|
Wednesday, July 19, 2006
THE TRAGEDY OF ISRAEL, PALESTINE, AND LEBANON
The new round of heart-rending warfare between Israel and the Lebanese
Hezbollah, is merely more evidence of the impossible situation that Israel (and
the United States), is
in. Israel is in the classic Catch-22, "damned if you do and damned if you
don't," situation. This, even though the Israelis score from four to ten to
one in terms of dealing death and destruction upon the enemy, whether
Palestinian or Lebanese.
"Never Forget!" and "Never Forgive!" are
practically the Israeli nation motto – and because Israel is surrounded by
enemies individually and collectively dedicated to its destruction (even if some
have become "politically correct" and no longer say it out loud), the only
viable defense is always considered a deathly and destructive offense. Measured,
proportional, responses to acts of Palestinian or Hezbollah terror are not in the
Israeli genes. Overwhelming retribution is the rule. And this begets more of the
same.
Of course, to the Palestinians, terrorist acts are the only
effective tactics against systemic, long on-going, injustice and the
overwhelming military might of Israel. And, naturally, to the Palestinians and
Lebanese, Israeli military retribution is nothing more than terrorism
personified and multiplied by multiple factors.
In the present case of the kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers,
with the purpose of gaining bargaining chips for the release of Palestinian and
Lebanese being held by Israel, the answer has been an all-out assault against
Lebanon and death for hundreds of innocent Lebanese, and the displacement and
homelessness for tens of thousands of others.
Unfortunately, no matter the success and degree of Israeli reprisals, and
the degree of vengeance extracted, the net result is always a renewal of commitment on the
part of the enemy, and a score card that (if the God of Israel is just, and keeping score),
bodes ill
for the long-term future of Israel.
And, of course, this sort of overwhelming punishment is made
possible by American money and armaments, and everybody knows it – making the United States
an accessory to the fact in all the depredations pursued in the name of the
"defense of Israel." And, in both the short and
long run, this bodes ill for the future of America and the American people.
For all practical intents and purposes, the United States
government is committed to supporting and defending Israel, right or wrong, into the indefinite
future – in spite of the fact that several Arab states supposedly also depend on
us, and expect us to play the role of impartial mediator in these times of
trial and tribulation.
But that often measured impartiality is conspicuously absent in the
latest round of violence. Oh yes, we will exert some pressure on Israel at some point,
but we seem to always delay that pressure until Israel has extracted at least
ten eyes for an eye, and teeth or a tooth – or multiple hundreds of eyes or an
eye, if possible.
And that is the crux of the problem – the fact that two
"eye for an eye" peoples are at perpetual loggerheads over the same
real estate, utilizing the the very same eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, principles.
Most Americans, of course, tend to favor Israel. Not only do
they see Israel as the underdog in an unreasonably hostile world in an ongoing
contest between good and evil, many believe the Jews are God's Chosen People –
the direct descendents of the biblical Hebrews – and that they are fulfilling
biblical prophecy. To some Americans, Armageddon is a desirable and worthy
goal.
Whether or not present day "Jews" and Israelis are actually
the descendents of the ancient Hebrews is a matter of debate and opinion, but
there does seems to be some interesting parallels to biblical times unfolding
around the modern State of Israel.
Unfortunately, though the American media always leaves
Americans with the impression that Palestinian and Arab hatred,
radicalism, and hardheadedness are principally responsible for Middle East
strife, and that Israel is
the heroic underdog embattled against multitudinous irrational enemies, history
clearly tells a
completely other story.
That story boils down to this. In a nutshell, the state of Israel was
established on other peoples' land – and the western world has largely turned a blind eye
to a long chain of tragic injustice.
There's no simpler way to put it. Of course, this was nothing
new. The United States of America was established on conquered soil too –
gained no less violently or deceitfully. But
Native Americans had no champions in the colonial world to take up their cause,
and their conquest was overwhelming, irrevocably complete, and
irreversible.
Things are different now. The descendants of the colonial powers (including
the USA), at least give lip service to "self-determination" and
"liberty and justice for all" regardless of race, religion, or
national origin.
