By: Jack Perry
Reprinted from Lew Rockwell.com
I want to be as fair-minded as I can in what I am about to say. Now, the media acts like the government has been running better than a Swiss watch for the last eight years. And I don’t want to sit here and act like it ran like a Swiss watch the eight years before that, either. Nor will it run like one going forward. Why? Because it is still the government we are talking about. One man isn’t wholly responsible for this train wreck we see before us. But what’s more, one man will not be fully responsible for future messes, as much as the media would have us believe.
I will save time and refer to our federal government as Guv from here on. Look here, Guv, the population of homeless people has been increasing every year. Now, how is it that you’re able to run around and blather this nonsense about us being “the greatest nation on Earth” when every city park looks like a refugee camp? And why do they look like refugee camps? Because they are! They’re economic refugees! You clowns have collectively spent the prosperity of three or four generations now! And for what? The Vietnam War? The Iraq War? This horrifying nightmare you brought to us trying to bring Dumbocracy to Syria? I see the homeless every day. More than half are seriously mentally ill. No, let local police handle it, right?
Speaking of the homeless, there are flyers and handbills everywhere telling homeless veterans where they can try and get help. No, not from the VA. I’m talking hot meals, showers, a place to sleep. Some of them are so recently discharged, you can hear their dogtags still jangling under their shirts as they walk. See, these are the results of your trying to bring “democracy” to people who will fight tooth and nail to keep your version of that out of their countries. But you’re done with them, right? Again, let the local police handle it. We’ve got a war to start with Russia, after all.
I’m tired of hearing this nonsense about how great Guv has been for the last eight years. Sorry, but this is the same Guv that has been in control for over a couple hundred years now and they’ve done nothing but pauperize huge swathes of the nation that used to have economic stability. Tax this, tax that, pass this law, sign BS trade treaties over here, jail people for smoking weed, and on and on it goes. We have more people per-capita in prison than the Soviets had socked away in gulags and you jokers want to tell me we’re so great? Flush out your headgear, dummies. You jail people over smoking some flowers while you people commit multiple felonies, torture human beings, start illegal wars, and kill people all over the planet and not one of you—not one!—sees a day of jail time for it. No, jail is also the relocation camp for the economic refugees your insane policies have created. And the mentally ill, too, by the way.
The poor, yeah, you’re all so keen on us, aren’t you? As if we’re cute little waifs in a Norman Rockwell painting that you condescend to flip a dime to on the street corner. Excuse me, but the fundraisers you all attend cost $25,000 a plate. That’s more than we earn in a year! And, what, Guv? You think you KNOW us and what our needs are? Many of us haven’t even heard of the crap you serve at these shindigs and you want to act like you’re in solidarity with us? Here’s a news flash for you: I don’t trust any of you and I don’t even like any of you. I’ve seen too many broken promises. Too many people that went to jail for weed while you people, again, committed multiple felonies and flippin’ walked.
You do these stupid things like provoking the Russians—the Russians!—and act like we’re all behind you on this? Yeah? We’re the one that will be incinerated. If we’re lucky. You’ll all be hiding in those bunkers you built for yourselves with that 100 year supply of Xanax and heaven alone knows what other drugs you stashed away down there. Right, no jail terms for you! Let some poor soul have a bottle of Xanax without a prescription, he goes to jail. You guys stash a century’s worth of it for a couple thousand people to party like it’s Doomsday (because it is) and they probably high-fived throughout the Pentagon and put in a few purchase requisitions for Quaalude's.
Look here, Guv, what makes you think you’re so dang smart? Smart people don’t get into wars they can’t win because they don’t get into wars. Look at the Swiss. They make nice watches. They make lots of nice stuff besides that. Why? Because they’re not flushing away their prosperity down the commode on senseless wars that drain the economy. You run around with this BS meme that “war is good for the economy” and the only “economy” it’s good for is the offshore one the CIA has through black markets, shell corporations, and bogus bank accounts. Man, the German SS had nothing on these guys! Those bush league buffoons in black uniforms wouldn’t make it through Day One at Langley. Not crooked enough. Great team you’ve got there, Guv. CIA means Crooks In America.
You created a humanitarian disaster in Syria and a war of epic proportions. That war will not be truly be over for a decade, I’ll bet. And the terrorist attacks coming from it will plague Europe and the United States for two decades, at least. And for what?! Democracy?! My word, do any of you realize what you have done?! Almost 300,000 people dead and more to die and you think they care about voting for some charlatan with a pass key to the bathroom at Langley? If this goes on, in order to have elections in Syria, you’ll need to hold a mass seance. You spent how many hundreds of millions of dollars on this insane war and vets from the last one are sleeping on the streets. Bravo, Guv! Outstanding performance! Those Hollywood celebrity policy parrots will be glad to play you in the next movie to glorify this endless slaughter. Then you can invite them up to the White House and give them the ear you have long refused to give to the real people who aren’t playing real people on TV.
You see, Guv, I am not fooled by this. I know that it doesn’t matter who is president, the United States military, probably on orders from the CIA, will continue to provoke the Russian military until someone gets nervous and shoots. Bravo! The border skirmish we’ve all been waiting for! Now we can jump right in and lose another war. Notify local police departments across America that the homeless population will soon be increasing rather rapidly. Well, those who live anyway. Right, let’s park American troops in Poland. Because that’s right where the last world war we had began in earnest. Might as well keep using a winning combination, right? Those poor, duped Poles. Waving American flags as American tanks and Humvees roll in. And none of them know they’re expendable and we can’t beat the Russians in a conventional war. Meaning Krakow will be a smoking, radioactive crater within 48 hours of a border skirmish escalating into a full-scale launch-on-warning. Let’s see you wave American flags then.
