experiencing a catastrophic economic collapse.  Human beings being human beings responded by demanding security.  Leaders being leaders responded by seizing power and taking steps to control the situation.  Unfortunately the situation was uncontrollable.  As things became dire, this nation’s citizens were willing to grasp at any straw as long as someone would make their lives work again.  They were willing to accept almost any degradation.

The nation, vulnerable and financially bankrupt, was a fertile field for an opportunist to take advantage of.  This opportunist represented a party that was willing to make one segment of the population a scapegoat for the economic hardships that citizens were experiencing.  In effect, this leader blamed the rich.  As you might guess the strategy was fantastically successful.  The only problem was that the nation’s constitution guaranteed rights that were a problem for these parties’ plans.  The solution was to ignore those constitutional guarantees.

Picture from article by: Daniel Castillo By now you have likely guessed what nation I am referring to.  What is frightening is that when we see today’s news, how much of what happened then is taking place now.  I noticed on this week, on the first Friday of the New Year, a judge ruled that the majority of Americans were now subject to search and seizure of their electronic devices like laptops and iPhones.  That’s right.  If you live and work within 100 miles of the coast or a international border, this ruling says law enforcement can go through your belongings on a whim – no search warrant needed.  In similar fashion, earlier last week, Americas witnessed citizens lining up in Connecticut to register their weapons and ammunition.  This is another key step that earlier regime took.  I have noted other examples in earlier posts, but you get the point.  My thought is that it is our duty as American citizens to keep our eyes open and take note of the news items we see, not as an individual incident, but as a puzzle piece in a larger picture.  It is incumbent on each of us to resist the loss of freedom lest we find ourselves going down the same path that German citizens did in the 1930’s.  There is a threat out there from terrorism, but my question to you is this.  Are the government over-reaches and their ignoring our constitution really making us any safer?  I can only speak for myself, but I am much, much more afraid of unaccountable government thugs than I am of terrorists.  If nothing else, there are many more government thugs, who while ‘just following orders,’ who can ruin a person’s life than there are terrorists in America.

The reason I wrote Phoenix Republic was and is to get Americans to wake up to the big picture.  We all have things we believe in and we should all do what we can to win hearts and minds with regard to achieving the best for our country.  My point is that there is a bigger picture than left vs. right politics.  We do not all have to agree on individual policies but it is imperative that we all agree on defending freedom.

Additional Resources:

First hand accounts:

The first of these, a woman named Irma from Massachusetts talks about the comparison between today’s America and what she experienced in Germany.  This is very compelling and I highly recommend listening to it.  The second link is another woman who lived under the Nazis.  Her presentation is 46 minutes long.  It is instructive and compares Germany to the US today – with excerpts of current events juxtaposed with the historic events she is speaking to.

Irma Shares With Buck Sexton The Horror of Living Under Tyrannical Government 

Related news stories:

http://www.truthandaction.org/judge-reaffirms-constitution-free-zones-100-miles-inside-u-s-borders/

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/12/31/looks-like-weimar-germany-the-viral-photo-out-of-connecticut-thats-giving-some-gun-owners-chills/

http://www.history.ucsb.edu/faculty/marcuse/classes/33d/projects/1920s/Econ20s.htm

Nuclear Option

Last week the senate controlled by the Democrats took the unprecedented step of changing senate rules so that judicial appointments now only require fifty-one votes to be confirmed.  For the past two hundred and fifty years that threshold has been sixty votes.  Watching the news last week, I noticed political pundits went on extensively about the meaning and impact of this unprecedented step.  While the change may not seem earthshaking, the results in coming years will be profound.  Regardless of the consequences of this action, only pundits and true political wonks will care, I fear.  The true impact however takes place after it’s too late to do anything to stop it.