There are so many ironies evident in the creation and ongoing
conduct of the state of
Israeli that it's a challenge to enumerate them. Yet, to most Americans, Israel
is a small and gallant nation fighting valiantly for survival. And this is true.
But this side of the picture totally ignores history.
Not the least of the ironies is embodied in our own impossible
position in the on going Arab Israeli conflict. In spite of our birthing pains
and the injustices wrought upon the native peoples during the formative years of
the United States, we still aspired to be a Christian people, a Christian
nation, and a Christianizing influence on the world. But we have lost the focus
of that purpose, and have become a nation more closely associated with the
Hebrews of the Old Testament rather than followers of Jesus who preached,
brotherly love, "Love thy neighbor," and "Do not unto others...,
etc."
No less ironic – while the idea of America as a
"Christian nation" is being actively erased from the national identity
(at the behest, in large part, of Jewish influences), the present administration
purports to be a "Christian administration," doing God's will in
combating terror and defending God's Chosen People. Yet our conduct is anything
but Christian. We have taken up the sword, armor, and ways of the ancient
Hebrews – thinking of ourselves as "Christian soldiers" –
seemingly oblivious to the fundamental contradictions in such thinking.
The Evangelicals in our administration are of an Old Testament
variety, where eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth remedies are considered
God's way. This is not the Christian way by any stretch of the imagination, and
those who claim it is (no matter which side they take), are simply confused and
have failed to recognize the real Christian message.
AN HISTORICAL RECAP
The establishment of Israel in Palestine happened at
the very time in history when the conquest of weaker peoples by stronger powers
(which was the very story of great empires and colonialism), was becoming
politically incorrect. At that time the very last great colonial empire was in collapse and colonialism
was being given evil connotations – the United States being in the vanguard of
those redefining "justice" in the world and spearheading the notion of
"national self-determination" for previously colonized nations. Soon,
largely to our good offices, traditional colonial empires would be relegated to the dustbin of
history.
But Israel is very much a colonial imposition on Palestine. It
owes its existence to the colonial period
that the Zionists themselves have helped bring down. It was thanks to the British Empire that the
Zionists managed to gain their foothold in Palestine.
When Israel proclaimed its independence in 1948, International
law was already established to outlaw the sort of conquest that the formation
of Israel actually represented. Yet Israel has always been considered
"different" somehow, and the enlightened West, as well as the Soviets,
lent it support.
That formative period of the Jewish Homeland in Palestine, from about 1917 to 1948, was a period
of conquest engineered by Great Britain on behalf of the Zionists. And through
systematic purchase, forced appropriations, ethnic cleansing, and terrorism, the
state of Israel was born. It was facilitated by the major colonial power of the World War One
era (with the muscular backing of the United States, to defeat Germany and the
Ottoman Empire in World War One, to make it all possible). That, and the
financial power of American and European Jews, and their dual ability to both
influence the great powers and purchase
Palestinian land.
The Middle East was carved up by England and France following
the First World War, from the lands formerly part of the defeated Ottoman
Empire. Along
with the formation of several Arab States (initially subjected to the colonial
yoke), a Jewish Homeland in Palestine was considered a strategically brilliant
idea. It would serve (hopefully), as a friendly, progressive, western ally in
the Arab world.
Ironically, a considerable amount of the terrorism that
occurred on the
brink of Israeli independence was directed at the great facilitator and Zionist/Jewish
benefactor – the British colonial government, which was then in the form of a
League of Nations "Mandate."
From long before Israeli independence, none of the surrounding Arab
states (which had gradually been granted their independence), recognized Zionist claims to the Holy Land.
It shouldn't be
surprising (though Americans tend to be incredulous at the fact), that they didn't recognize Israel's independence or right to exist.
And it was because
the British were attempting to honor promises of justice to the Palestinians,
and promises they'd made to neighboring Arab states, that the founders of Israel turned
their guns and terrorist bombings upon their own benefactors.
Oddly enough, the Zionists, in spite of their secular humanist
liberalism, based their claim to Palestine on the biblical record that says God
promised Palestine is the Children of Israel. Yet those Zionists were largely
made up assimilated, non-practicing, Jews who actually gave the scriptures very
little credence. It was merely a Jewish legend and dream that the Jews were destined
to return to the Promised Land and rebuild the Temple of Solomon. In fact, most faithful
Jews were against the Zionist push for a homeland in Palestine. If such a return
was to take place, it was to be in God's own time.