And how does a war with Russia help us, exactly? Oh, I know! Then we can pass more wartime measures, more laws that will probably govern and dictate when a red flag needs to pop up on a Homeland Security because someone checked out a “flagged” book at a public library in Twin Falls, Idaho. “Patriotic Americans will not read Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, or any such Russky propaganda! We have instructed public libraries to remove these books from their shelves and give us a list of names of who has checked them out over the last twenty years! If any librarian refuses to do so, he or she will be subject to arrest as a person-of-interest! And anyone found in possession of music by Shostakovich is subject to arrest! Let no one even think of cooking Beef Stroganoff! After all, if it saves just one life…” That’s how you think, isn’t it, Guv? Everyone is a suspect, everyone is guilty. Except you, Guv. And you’re the one actually committing the crimes! Brilliant! Perfect alibi! “How can I be the crook? I wrote the laws!”
So don’t hand me this crap that the government has been rolling along, slick as you please, for the past eight years. The government has rolled the world into a humanitarian disaster. The government is rolling the world into another world war. And the most fascinating thing about it is that most of Europe, who will be the nuclear battlefield as far as the first salvos of tactical nukes go, thinks that Guv has not been behind it! And practically begs Guv to provoke the Russians even more! Ukraine changed hands between Russia and Poland for hundreds of years and, what, now we’re concerned about it? Gosh, how did they ever manage to bicker over this piece of territory while the United States was busy shooting its indigenous population in the name of Manifest Destiny? Right, Guv, you’ve got the proven track record on what can and cannot be done with lands and populations one side deems up for grabs, right? As long as you apologize for shooting them later, it’s all good. What? Give the land back? No, Guv has moved on. Now Guv tells other countries to give back land or enforces no-fly zones. And Europe seems to forget what their cities looked like the last time the Russians came through. And Guv, too, for that matter.
Right, everything has been just peaches and cream for the last eight years. Gosh, I know I’m impressed. Russia is conducting mass civil defense drills for the first time since the end of the Cold War. They’ve fielded another 100 thermonuclear warheads with dozens of new ICBMs. Gee, Guv, sure is a smart move to put troops into places where the possibility of a border clash is certain. Or, perhaps, some trigger-happy Polish soldier decides to “get even” and takes a shot at the Russians and hides behind an American tank. Or some Estonian. Or some U.S. naval vessel fires on a passing Russian warplane. “We can’t let the Russians embarrass us!” Indeed. It’s certainly worth the deaths of several billions of people to ensure we are never embarrassed.
It sure is swell to see everyone feel that the CIA is now telling us the truth. At least the news media does. Why not? Many of them probably get press releases from some press agency funded by In-Q-Tel. Look that one up. Right, CIA venture capital firm. Gee, Guv, exactly what companies do they fund anyway? Or do you even know? Of course they must be telling us the truth. Like they told us the truth about Iraq. And Syria. Now, we know the CIA tortured people. So if the news media affords this organization impeccable truthiness, it would be like the news telling us in 1939, “Oh, yes, we know the Soviets tampered with our elections. The Gestapo told us so!” Why not? Guv brought over several Nazi war criminals here during Operation Paperclip and afforded credibility to them, too. Must be where Guv learned it.
Nazi war criminals helped us win the Space Race, too. The one liberals think was so peaceful and not about proving who had the most accurate ballistic missiles. “If we can put a man on the moon, we can drop a warhead right into Leonid Brezhnev’s vodka tumbler!” Later, they padlocked psychiatric hospitals, shook them all out on to the streets, and built the Space Shuttle. Yay! The Guv-lovers all want more money spent on NASA. Well, in order to do that, we need to order local governments to build more city parks. That way, there will be a place for the burgeoning population of homeless to be sequestered. Then we can afford to send a mission to Mars to prove that planet is less viable than Death Valley. But, hey, we’ll beat the Russians to another orbiting sphere of lifeless rock! I understand Guv entertains notions of building a “base” on Mars. More likely, a secret prison for “unlawful enemy combatants” and other non-people who no longer exist. “It’s not on Earth! So no laws regarding the treatment of human beings apply! On Mars, we don’t even have to think of them as human beings!” But, no worries. They won’t be able to afford to cart the homeless up there.
Sell this government to someone else. I’m not buying it.
Editor's note: This is an excellent piece by Mr. Robert's but where the CSA disagrees is with a comment toward the end of piece that says the "left" has abandoned Marxism. They have not. That defines them. They are only interested in total control of the narrative of history, the dominance of society, and the rejection of those who are not in line with them.
By: Paul Craig Roberts
“Racist” is the favorite epithet of the left. Every white person (except leftists) is a racist by definition. As we are defined as racists based on our skin color, I am puzzled why we are called racists a second, third, and fourth time due to specific acts, such as favoring the enforcement of immigration laws. For example, President Donald Trump says he is going to enforce the immigration laws. For the left this is proof that Trump has put on the White Sheet and joined the KKK.
The left doesn’t say what a president is who does not enforce the laws on the books. But let’s look at this from the standpoint of the immigration laws themselves. In 1965 a bill passed by the “racist” Congress and signed by the “racist” President Lyndon Johnson completely changed the racial composition of US legal immigration.
In 1960 75% of US legal immigration was European, 5% was Asian, and 19% was from Americas (Mexico, Central and South America and Caribbean Islands).