Before going into the ramifications that this naked power grab represents; I think that it is worthwhile to define what the rule change is and what is impacted.  First of all, the rule change only effects presidential appointments, excluding the Supreme Court of the United States.  In other words the filibuster is still in place with regard to other legislation and the Supreme Court must still follow the traditional path with regard to constitutional requirement that the senate provide its advice and consent.  For this reason, I have had a couple of people ask me what difference it really makes.  Doesn’t a president deserve the right to appoint the nominees of his choosing?  Didn’t the Republican Party under President George Bush threaten to do the exact same thing for exactly the same reason? Generally, all things being equal, I would say that a president does deserve his nominees and yes, the Republicans did threaten to do the same thing.

The problem I have with these two points is that all things are not in fact equal.  For one thing, today the United States has a seventeen-trillion dollar debt, civil liberties are being destroyed, the federal government is ignoring the US Constitution, and the true unemployment rate is over thirteen percent, with young black males suffering the worst with over twenty-eight percent unemployment.  For another, the Republicans threatened to change the rules, but anyone who is paying attention is aware that they didn’t change the rules, did they?  Mr. Bush was guilty of pushing unwanted government on Americans too, but the current occupant of the White House is doubled down on Mr. Bush’s federal government over-reaches on an unprecedented scale.

The party in power has the absolute right to do a lot of things while they rule.  This rule change could have been enacted at any time in our history, yet it wasn’t.  The United States Senate operated under the sixty vote filibuster rule through the Civil War, both world wars, the Vietnam War, and the War on Terror.  I hardly think that any of these periods in American history were without controversy or disagreement regarding presidential appointments.  The problem as I see it today is that the world is approaching a nexus in history.  Although I believe that life’s pressures do cause history to repeat itself, we are not on a merry-go-round, we are in fact moving through time in a linear manner.  Key events do matter.

The problem with the Democrat Party taking this action now is that it unveils a clear strategy on their part to rule with no regard to the wishes of millions or American citizens.  This rule change will allow the President to change the makeup of the court, and or the ability to seat truly radical federal judges that will be in their positions for life.  Let me ask you something.  Is it a good idea or a bad idea to allow a president who has repeatedly expressed the willingness to go around congress with executive order the ability to stack the courts with appointees that may well support his extra-constitutional excesses?  The framers of the constitution specifically split power up amongst three branches and between the federal government and the states for a reason.  Absolute power corrupts, absolutely.

It seems to me that Rome went down a very similar path.  The Romans fought for freedom, established a republic, and became wildly successful.  Then, after a few generations of being the world’s only super-power, the culture became decadent.  Larger and larger numbers of Romans began to feel disenfranchised and the upper classes becoming lazy as the work ethic declined.  Eventually, it just didn’t mean that much to later generations to be a Roman citizen.  The moral decline in Rome is obvious.  We can see it represented in literature, and in public events such as took place in the Coliseum.  In a word, Roman lifestyles were more and more about instant gratification, gratuitous sex, and violence.  Any of this sound familiar?

Productivity declined causing the relative cost of government and the military to skyrocket.  Supporting the bloated cost of regulation and security became an ever increasing burden to the middle class, yet the entitlement culture in Rome demanded ever-increasing benefits, exacerbating Rome’s problems.  As it is today, some sectors of Roman society were under taxed while others faced confiscatory taxation.  It is today as it was then, all too easy to distract the masses by fomenting economic class warfare, pitting the rich against the poor.  Citizen’s allegiance to Rome diminished, and many supported the rise of a strong-man government over the individual responsibility inherent in a republic.

My point in this little jaunt through history is that when a culture declines it becomes very attractive for the ruling class to change the rules when events begin to become unmanageable.  Phoenix Republic is about western culture becoming unmanageable because it is simply too broken in too many places.  The culture in the twenty-first century United States is fragmented.  Millions of Americans feel that someone owes them something while millions more still cling desperately to the notions of individual, responsibility, and hard work.