If one takes the time to read the Bible, he will see that
possession of the Promised Land was contingent on certain mandates handed down
by the God of Israel. The most important, and the one that they failed to
fulfill, was God's mandate to kill every man, woman, and child, and beast of the
field that already occupied the Promised Land. Though the biblical Israelites managed to
conquer and rule over much of Palestine for a while, they had failed to fulfill
that bloody mandate. God brought vengeance down upon His wayward children (several times), and
eventually sent them out of their Promised Land, scattering them into exile as the result of their failure to fulfill
His
commands.
History (even biblical history), seems to be repeating itself.
Though the Israelis have gained another foothold in Palestine, they have failed
to kill every man, woman, child, and beast of the field whom they found there.
In fact, they initially tried to establish themselves in the Promised Land
peaceably. But the Canaanites still flourish – and though the Israelites may
kill an inordinate number of Palestinians, they have failed, and will continue
to fail to kill them all.
Such a thing, of course, is even more inconceivably in this day and
age than it was during biblical times. And
thus, if we pretend to believe in Hebrew scripture and biblical precedent, God will probably once again
expel them from the Promised Land and send the Jews into exile.
It should be noted, that many, if not most, fundamentalist
Jews (faithful to their religion), do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israel
state any more than the Arabs do, in spite of their cultural and religious ties
to the Promised Land.
Of course, there is always the problem of just who the Chosen
People actually were – and whether present day Jews are in any way related to
the ancient Hebrews of the Bible. They tell us, of course, that being Jewish has
nothing to do with race, but everything to do with being of the Jewish faith. At
the same time, Jews remain Jewish even after abandoning their faith (unlike most
Gentile Christians, who are apt to become "anti-Christians" at the
moment of their supposed "enlightenment" into agnosticism or atheism).
But this is a complicated subject in itself.
But in light of these strange incongruities that uniquely
attach themselves to the Jewish people, Israel's independence, and the Jewish
State itself, are unlike any other "People" or any other nation in the
history of mankind. And, in spite of the humanistic liberalism of most Zionists,
they still claim the Promised Land as their own unique and uncontestable
inheritance. And, there is little doubt, in spite of all their lack of religious
fervor on the part of the Zionists, they still consider themselves (along with their more faithful
brethren), "God's
Chosen People" – or at least God's greatest gift to humanity. The media
tends to make this abundantly clear, as the "Jew's," as the result of
past injustices and the Holocaust," have actively cast themselves as
"our humanistic conscience."
The Zionists may be God's Chosen Children, of course. Who is Pridger to judge? But it
leaves most of us (who are ignorant and uninitiated), in a great deal of confusion and
wonder that God's Chosen Children would become such a thorn in the side of
everybody else with such an inordinate amount of blood on their hands.
But, whatever the case, Israeli independence, and the Jewish
State, for the Israelis, was the
very beginning of an ongoing struggle for national survival rather than the end
of the struggle,
and her history has been regularly punctuated by wars with neighbors, bloodshed,
and an
ongoing state of internal warfare.
Israel has never really been independent. There
was no independence under the British Mandate, of course, and there would be no
independence or hope for national survival now but for the unequivocal backing
of the world's only superpower and the financial clout of the western community
of the remaining Diaspora.
The Zionists aren't evil incarnate, of course. Their
intentions were good – and, if you can discount the rights of Palestinian
Arabs – their purposes and goals were as noble as they come.
It had been hoped by the Zionists, of course, that the "Palestinian
problem" could be made to simply go away. But the time for that sort of
thing (massive expulsions and slaughter) had long past, and they'd already done
enough of it to have pushed their luck in the eyes of the international
community.
Just as the Palestinian Arabs have never acknowledged Israel's
right to exist, it has always been Israel's contention that there was no such
thing as a "Palestinian People." What we call Palestinians, they
insisted, were just a few scattered Arab tribesmen who actually belonged in Syria,
Jordan, and
other surrounding Arab States. And they hoped all the Arabs remaining in
Palestinian, with their prompting, would
eventually see the light and move off and disappear into those surrounding
states.