In 2013 10% of legal immigrants were European, 30% were Asian, 55% were from Americas, and 5% from Africa. http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/fifty-years-1965-immigration-and-nationality-act-continues-reshape-united-states
The 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act is a very strange law for racists to have enacted. Would racists pass a law, which has been on the books for 52 years, that fundamentally transformed the racial profile of the US by limiting white immigration, thereby ultimately consigning whites to minority status?
We could say the racists did not know what they were doing, or thought they were doing something else. However, the results have been obvious at least since 1980, and the law is still on the books.
We live during a time when there is an abundance of information, but facts seldom seem to inform opinions. The left delights in branding the Founding Fathers racists. The left was ecstatic when a 1998 DNA study concluded that Thomas Jefferson was one of eight possible ancestors of Eston Hemings, a descent of Jefferson’s slave Sally Hemings. The left seized on the implied sexual relationship as proof of Thomas Jefferson’s racism.
Let’s assume Jefferson had a sexual relationship with Sally Hemings. Does this prove he was a racist, or does it prove the opposite? Why is it a sign of racism for a white to have sex with a black? Does this prove that James Bond was a racist in the film “Die Another Day”? Do we really want to define racially mixed marriages as racist, as a white conquest over a black, Asian, or Hispanic?
The left has declared the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution to be racist documents and, therefore, proof that the US was founded on racism. The left is particularly incensed that the Constitution counts enslaved blacks as three-fifths of a white person. Is the three-fifths clause a sign or racism, or was it a compromise to get an agreement on representation in the House of Representatives?
It was the latter. Indeed southerners, such as James Madison and Edmund Randolph, wanted blacks to be counted one to one with whites. It was northerners, such as Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania, who wanted blacks to count as fractions of a person. Why was this?
The issue was whether the North or the South would have majority representation in the House. The country already had different economic interests which came to conflict in the War of Southern Secession, which is mischaracterized as a civil war. (A civil war is when two sides fight for control of the government. The Confederacy was not fighting for control of the government in Washington. The South was fighting to secede from the union in order to avoid economic exploitation.)
The southern states were agricultural, and from early colonial times long before there was a United States or a Confederate States of America the absence of a work force meant that the agricultural labor force was imported as slaves. For the South slavery was an inherited institution, and from the South’s standpoint, if blacks were not included in the population on which US representation in Congress would be based, the South would have a minority voice in Congress and would not agree to the Constitution. The three-fifths clause was a compromise in order to move the Constitution toward agreement. It had nothing to do with racism. It was about achieving balance in regional representation in Congress. http://www.blackpast.org/aah/three-fifths-clause-united-states-constitution-1787
The Southern Secession resulted from divergent economic interests and was not fought over slavery. In former times when the left had real intellects, such as Charles A. Beard, a historian who stressed class conflict and a founder of the New School for Social Research and president of both the American Political Science Association and the American Historical Association, the left understood the divergence of interests between northern industry and southern agriculture. Those who think Lincoln invaded the South in order to free slaves need to read Thomas DiLorenzo’s books on Lincoln. DiLorenzo establishes beyond all doubt that Lincoln invaded the Confederacy in order to preserve the Union, that is, the American Empire, which has continued its growth into the 21st century.
The preponderance of war correspondence on both sides shows that few were fighting for or against slavery. According to the 1860 US census, slave owners were a small fraction of the Southern population. http://www.civil-war.net/pages/1860_census.html
The Confederate Army consisted almost entirely of non-slave owners who fought because they were invaded by Union armies.
The large agricultural interests (slave owners) had the money necessary for raising armies and were represented in the governing bodies. So naturally, their interests would be represented in the articles of secession.
As the war began with Lincoln’s invasion of the South, we should look to see Lincoln’s explanation for the war. The reason he gave repeatedly was to preserve the Union. Most historians understood this until “racism” became the explanation of all white history and institutions.
As for Thomas Jefferson, he was opposed to slavery, but he understood that the agricultural South was trapped in slavery. The “discovery” of the New World provided lands for exploitation but no labor force. The first slaves were white prisoners, but whites could not survive the malaria. Native Indians were tried, but they were not only as susceptible to malaria as whites but also used their native knowledge of the terrain to resist those who would enslave them. Blacks became the work force of choice because of genetic superiority in resistance to malaria. As Charles C. Mann reports in his book, 1493
, “About 97 percent of the people in West and Central Africa are Duffy negative, and hence immune to vivax malaria.”
Thus, the real “racist” reason that blacks became the labor force was their survivability rate due to genetic superiority from their immunity to malaria, not white racists determined to oppress blacks for racial reasons.
The myth has taken hold that black slavery originated in white attitudes of racial superiority. In fact, as a large numbers of historians have documented, including Charles C. Mann and the socialist economic historian Karl Polanyi, brother of my Oxford University professor, the physical chemist and philosopher Michael Polanyi, black slavery originated and flourished in Africa where tribes fought one another for slaves. The victorious would market their captives to Arabs and eventually as time passed to Europeans for transport to the new world to fill the vacuum of a missing labor force. (See for example, Karl Polanyi, Dahomey and the Slave Trade
It is a mystery how the myth of Thomas Jefferson’s alleged racism and love for slavery survives his drafts of the Declaration of Independence. One of Jefferson’s drafts that was abandoned in compromise over the document includes this in Jefferson’s list of King George’s offenses:
“he has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating it’s most sacred rights of life & liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. this piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the CHRISTIAN king of Great Britain. determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce: and that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, & murdering the people upon whom he also obtruded them; thus paying off former crimes committed against the liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another.”http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/declara/ruffdrft.html
Jefferson’s attack on King George sounds like the left’s racist attack on Jefferson.