By voting to change the filibuster rule with regard to appointments, the Democrats are poised to rubber-stamp judicial and senior administrative appointees with no consideration given to the minority party.  This move thus effectively silences the voices of millions of Americans who oppose Democrat’s progressive agenda of transforming this country.  In other words, I believe it’s credible to say that the United States is now transforming from a Republic into an Empire.  Every time the United States Constitution is disregarded for the sake of convenience or so-called safety, representative government is diminished.

Think about it.  How is an oligarchy of progressive leaders who dismiss the rights of citizens substantively different than the Roman Triumvirates that led to the end of that previous world super power?

Additional Resources:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2013/06/07/the-unemployment-news-is-worse-for-many/

http://www.usu.edu/markdamen/1320Hist&Civ/chapters/08ROMFAL.htm

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XnwBMoPll8

Flag4

During my lifetime, politics in the United States has always been left versus right as represented by the Democratic and Republican parties.  Our popular consciousness holds that the “two party system” has always been a part of the American landscape, more or less, since the founding of the republic.  Yes, there have been any number of other parties throughout history, and a few of those have even had their members make it to the White House.   Many Americans are comfortable with the idea of a two party system and to be sure, the fragmented mess and coalitions that result in European governments can produce some strange bed-fellows.  Still, when one speaks of the two-party system, many people assume that what we have today are those two parties.  This has been the case since President Lincoln’s election in 1861, but prior to President Lincoln there were Federalist, Democrats, Democratic-Republicans and Whigs.  Throughout our history the United States has experienced seventeen third-party runs for president of the United States.  The net result of these efforts varied, but the average percentage of the vote gained by a third party  run is eleven percent with Teddy Roosevelt’s Progressive Party taking over twenty-seven percent of the vote.

My point is this.  Political parties in the United States are living things.  Whenever a political movement becomes strong enough in this country, it gets absorbed into an existing political party, or one of the existing parties is defeated and ceases to exist.  People are people, and it’s only human for leaders of and existing establishment party to become arrogant.  The story of the Republicans rise to prominence is an example.  I posit that the Whigs simply refused to do anything meaningful about slavery.  They were more or less opposed to the idea of slavery, but the stakes were high and they preferred for political reasons to dissemble, to offer meaningless votes and act as if they were fighting slavery while all the while placating Democrat’s desire to allow the institution to continue.  That story sounds to me like today’s Republican Party negotiating with the Democrats over immigration, the debt ceiling or Obama-care.

They miscalculated.  Republicans swept to power on the votes of a largely moral and freedom loving public, which realized that the evil that was slavery must end.  The Whigs were destroyed, and their adherents were themselves absorbed into the Democrat or Republican parties.

Only fifty-one years after Lincoln’s election the Republicans were themselves tested by one of their own.  It was a just over a hundred years ago, a new century was dawning, and President Theodore Roosevelt wasn’t done with political office.  He wanted to “transform” the Republican Party into a progressive party.  He was short of money but won over twenty-seven percent of the vote anyway.  Those in power in the Republican Party were alarmed and reacted accordingly by moving sharply towards progressivism in order to capture those voters.  I argue that it was this election that killed the two-party system in the United States.  It wasn’t a quick death to be sure, but the Republicans have moved inexorably towards over regulating big-government since that time.

political modelIn the 1960’s LBJ’s “Great Society” moved culture sharply in the direction of dependency on government.  In the 1970’s the Democrats also had their own watershed moment.   The Vietnam War was raging and protests were both widespread and violent.  The Democratic Party basically “transformed” from being the party of liberal ideals to one of progressive socialist ideals.  What was once a progressive caucus within the Democratic Party seized power.  Like the Republicans before them, the Democrats have steadily moved towards democratic socialism.

Personally, it is my belief that since Lincoln parties have matured somewhat.  Politicians loathe giving up power.  Since Lincoln, the United States has settled into a pattern of Republican versus Democrat.  I don’t think that the American public suddenly stopped evolving politically, but rather that political leaders did a better job at maintaining the status quo.  In the 1860’s entrenched leaders knew well that they could be defeated and set out to make such an occurrence difficult to achieve again.