But the surrounding Arab states were not at all accommodating.
In spite of the fact that the viability and security of the state of Israel (as
it was originally intended), depended on the
friendship and cooperation of its neighbors, there was never any real hope for
such cooperation, because of the very processes that brought the Jews to Palestine, and finally
resulted in Israel in the first place. The whole Zionist program was not only an
affront to them, but clearly an
inhumane injustice to to the Palestinian Arabs who we now call Palestinians.
And at the core of the problem there was something else –
something that has become much less of a focus during the progression of
Israel's short history. The Zionists, and Israeli leadership, actually had a
much larger vision of their future role in Palestine and the Middle East. The
key words are embodied in "Greater Palestine" and "Greater
Israel," which takes in much more territory than that encompassed by the
official State of Israel.
It was perhaps this ambition, of which the surrounding Arab
states were undoubtedly aware, that from the very beginning foreclosed on
peaceful relations with all neighboring states and peoples, and prevented Israel
from making the slightest attempt at becoming truly democratic – embracing
Jews and non-Jews alike as full citizens.
Such as state, naturally, could not ultimately have been a
"Jewish State" at all. But it might have become a state where Jews may
have coexisted in peace with the Arab population. To the Zionists, however, this
would be totally unacceptable, for a Jewish State was the purpose and intention,
as well as a much greater roll in ruling the entire region.
Events have foreclosed on Zionist dreams for a "Greater
Israel" that stretched beyond the Jordan River. Even Israel is now forced to call
Palestinian Arabs "Palestinians." They even acknowledge (under
considerable long-term duress), the Palestinian right to a national existence.
But the
Israelis also know that they cannot allow a viable Palestinian state to come
into existence. It is their present hope that any future "Palestinian
State" will consist of only the Gaza Strip and a few scattered "homelands" or reservations on the
West Bank and Golan Highlands, which will effectively be dependent on, and
beholden to, them in every significant way – a plan that is totally
unacceptable to the Palestinians, and understandably so.
Pridger sees Israel's problem, and sympathizes with the
Israeli people, but they are caught in an untenable position with no solution in
sight. It's truly a heart-rending situation. And, with no solution in sight, justice for the suffering Palestinian
population in Israel proper, the remaining Palestinian enclaves, and the
scattered Palestinian refugee camps in neighboring countries, remains an
impossibility as long as Israel exists as a Jewish State.
Scattered "homelands" inside Israel are what the Israelis now
consider the only possible makings of a Palestinian State. They are not a whole
lot unlike the tribal homelands that had everybody so upset about in Apartheid
South Africa (not the least of which were the Jews who pushed for "justice
for Black South Africans" and influenced American policy toward the Apartheid
nation), but are much more "contained" and controlled.
In the United States we still have reservations for Native
Americans, but Indians are nonetheless full-fledged American citizens with
rights that equal those of any other American with a few special privileges to
boot.
THE ONLY DEMOCRACY IN THE MIDDLE EAST?
We often hear that Israel is the
only democracy in the Middle East – that it is a lot like the United
States. And there is some truth in this. But Israel is more like the young
United States of a century and a half ago.
The unpopular truth of the matter is that United States was founded by
white men for white men, regardless of their forethought in making more sweeping
pronouncements about human rights in out founding documents. But, for much of
our history, the key to full, 100%, citizenship, suffrage,
and social equality was embodied in the phrase "Free, white, and twenty-one."
If you weren't free, white, and at least twenty-one, you weren't a complete
freeman. And this was true right up to fairly recent times, within Pridger's own
short lifetime. Now, of course, things are quite different, though none of us
are nearly as free as we once were.
The truth of the matter is that Israel was founded by Zionists
as a Jewish national homeland. If you aren't Jewish, you can never really be a
100% Israeli – Israel doesn't want you, and non-Jews need not apply. Somehow
everybody is supposed to overlook that fact when they make judgments concerning
Israel and the Israelis. While most Americans can apparently overlook it,
there's not a single Palestinian or Arab anywhere who can.