It is amazing how proud some Americans are of their ignorance and how quick they are to hate based on their ignorance. In America the level of public discourse is so far below the gutter level that a person who ventures forth to tell the truth can expect to be met with violent hatred and every epithet in the book. Criticize ever so slightly the Israeli government’s theft of Palestine, and the Israel Lobby will immediately brand you an “anti-semite,” that is, a hater of Jews who wants to send them to the gas chamber. If you don’t denounce whites, especially Southern whites, as racists, you are not only a racist but also a member of the KKK who wants to lynch blacks.
Yes, I know. It works also in the other direction. If you don’t hate the left, you are one of them. Because I criticized the George W. Bush regime for its war crimes, conservatives branded me a “pinko-liberal-commie” and ceased to publish my columns.
Hardly anyone, even southerners, understands that racism in the South originated in the horrors that were inflicted on the South during the Reconstruction era that followed the military defeat of the Confederacy. The North inflicted blacks on southerners in ways that harmed prospects for relations between the races and gave rise to the KKK as a resistance movement. As Reconstruction faded, so did the KKK. It was later revived as a shadow of its former self by poor whites who were ambitious for personal power.
The question remains: How can President Trump or anyone unite a country in which historical understanding is buried in myths, lies, and the teaching of hate?
Try to imagine the expressions of hatred and the denunciations that this factual article will bring to me.
If we care about humanity and the creatures on Earth, our task is to find and to speak the truth. That is what I endeavor to do.
When the left abandoned Marxism and the working class, the left died. It has no doctrine to sustain itself, just hatreds based on historical ignorance and misunderstanding of the limits within which life is lived. Humans are not superheros or magicians who can reconstruct humanity by waving a wand or smashing evil. Everyone lives within limitations, and the many submit more than do the few.
It is the few who fight against the limits to whom we owe the defense of our humanity.
It is the haters who are the barriers to moral and social progress.
By: Patrick Buchanan
Re-posted from Lew Rockwell.com
Don’t Make Any Sudden Moves” is the advice offered to the new president by Richard Haass of the Council on Foreign Relations, which has not traditionally been known as a beer hall of populist beliefs.
Haass meant the president should bring his National Security Council together to anticipate the consequences before tearing up the Iran nuclear deal, moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem or shooting down a missile being tested by Kim Jong Un.
In arguing against rash action, Haass is correct.
Where the CFR and the establishment are wrong, and Donald Trump is right, however, is in recognizing the new world we have entered.
The old order is passing away. Treaties and alliances dating from the Cold War are ceasing to be relevant and cannot long be sustained.
Economic patriotism and ethnonationalism, personified by Trump, seem everywhere ascendant. Transnationalism is yielding to tribalism.
The greater danger for President Trump is that the movement he led will be abandoned, its hopes dashed, and the agenda that Trump rejected and routed will be reimposed by a Republican Establishment and its collaborators in politics and the press. Again, it was Trump who read the nation right, which is why he is taking the oath today.
The existential threat to the West no longer comes from the East, from a Russian army crashing through Poland and Germany and driving for the Elbe and Fulda Gap.
The existential threat to the West comes, instead, from the South.
The billion-plus peoples of the Maghreb, Middle East, and sub-Sahara, whose numbers are exploding, are moving inexorably toward the Med, coming to occupy the empty places left by an aging and dying Europe, all of whose native-born populations steadily shrink.
American’s bleeding border is what concerns Americans, not the borders of Estonia, South Korea, Kuwait or the South China Sea.
When Trump calls NATO “obsolete,” he is saying that the great threat to the West is not Putin’s recapture of a Crimea that belonged to Russia for 150 years. And if the price of peace is getting out of Russia’s face and Russia’s space, maybe we should pay it.
George Kennan himself, the architect of Cold War containment of Stalin’s Russia, admonished us not to move NATO to Russia’s border.
Of Brexit, the British decision to leave the EU, Trump said this week, “People, countries want their own identity and the U.K. wanted its own identity … so if you ask me, I believe others will leave.”
Is he not right? Is it so shocking to hear a transparent truth?
How could Europe’s elites not see the populist forces rising? The European peoples wished to regain their lost sovereignty and national identity, and they were willing to pay a price to achieve it.
Apparently, the Davos crowd cannot comprehend people who believe there are more important things than wealth.
Yet while President Trump should avoid rash actions, if he is to become a transformational president, he will spurn an establishment desperately seeking to hold onto the world that is passing away.
Article V of the NATO treaty may require us to treat a Russian move in the Baltic as an attack on the United States. But no sane president will start a war with a nuclear-armed Russia over Estonia.
No Cold War president would have dreamed of so rash an action.
Rather than risk such a war, Ike refused to send a rifle or bullet to the heroic Hungarian rebels in 1956. Painful, but Ike put America first, just as Trump pledged to do.
And given the strength of ethnonationalism in Europe, neither the eurozone nor the EU is likely to survive the decade. We should prepare for that day, not pretend that what is taking place across Europe, and indeed worldwide, is some passing fever of nationalism.
Notwithstanding Secretary of State-designate Rex Tillerson’s diktat, the United States is not going to force China to vacate the fortified reefs in the South China Sea she claims as her national territory.
Stick to that demand, and we best prepare for war.
As for the Taiwan card, it was played in 1972 by Richard Nixon as the price of his opening to China. Four decades ago, Jimmy Carter cut diplomatic ties with Taiwan and terminated our security pact.