Now, a century later the progressive paradigm set in motion by President Roosevelt has fully blossomed.  Government controls every aspect of American’s lives, even violating the constitution upon which the republic was founded.  Whether from an honest desire to help citizens or just to obtain and consolidate power, today Americans are ruled by a one party system, the Progressive Party.  It has two wings, Republican Progressives and Democratic Progressives.  They put on a wonderful show and media types are more than happy to accommodate the theatrical performance that plays out in Washington DC or promote the endless debate on some pundit filled news channel.  They may have differences about what they want to control, but believe me, both wings of the party absolutely want the power to force Americans to submit to their all-knowing collective will.  If you have ever wondered why government excess is never dialed back, it is because the other wing of the party is always more than pleased to use the capabilities legislated by their predecessors to force its own will on America.

The problem today is that socialism doesn’t work.  It never has, but America is wealthy and there have always been ample sources of funding for progressives from both wings of the party to enact their schemes, or to buy votes.  The concern is that things are changing rapidly.   The days of the US dollar being the reserve currency may well be numbered.  More and more nations are moving away from the US dollar.  Nations like Germany have asked for their gold reserves to be returned.  OPEC which used to trade only in dollars for its oil is now making side deals with countries like Russia and China in currencies’ outside the dollar.  When Barak Obama campaigned on transforming America he was only putting icing on the cake.  The system is too broken in too many places.  Catastrophe is far too likely for my comfort.  Today’s political topology is not about an argument between the left and right, but about an argument between authoritarianism and freedom.  My concern is that both progressive Republicans and progressive Democrats are well aware that the clock is running out.  If that is true it would explain why leaders from the political class in both parties would fail to investigate the NSA spying on every American.  It explains giving the IRS and EPA a pass when they clearly break the law by illegally targeting political opponents.  It explains the unprecedented procurement by the federal government of literally billions of rounds of ammunition.  It explains why both parties overwhelmingly voted to authorize the indefinite detention of Americans without trial in the National Defense Authorization Act from 2012.  It explains the bailouts of the major corporate interests.  Ask yourself, is it at least possible that elites in the political industrial class are preparing for an economic tsunami.  If one assumes the political class believes this outcome is likely they would certainly need an authoritarian structure to ensure their retaining control.

A nation cannot endure with socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor.  The greatest number of people in history have benefited by an economic process where free people served others by serving themselves.  Collectives don’t get out of bed in the morning.  They don’t risk what they have to try and make a better mouse trap.  They don’t work seven days a week, or work late into the night to achieve success.  Individuals do these things.  Where there is no individual incentive to prosper or where a collective steals too great a portion of the fruits of an individual’s work mediocrity is the inevitable result.  Phoenix Republic is a novel about what it feels like for an average American when this progressive leviathan collapses in on itself.  Maybe the Tea Party or some other freedom group will prevail and “transform” the Republican Party back to a political party that represents free Americans.  Maybe, like the Whigs, the establishment lions in leadership positions fail to see what is happening and a new party will be born, restoring two parties to the American political landscape.  The question in today’s rapid paced world is this.  Do we have enough time to avoid disaster?  Take a moment to do a search on Teddy Roosevelt’s “Bull Moose Party.”   History clearly acknowledges that the party was a progressive party.  Incidentally, while researching this week’s article, I noticed that four of the first six presidents, (March 4, 1801 – March 4, 1829,) of the United States of America were Democratic-Republicans…   Ironic, Isn’t it?

Additional Resources:

http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/dont-cry-for-me-america-comparing-argentina-and-the-united-states/

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-11-02/how-world-really-works-documentary

(Editor’s note:  I am not sure how I feel about this video.)

I agree that political and corporate elitist are working together against the best interest of the United States.  I am not sure that this video advocates for collectivism, but I did see some collectivist themes presented.  Regardless, it is good food for thought.  Things are changing fast.  It is imperative that we know what is happening around us.