This is particularly ironic in view of the fact that the
Zionists' purpose was the result of discrimination against Jews throughout
history – and their own natural propensity against assimilation in most host
countries. And again ironically, the founders of Zionism, and most of the leaders of
the modern Zionist movement, were largely assimilated, non-practicing,
Jews. Their high goal was to give all Jews, practicing and non-practicing, a
homeland of their own, where anti-Jewish bias and anti-Semitism would not be a
problem.
The Zionist goal was to solve the "Jewish question"
or "Jewish problem" once and for all. But the result
has been anything but a solution. It's caused a much bigger and more dangerous
problem. And we have the specter of a Jewish homeland where all non-Jews, and
particularly the native inhabitants, are the subjects of ongoing discrimination.
The present problems with Lebanon are very illustrative. In
spite of the experience of Nazism and the Holocaust, the Israeli's are very
willing to engage in "overkill" that amounts to ethnic cleansing and
genocide when it comes to their own national survival. There present righteous
justification for their blood assault on both the guilty and innocent is
embodied in the fact that Hezbollah is officially listed as a "terrorist
organization" by the United States. This, thus far, has given them license
to kill and render homeless as many Lebanese as it takes to render Hezbollah
militarily impotent.
Out of supposed necessity, the methods of nation building and
insuring national survival, the
Israelis employ methods that are about as harsh and as racially supremacist as anything
Hitler and the German National Socialists had to offer, short of actual gas
chambers.
Hitler would have undoubtedly been happy to ship all European Jews
to Palestine, if he'd had that option. But, just as ironically, to hold the lid on
the Palestinian Mandate, the British put a tight lid on Jewish immigration to
Palestine just when the need was sorely arising.
There are no gas chambers in Israel, but there is systematic
slaughter and displacement. But never enough to solve the problem. Can anybody rationally believe
that Israel is today solving its problem by its actions against the Lebanese?
Even if Hezbollah is vanquished, the fruits of the victory will have long-lasting
repercussions that bode future ill for the State of Israel.
Like the Zionists and Israeli's, whose creed is "Never
forget, never forgive," Arabs have long memories.
But there is much more at work here than just the Israeli
military. Uncle Sam is probably much more deeply involved than meets the casual
eye – thus the continuing green light for more slaughter.
Since we seem to have Syria and Iran in our own war sights right now,
it appears that part of the purpose of Israel's present defensive offensive is
to provoke Syria into attacking Israeli forces in Lebanon. This would give President Bush an
excuse to widen our Middle East war and bring Syria to heel. And, since Iran is
supposedly backing Hezballah, it could give us the excuse we're looking for to chastise
and de fang Iran.
This less than obvious partnership between Israel and the
United States speaks to Israeli's desire to neutralize the military threat of
all hostile Arab States. Ultimately, Israeli rule of a "Greater
Israel" and unchallengeable regional military supremacy in the region is
undoubtedly the longer-term goal, both of Israel and the United States. The War
on Terror is our license to accomplish Israel's goals.
Meanwhile, while our nation building continues to founder in
Iraq, the threatening civil war and the breakup of Iraq into hostile warring
tribal areas is just what Israel is hoping for – a multitude of weak Arab
states always at each other's throats, with neither the national will nor the
capability to seriously threaten Israel militarily.
Israel's plans and future (whether limited to extended to a
Greater Israel), very much depend on American
military might, and our continued capability and willingness to keep them well armed
and its neighbors from combining against them.
Good luck Israel. And good luck to the Palestinians and other
Arabs too. But peace and justice for all in the Middle East is remains as inconceivable
and unlikely as a truly multi-cultural, democratic, and peacefully secure
Israel.
With all systems in both Israel and the United States geared
to "damned if you do and damned if you don't" policy, the Middle East
is definitely destined to remain a study in New World Disorder.
John Q. Pridger
WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE AN AMERICAN?
Since our government has more or less given our nation to the
world, it's becoming more and more difficult to define just what it is to be an
American – or what an American is. And since there seem to be a lot of people
in the world eager to kill Americans these days, maybe that's just as well.
Here's another one of those emails that make the circuit.
Written by an Australian Dentist...
To Kill an American
You probably missed it in the rush of news last week, but there was actually a report that someone in Pakistan had published in a newspaper an offer of a reward to anyone who killed an American, any American.