For Xi Jinping to accept that Taiwan might be negotiable would mean an end of him and the overthrow of his Communist Party of China.
The Chinese will fight to prevent a permanent loss of Taiwan.
The imperative of the new era is that the great nuclear powers — China, Russia, the United States — not do to each other what Britain, France, and Germany did to each other a century ago over a dead archduke.
President Trump should build the wall, secure the border, impose tariffs, cut taxes, free up the American economy, bring the factories home, create millions of jobs and keep us out of any new wars.
With rare exceptions, wars tend to be fatal to presidencies.
By: Jack Perry
Re-posted from Lew Rockwell.com
I have said here a number of times, Buddhism teaches that nothing ever happens at random. Nothing just occurs out of the blue, all by itself. A series of causes and conditions leads up to it. Everything is governed by this. Rain doesn’t just fall. A series of causes and conditions leads up to it, many of which have nothing to do with water by appearance to the human eye. Everything is caused by other things happening. Nothing happens at random.
Now, the Democrats currently think that this presidential election is some random event that just happened without causes and conditions leading up to it. They also think some external factor—Russia—created something from nothing. That being, the random event of losing the election. Even if Russia was a factor, what causes and conditions led up to Russia getting involved? Would it not be the fact the Democrats have continually provoked them? But the Democrats have not proven this because the truth is much more obvious. In fact, the Democrats themselves were the primary cause that they lost the election and they put into motion the causes and conditions that led up to it.
What we need to understand is that we live in a country divided into two distinctly different cultures, if you will. I call these Middle America and Coastal America. We saw this manifest as the electoral colleges handing the win to Trump. But to understand this dynamic, we need to first define these two cultures. Coastal America is predominantly the West and East Coast and the massive populations they have, which represent the slight majority population of the United States. These are, though not all of them, liberals to one degree or another. Middle America represents land mass, that being, they occupy most of the states between the two coasts. They represent often conservative populations. The electoral win represents the win of Middle America over Coastal America in this election.Physical Gold & Silver in your IRA. Get the Facts.
In a cohesive nation, people define themselves as citizens of it. They would say, before anything else, “I am an American” and that would bind us together as a people regardless of race, gender, or sexual orientation. However, Coastal America does not do this. Coastal America is a place of dividedness, as much as they proclaim “diversity” and “inclusiveness”. No. They define themselves by what makes them separate from everyone else. That being, skin color, gender, or sexual orientation. What’s more, they then attempt to lay claim to more rights than everyone else, special accommodations, and more political voice than everyone else. To the point that they believe their political voice can silence opposition by smearing opposition as “hate” and so forth. What’s more, they also say everyone else cannot “understand” them, therefore, outbursts of anger are supposed to be tolerated by everyone else. Thus, in truth, it is the Democrats who created the atmosphere of dividedness in this country because it is their special interest groups who set themselves above everyone else and separated themselves.
What happened was Middle America began to understand their voice no longer mattered in the face of everyone else that said because they were a thus-and-so ethnic group or self-identified gender subset. For example, if people in Middle America did not want men dressed as women using the same bathrooms as their ten-year-old daughters, they were slandered as “bigots” rather than their concerns as parents being heard. Therefore, Middle America finally had enough and decided they might as well divide themselves also. For their own interests, for once. The die was already cast, after all. It was the Democrats and liberals who first said, “We are not like you! We are different! We need a more political voice! We need to be heard!” Middle America simply said, “And so do we, for a change!”
Now, these causes and conditions led up to Donald Trump elected as president by Middle America over the slight population majority of Coastal America. They decided they needed someone who cared about things they cared about and did not concern himself with hypersensitive squishiness around most-favored special interest groups. These reasons are predominantly economic in nature. They wanted a guy who was more concerned with what appeared in working peoples’ pay envelopes and not what letter of the alphabet ought to come next after LGBTQRSTUVWXYZ, blah, blah, blah and the new gender of the month club. if Coastal America wants to continue with those games, that’s fine. But they need to understand it is they who have rendered the word “American” obsolete and, ergo, they cannot complain when others then agree that, yes, we are divided.
Now we must come to the facts. The first fact is: We no longer have anything in common. Middle America and Coastal America cannot be reconciled at this point. Too much has happened for that to be repaired. We need to understand another dynamic. Coastal America controls population centers, some industry, the political machine, the entertainment industry, and major ports. But Middle America controls the food, oil, minerals, and the vast majority of lands where nuclear weapons are sequestered. You, Coastal America, cannot simply dictate your will to the people that feed you. Period. What works for you out there in Los Angeles does not work for people in Utah, sorry. If you keep pretending like everyone in America thinks like you do, then you are fools. You divided yourself from the concept of being “American” because you said you were first and foremost this ethnic group or gender subset. You forgot something: We are first human beings. And human history teaches that without cohesiveness, any nation or society will decay and fall apart.
Therefore, the causes and conditions leading up to eventual secession are already present. The election of Donald Trump is a huge signal that this will eventually occur as more causes and conditions manifest. Soon, Middle America will discover they will be better off to be their own socio-economic group without having to carry the dead weight of Coastal America bureaucracy and political correctness/foolishness behind it. Those things cost money. To order some small town in Kansas to build bathrooms for a third gender classification means they’ve got to take that money from schools to do it. At some point, Middle America will rather keep that money. I think we’re, hmmm, about ten years away from economic powers arising in Middle America that will create an economic secession and pursue their own economic policies apart from the feds. I predict Texas as the epicenter since they’ve got a huge port and energy resources. Trump proved that Middle America can assert political power. From there, even more, can and will be done.
