A column called America's strategic suicide crystallized this objective in me. It is by a Christian libertarian who calls himself Vox Day. In following up the issues, I was unable to organize the many pieces of information either on paper or in a text file, so I chose to move here.
Vox concludes his column on a very pessimistic note (from the U.S. point of view):
Globalization is far from inevitable. In fact, as mass-lethal weaponry becomes ever smaller and more affordable, techno-sociological history suggests that the nation-state will not be replaced with larger transnational government, as everyone believes, but by something more akin to the feudalism of the pre-modern era. .. America is looking increasingly unlikely to survive intact, thanks to the actions of her suicidal leaders ...Vox's column then links to his blog. It begins with a quote from Ron Paul, and has a very readable collection of comments. As I wandered through these threads, I found side roads, bike trails, footpaths and bunny trails. I will collect a number of them here. It is up to you, dear reader, to decide which is which.
Ron Paul is a Republican Congressman representing the 14th District of Texas. He was a Libertarian candidate for President in 1988, and is presently running for President on the Republican ticket. He was recently quoted in a lot of news broadcasts when he and Mitt Romney clashed over whether the US was "at fault" for the attack on 9/11/2001. Ron Paul is an obstetrician (baby doctor for those of you in Rio Linda), in his 70's, and one of the few (the only?) Congressmen who takes the Constitution seriously. He is known as "Dr. No" for his oft-stated attitude that if the Constitition does not specifically authorize something, then it should not be permitted to Congress.
The "popularity" of Ron Paul is paradoxical. When his name was first included (select 2007-04-1 from the dropdown list) in an internet poll, he appeared to get almost as many votes as all other Republican candidates combined. In contrast, he was invisible in a contemporaneous Gallup poll, which allegedly put him at 1% or below. (Following the link provided by Pajamas Media gives an article dated 16 May, and no obvious way to get to the earlier data. Pajamas Media claims their poll is being "spammed" by Ron Paul supporters. One of the interesting unanswered questions is: Who are Ron Paul's supporters? The Democrat leaders hate him, and have even tried candidates that claim to be to the right of Paul, to try to unseat him. The Republicans don't particularly like him either, because he is against much of their legislation. There is no doubt he has a lot of support from small-government conservatives. He also has support from liberals (Kos Kidz), who like his track record:
There is one man who would test even the Democrats to prove the integrity of their positions. He voted against the war in Iraq. He is against capital punishment, and voted against the anti-gay marriage amendment. He would legalize marijuana. He votes against all bills that raise taxes or spend federal money in a way not explicitly authorized by the Constitution, even for the Congressional Gold Medal of Honor. His name is Ron Paul ... [emphasis in original]My education was in the sciences, so I neglected the classics. I had no idea how much I was missing! One of those unfamiliar classical names popped up in Vox's comments thread. It was Polybius, a really ancient historian, who apparently was controversial because he wasn't enough of an elitist. His history of Rome is online as an essay, and there is also a numbered version that makes it easy to cite "chapter and verse" like the Bible. The result is inconsistencies. The commenter on Vox's blog quotes Polybius:
"...while enticing and corrupting the common people in every possible way. By which means, in their senseless mania for reputation, when they have made the populace ready and greedy to recieve [sic] bribes, democracy is destroyed and it is transformed into a government of violence and the strong hand. For people, habituated to feed at the expense of others,..." Bk 6 sec 9In contrast, the numbered version gives "mob rule" rather than "a strong hand" as the ultimate outcome. (Scroll to the bottom, find P399 in the right margin.) In either case, they appear to be accurately describing the state of modern America. They only differ in the failure mode. And this "prescient" analysis was performed around 200 B.C.!
Here is one more thread. Vox's Paul quote begins:
The American Republic is in remnant status. The stage is set for our country eventually devolving into a military dictatorship, and few seem to care...The remnant he is referring to is described in, for example, Isaih 10:20-23. This remnant has been discussed by a very modern historian and analyst on a blog called in part Eject! (The term "remnant" occurs near the bottom of this essay, but read it all!) He is actively collecting "members" of the remnant for duty in present-day America! I am one he has collected. Another is engaging me in a dialog in Esperanto (Click on "PRI" in the banner. A direct link is not available.) This blog is an outgrowth of that dialog, since I am not sufficiently fluent in Esperanto to carry it out there.
Incidentally, Esperanto is an "artificial" language created in 1887 by Ludovic Lazarus Zamenhof. It has a very well organized community of speakers spread throughout the world. It is claimed to require about 1/10 the effort to learn of any Western language, and 1/3 the effort for a native speaker of an Eastern language (Chinese, Korean, Arabic, etc.) A careful study of many languages concludes there are about two million fluent in Esperanto. However the Esperanto Wikipedia has over 85,000 articles, which puts it ahead of Turkish, Danish, Korean, Arabic and Greek, which have many times more native speakers. This suggests that the Esperantists are very well organized and motivated in the international sphere. If you are considering learning another language to communicate outside the Anglosphere, think of Esperanto!
William A. Whittle is the author of Eject!.. and a prolific analyst of modern philosophy. His essay on Tribes argues that labels such as Black, White, Latino, Republican, Democrat, etc. are not relevant. What matters is the tribe to which a person belongs; how that person treats friends, and at least as important, strangers. Further, those blinded by the arrogance of money or power, as well as those who use labels to avoid really knowing others, are an increasing part of the danger to the survival of the nation. Tribes is available as a (dead tree) book for readers who wish to spread these ideas to others who do not get information from the internet. (If they don't read either, you have a problem that has not yet been solved, and may not be solvable!)
There is a way out of this mess. There always has been, and the world is too big and complex for a solution not to be available. Just do not look to your leaders. Look to yourself and your tribe. Study what has happened before. Look deep into history, and take advantage of the efforts of others. Most important, use your reason, and act on the results of your analysis!
The best to you and yours on Memorial Day, 2007!