So an Australian dentist wrote an editorial the following day to let everyone know what an American is . So they would know when they found one. (Good one, mate!!!!)
"An American is English, or French, or Italian, Irish, German, Spanish, Polish, Russian or Greek. An American may also be Canadian, Mexican, African, Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Australian, Iranian, Asian, or Arab, or Pakistani or Afghan.
An American may also be a Comanche, Cherokee, Osage, Blackfoot, Navaho, Apache, Seminole or one of the many other tribes known as native Americans.
An American is Christian, or he could be Jewish, or Buddhist, or Muslim.
In fact, there are more Muslims in America than in Afghanistan. The only difference is that in America they are free to worship as each of them chooses.
An American is also free to believe in no religion. For that he will answer only to God, not to the government, or to armed thugs claiming to speak for the government and for God.
An American lives in the most prosperous land in the history of the world.
The root of that prosperity can be found in the Declaration of Independence, which recognizes the God given right of each person to the pursuit of happiness.
An American is generous. Americans have helped out just about every other nation in the world in their time of need, never asking a thing in return...
When Afghanistan was over-run by the Soviet army 20 years ago, Americans came with arms and supplies to enable the people to win back their country!
And while performing this great good deed, we put the Talaban
in power and empowered future arch-enemy Osama bin Laden. And the email message
gets a little mushy after this, so Pridger won't quote all of it.
But it points to the fact that the composition of this nation
is such that we can no longer really know what we are. And though we claim to
know, we really don't even know what we stand for any more – other than for gross materialism and conspicuous super
over-consumption as the "American way of life."
This, of course, is diversity. But no nation has ever thrived
on racial or cultural diversity, and many empires have collapsed once their
founding cultures and creeds were diluted or forsaken.
While we continue to say we are the products of the
Declaration of Independence and are ruled by a government under the
Constitution, this has become a fiction. Though we are still a superpower we
are no longer independent. We are a nation of super-consumers that depends on
foreign creditors and laborers to support our national life style.
And, most significantly (but almost universally overlooked),
this extraordinary and growing national indebtedness is no longer a cause for
concern. In fact, we purport to rule the world through a form of forced
"mutual dependence." "Mutual Assured Dependence" is a new
incarnation of the former MAD nuclear strategy. This is what is meant by
"international interdependence," the "new international
economic order," globalism, and the New World Order.
There's another email out there making the rounds that makes a
good point. To paraphrase:
"Iraq needs a constitution. So why don't we just give
them ours? It was written a long time ago by a lot of brilliant men, and we
don't use it any more."
Once the chickens of this reality really begin coming home in
serious numbers, a diverse nation such as ours will begin to show some strains.
The Balkanization of America may become a possible answer, as the nation begins
to try to sort itself out again.
This time will likely come when all systems begin to break
down, and the American people learn what hunger and physical hardships are. War
or natural disaster will likely be the trigger, followed by global financial
collapse.
So, as the old saying goes, "Eat, drink, and be
merry..."
John Q. Pridger
Thursday, July 6, 2006
THE GALL OF IRAN AND NORTH KOREA
When the leader of the world's only superpower singles out a
few nations and calls them the "Axis of Evil" there's usually a good
reason for it. Those nations are somehow not knuckling to the program script
devised by that superpower. And, of course, there are repercussions – usually
in the form of unintended consequences.
Our president singled out Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. We've
"fixing" one of them now, and we are beginning to realize that the fix
is probably going to end up worse than the break. Thus far the fix has merely
created and compounded problems that did not previously exist – and these
problems won't go away any time soon. And now that we've more or less
"bought" Iraq and Afghanistan, what are we going to do with them?
The big irony of the "fix" is that Iran and North
Korea were perhaps the real threats all along (or at lease actually developing
weapons of mass destruction), and the war against Iraq more a case of
malfeasance than a purposeful movement against a threatening power.
Two things are certain. We will continue to incur
ever-increasing deficits and national indebtedness, and we will increasingly be
considered "THE REAL GLOBAL APEX OF EVIL" by a widening group of
nations and people. Such are the rewards of empire – an empire brought about
without the informed consent of the governed.