It needs to be said again: Many of us in this nation no longer have anything in common. Many people identify themselves as something besides “American” first. There is nothing wrong with that, either. But let us be honest and state that we also should be free to pursue our own mutually exclusive socio-economic interests. It will happen. All things arise and pass away. This is another truth in Buddhism. Things come into being and then pass away and become other things. This time is now here in the United States. We are simply not “united” anymore and states are more like a collection of scorpions in a bottle, battling one another for federal funding. This cannot continue and will not continue. The reason states compete is not for federal funding, in truth. It is to recover wealth stolen by the federal government from the states via federal income tax. One day, states will wake up to that and decide to keep that wealth rather than beg the feds for it as alms.
The “self-identity politics” of the Democrats have borne the fruits of such endeavors. If you run around preaching how different we are and demanding everyone bend to the will of whatever someone defines him/herself as, then do not complain when others set themselves apart, too. There are now universities where the faculty has been told that even to say “him” or “her” or “gender specific” titles is to be avoided because it might hurt the feelings of people to whom those gender-specific titles do not apply. Ok, but these are also the people that think they have the right to run around labeling those who disagree with them as “bigots” and “intolerant” and so forth. What, then, can be the expected result of this tearing away at the fabric of cohesiveness?
This isn’t something the conservatives created or manifested out of thin air as a random occurrence all by itself. The United States didn’t collectively wake up one day and say, “Gosh, I think I’ll vote for Donald Trump and do my part of creating a divided nation.” No. The nation was already divided. A series of causes and conditions led up to that. The primary is that groups of people held forth that they were different from everyone else. They alone knew what it was like to suffer hardships. They alone had suffered, yes, and no one who wasn’t one of them knew what it was like. No one but them had ever been persecuted in history. Well, people are more than willing to hear your struggles and make good on past injustices. However, after a time, it became evident that more never was enough. People kept on adding more letters of the alphabet to LGBTQ and creating new minority groups that would, in turn, demand their own political power, concessions, and social accommodations. Again, who created the divisions in our society here? They were being created almost every year in gender identification alone.
Therefore, no one ought to be at all shocked or surprised that the United States is actually on the road to becoming two distinct nations. Middle America has now stated as a political fact that they have nothing in common with Coastal America. That is exactly how the electoral college elected Trump. And the Democrats sit there looking at the Russians? How, exactly, did Russia create these divisions? The liberals will certainly keep right on adding to the causes and conditions that will ultimately lead to secession. You can do a lot of things, but you can’t continue to dictate unpopular policies to an entire land mass that, in truth, you will not be able to control if they decide to go their own way. Number one, your two coasts are divided by them. But more importantly, they control the food. They feed much of the world, too. Right, go tell the world they won’t be able to eat until you get Middle America back under control. I bet the UN would be demanding a “two-state solution” before the ink was dry on an executive order out of the White House insisting Middle America stood down.
Read this message, liberals: Middle America is tired of your BS. Trump is probably the only warning you’re going to get. In fact, Trump is too little, too late. Middle America has nothing in common with Coastal America anymore and hasn’t for a long time now. Middle America feeds you and you’re going to sit there and call them “bigots” and slander them? If Middle America decides not to plant corn just one year, let’s see you eat CDs and DVDs coming out of Hollywood. Let’s see how the rest of the world stands with you when their people are starving as a result. You fail to understand the peril that you are in. Middle America could secede tomorrow and eat. Coastal America would have about two weeks (thanks to the “Just-In-Time” supply system in supermarket distribution schemes) before they began to see food riots. What, California agriculture will save you? Last I checked, they’re bulldozing entire groves of fruit trees thanks to a drought. Right, you geniuses would rather the stars up in Hollywood had nice lawns than you had food security. Don’t forget Arizona controls the Colorado River before it gets to you.
I would humbly suggest that Coastal America starts looking at “local agriculture” as more than some hipster, boutique food fashion selling blue potatoes at $7.99 a pound or kale chips for dogs at $8.25 a bag. You guys better start figuring out how you’re going to FEED that oh-so-superior population majority you keep throwing in our face after this election. Because I think Middle America is getting about done with feeding the ungrateful and whiners. Yes, you have a population majority. But let’s see you feed them.
by Al Benson Jr.
When I was a kid around eight or nine years old, there was a popular song out called "Don't fence me in." The first line of that, or the chorus, I can't recall which, said "Give me land, lotsa land under starry skies above. Don't fence me in." At that point in my life I hadn't traveled all that much and so the idea of the song appealed to me. It still does except that, at my age, I've done most of the traveling I'm likely to do, but I still have the memories and a batch of old photos and I do enjoy both. As a kid I always wanted to go west. When I was 21 years old I finally got to go and once I started I kept going until I couldn't go anymore.
It's a good thing I got to go when I did, in those pre-Obama years when the West was still relatively open, because our soon-to-be-f0rmer Marxist president seems hell bent on shutting down as much Western land as he can so ordinary folks can't get to use it or even see it except from a distance.
It would seem that he has eagerly embraced the old Marxist concept of private property being some sort of sin and he'd like to redistribute as much of the property in the West to "the people" (meaning his kind of people and no one else) as he can before he is forced to leave the White House, even though his bosses will force him to remain in Washington as part of their agenda to destabilize a Trump presidency.
Earlier this week I read an article on http://www.mrctv.org written by Brittany M. Hughes and entitled: Obama Seized Enough Land and Water in 8 Years to Cover Texas Three Times. That headline caught my attention. Having been in Texas several times over the years I have come to realize just how big Texas really is and if Obama has taken all that much land in eight years then he has to be one of the greatest land confiscators this country has ever witnessed.
Hughes' article noted: "Last week, in one of his final moves out of the Oval Office, Obama executively designated more than 1.5 million acres of land as national monuments, preserving their untouched facade while closing them to human expansion, development, energy use, ranching or state or local jurisdiction." And Hughes continued: "In a move ignored by the liberal media...last week, Obama unilaterally seized more than 1.3 million acres from Utah to establish the Bears Ears Monument, preserving it at the behest of conservationist groups and Native American tribes who claimed the land was sacred." Utah's state legislature was not overjoyed with this and they opposed it. Some have speculated this is One of Obama's moves to try to limit Trump's efforts to increase domestic energy production, which would not surprise me in the least. But like all good Marxists with an agenda, Obama kills two birds with one stone here. He not only limits a new administration's attempts at new energy production but he also locks up the property to keep ordinary folks off much of it.
He did the same thing in Clark County, Nevada when he took land for the Gold Butte National Monument. This just about shut the whole area down to any uranium mining, and oil drilling, as well as any future natural gas production. Can't have Obama's Muslim buddies in the Middle East losing out on their profits because the United States can take steps to be more energy independent now, can we. The utmost last thing Obama wants is any kind of independence for this country. He has spent two terms in office trying to shut down that kind of thing, whether it's offshore oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico or trying to stop that pipeline that's supposed to cross the country for north to south and provide lots of new jobs in the process. He has to stop that kind of stuff and he works mightily at it. Those that voted this person into office so he could spend eight years trashing our economy while crying alligator tears for the middle class (who he really hates) will at some point, have to answer for their votes--and I'm glad it's them and not me!
Interesting to note is the land he took in Nevada is in Clark County where the big fuss over the Bundy Ranch situation happened. Looks like the feds won't have any opposition in Clark County now--most of it is in jail. Protecting your God-given rights anymore can be costly.
In Nevada the feds already control over 80% of the land, leaving only 20% for private interests and the folks in the state. So what do they need another 300,000 acres on top of all that for? So private citizens can't use it to make a living that might render them somewhat independent that's why. The Ruling Elite wants no independent citizens, only subservient slaves, so any attempts at liberty have to be suppressed--any way they can, any way they have to because, after all, the end (total slavery) justifies the means according to Marxist dogma.
This is the sort of thing Trump was elected to prevent. Let's hope he gets the chance and that Comrade Obama doesn't end up confiscating it all (in the name of the people) before Trump even gets in office.
I've said it before and I will say it again, the folks in the South with their unique heritage and the folks in the West with their unique heritage (both of which are connected) have the same enemies--liberals, socialists, communists, and the ruling CFR/Trilateral Establishment. Both Southerners and Westerners need to realize this and try to help one another out wherever they can. The Ruling Elite, if it can, will willingly destroy both of our cultures.
By Thomas DiLorenzo
Reprinted from Lew Rockwell.com. Dr. DiLorenze is a friend of the Confederate Society.
In his new book Nullification: Reclaiming Consent of the Governed
, Clyde Wilson pinpoints the folly and futility of “presidential politics” – of hoping against hope that some Great Savior will somehow restore American liberty. Only those who are almost completely ignorant of American history could be fooled by such a farce. Unfortunately, that seems to include most Americans.
Early Americans were never so naïve as to believe that national politicians could preserve their freedom; that was their
are the ones who, acting through their state-level political societies, created and gave authority to the Constitution. The government was to act as their agent
and was delegated by them only a few specific powers. Moreover, the government itself could never be the judge of its own powers, for that would lead to “nothing less than a government of unlimited power, a tyranny,” writes Wilson. Of course, that is what Americans have now lived under for generations with the “black-robed deities” of the “supreme” court announcing for all of us what freedoms we shall have.Nullification: Reclaim...
Clyde N. WilsonBest Price: $4.67Buy New $3.48A monopoly or “national” government was always understood to be the greatest threat to liberty by such American statesmen as Thomas Jefferson, author of the Kentucky Resolution of 1798 that enunciated the concept of nullification. (He was invited to author the Resolution by friends in the Kentucky legislature). It was a response to the first totalitarian power grab by the New England, leftist establishment led by John Adams who enforced the Sedition Act, an abominable law that outlawed free political speech in America. “Resolved, That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government,” Jefferson wrote in the Resolve. “[A]nd that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force.” Kentucky would not allow the enforcement of the unconstitutional Sedition Act within its borders. James Madison authored the Virginia Resolution of 1798 that said the same thing. If “consent of the governed” were to have any real meaning, that consent would have to be enforced through such political vehicles as nullification and secession.Current Prices on popular forms of Silver Bullion
The leftist New England establishment first invented the lie that Jefferson was not the author of the Kentucky Resolve – until the great man’s grandson produced a copy of it in his grandfather’s own handwriting. They then invented a second lie that Jefferson was only defending free speech and not states’ rights. Jefferson himself denied this all throughout his life, Wilson points out, by insisting that in the American system of government, states’ rights and liberty could not be separated. If Americans were to have a constitution that protected their freedoms, they would have to enforce it through political communities organized at the state and local level.
The central government itself could never be trusted – especially through its “supreme” court — to do so. Jefferson understood that if the day ever came that five government lawyers with lifetime tenure would decide what everyone’s liberties were to be, then the American Revolution would have failed and Americans would live under a tyranny. That day arrived in 1865, when the U.S. government finally destroyed federalism and states’ rights and consolidated political power – including the power of constitutional interpretation – in Washington, D.C.The Problem with Socia...
Thomas DiLorenzoBest Price: $6.49Buy New $11.02
Once empowered by a monopolistic, consolidated, centralized government used to enrich its operators, there would be no logic that could overturn it, said Jefferson, for “you might as well reason and argue with the marble columns” in the Capitol, he said in a letter. He was well aware during his lifetime that the New England “consolidators” wanted a highly centralized government that would subsidize their business enterprises with cheap credit through a bank run by politicians; protect them from international completion with protectionist tariffs, and lavish canal- and road-building corporations with tax dollars. Jefferson’s nemesis Alexander Hamilton, the intellectual leader (of sorts) of the New England/New York/Philadelphia leftist establishment, gave this British-style
mercantilistic corruption scheme the Orwellian label of “The American
As Wilson points out, Hamilton praised the American ideals of federalism and states’ rights in The Federalist Papers
, and then spent the rest of his life doing everything he could to undermine and destroy those ideals. This included inventing a false history of the founding in which he claimed that the citizens of the states, who ratified the Constitution in state political conventions, were never sovereign, and that Americans’ real “original intent” was to create a highly centralized, monopolistic government like the one in England. Hamilton’s theory, Wilson correctly points out, “always rested upon coercion, chutzpah, and lies.” It was also the theory of the American founding that was embraced by Abraham Lincoln who used it to “justify” waging war on his own fellow citizens, killing them off by the hundreds of thousands with the self-proclaimed objective of “saving the union.”
One of the sillier arguments fabricated against true federalism, which includes the rights of nullification and secession, is the slogan that “states don’t have rights, people do!” Duh. As Wilson points out, it was John Taylor of Caroline who actually first said this in the context of explaining the Jeffersonian dictum that “States are instruments
by which the people may assert their rights against usurpers and oppressors” (emphasis added). At least they were in Taylor’s day. Today they are appendages of Washington, D.C.The Real Lincoln: A Ne...
Thomas DiLorenzoBest Price: $3.43Buy New $6.61In a chapter on “The Real Constitution” Wilson states the obvious fact that the fabled “system of checks and balances” has been a complete failure in limiting governmental powers to those delegated to it by the Constitution. In reality, all three branches of the federal government work in tandem
to limit our freedoms.
It is “we the people” who are limited and controlled, thanks to the state’s judicial monopoly of constitutional interpretation. “The real Constitution did not belong to lawyers, who obfuscate for a living,” writes Wilson, who points out that most of the participants at the constitutional convention were not
lawyers, unlike today’s political class. The people do not need lawyers to tell them what “THEIR” constitution says, Wilson proclaims.
The fatal mistake of conservatives and libertarians who call themselves “constitutionalists” is their belief that the federal government can somehow be persuaded to begin enforcing the Constitution and thereby limiting its own power, prestige, remuneration, and perks. “The peoples of the states have not delegated to federal judges the power to decide what their rights are. This is a power they have reserved to themselves.”
By “the people” Wilson, like Jefferson, does not mean a majority of the electorate. “By people, do we mean that if a million Chinese wade ashore in California and outvote everybody else, then they are sovereign? I think not.” If “consent of the governed” has any meaning at all, writes Wilson, then it means what it was always intended to mean: the people of the free, independent, and sovereign states. “The right to self-government rests on the right to withdraw consent from an oppressive government,” says Wilson, and in the real American system that has historically been achieved by the people acting through their state-level political communities. It is how they decided to fight the Revolution; it is how the Revolution ended, with King George III signing a peace treaty with each individual state; it is how the Constitution was ratified; and it is how the Constitution can be amended. This is why, in all the founding documents, “United States” is always in the plural, signifying that the free and independent states are united. It never meant some Leviathan called “the United States government.” That was the lying fabrication of Lincoln in his Gettysburg address in which he invented the strange notion that the founders created a “new nation” instead of a confederacy of free and independent states, as is clearly stated in the Declaration of Independence, among other places.Lincoln Unmasked: What...
Thomas DiLorenzoBest Price: $4.10Buy New $6.53Real federalism or states’ rights is all but nonexistent today, says Wilson, because “it presented the most powerful obstacle to the consolidation of irresponsible power – that consolidation which our forefathers decried as the greatest single threat to liberty. For that reason, states’ rights had to be covered under a blanket of lies and usurpations by those who thought they could rule us better than we can rule ourselves.” After the “Civil War,” writes Wilson, “the American idea of consent of the governed was replaced by the European idea of obedience.”
The destruction of the Jeffersonian, states’ rights tradition, with the elimination of nullification and secession as the essential ingredients of the consent of the governed, allowed the rotten Hamiltonian system of government by crony capitalists, for crony capitalists, and of crony capitalists to become cemented into place. This is what Lincoln and the Republican Party of his day meant when they said they were “saving the union,” Wilson observes. It was NOT the voluntary
union of the states they wanted to preserve; they utterly destroyed
that and replaced it with a Soviet-style, compulsory
union held together by violence, mass murder, mayhem, and plunder. Their “union” was a large, centralized government that would dispense corporate welfare and protect the party’s corporate political supporters from international competition while showering them with cheap credit through a government-controlled banking system. As Wilson himself explains: “With the Lincoln revolution the Hamiltonian program triumphed. Indeed, that was the purpose of the Lincoln revolution. Thus today, all the politicians of both parties rally around so that the taxpayers and posterity can reward the Banksters, Too Big to Jail,
for their evil deeds” (emphasis added).