Now that we're bogged down fixing Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran
and North Korea have apparently figured that it's an opportune time to send us a
message. Iran has decided to go ahead and become a nuclear power, and North
Korea has decided to demonstrate that they have a delivery system for their own
nuclear toys. Chances are, they are coordinating their efforts to flaunt and
taunt the great superpower.
Of course, the reason we attacked Iraq first (both times), is
clearly evident to all interested parties. Iraq is closer to Israel than Iran or
North Korea, and was perhaps a viable threat to that country. And, while Israel depends on the United States to maintain its own
regional (and internationally illegal), nuclear and WMD supremacy, we have come
to rely to an inordinate degree on an ungodly mixture of Zionists and corporate
board room types to do our national thinking for us.
Clearly, the world is becoming a much more dangerous place. To
a large degree, it is becoming more dangerous because we are trying to rule it,
and because there will always be resistance to such efforts.
And we're trying to rule it, not in the interests of the American people or any
principles established by the national charter, but on behalf international
capital interests, their bottom lines, Wall Street, and global securities
markets, not to mention the security of the State of Israel. The world will continue to
become more dangerous until the American empire has crushed all resistance or is
defeated in its global designs.
Someday, America will probably be forced back to it's own shores in
spite of its increasingly high tech WMD capabilities. If or when that happens,
given the admixture of our present national culture, we'll be
lucky to hold the nation together within its present boundaries.
Reestablishing an independent American republic will not be
easy, but it will have to be done if we are not to be occupied and dominated by
foreign powers.
One reason it will be difficult to reestablish an
American republic is because we no longer really know who we are or what we stand for.
We'll have to figure that out again before we can succeed.
There is certainly no guarantee that the American republic
will be reestablished along the lines of its birth and what was intended by the
founders. The world will remain a dangerous place, and security concerns will
likely continue to dominate national policy, foreign and domestic, and defeat
the notion that there can be, or ought to be, a nation of freedom and liberty for all.
John Q. Pridger
Tuesday, July 4th, 2006
INDEPENDENCE DAY
For Pridger, Independence Day provokes melancholy thoughts of
American independence lost. In spite of Pridger's pride in being an American and
continued patriotism, the celebrations that take place on the 4th of July ring
hollow to him. Celebrating something that was once great but now merely a memory and
fiction is hardly a cheerful observance. The United States is no longer
independent, and celebrating Independence Day is akin to celebrating a birthday
in an intensive care unit, if not a funeral parlor.
To put the best face on what is otherwise a troubling day,
Pridger celebrates the "Declaration of Independence" and what was and
ought to have been. The principles
outlined in the Declaration of Independence are as greatly admired, and are as valid
now, as they were on this
day in 1776. But, as a nation, we've strayed so far from those high principles and goals that
it is a stretch to associate the present nation with them.
So let us celebrate what was intended in that Declaration of
Independence, the essences of which is quoted here (with some emphasized print
added), omitting only the list of
grievances against the King of England.
Declaration of Independence
In Congress, July 4, 1776
The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United
States of America
When in the Course of human events, it becomes
necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected
them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate
and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should
declare the causes which impel them to the separation. – We hold these truths
to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by
their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life,
Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. – That to secure these rights,
Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the
consent of the governed, – That whenever any Form of Government becomes
destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to
abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such
principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most
likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long
established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and
accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to
suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the
forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and
usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce
them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw
off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security...
...
We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of
America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the
world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority
of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these
United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States;
that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all
political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought
to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have
full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish
Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of
right do. – And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on
the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our
Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
| John Hancock
New Hampshire
Josiah Bartlett
Wm. Whipple
Matthew Thornton
Massachusetts Bay
Saml. Adams
John Adams
Robt. Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island
Step. Hopkins
William Ellery
Connecticut
Roger Sherman
Sam'el Huntington
Wm. Williams
Oliver Wolcott
New York
Wm. Floyd
Phil. Livingston
Frans. Lewis
Lewis Morris
|
New Jersey
Richd. Stockton
Jno. Witherspoon
Fras. Hopkinson
John Hart
Abra. Clark
Pennsylvania
Robt. Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benja. Franklin
John Morton
Geo. Clymer
Jas. Smith
Geo. Taylor
James Wilson
Geo. Ross
Delaware
Caesar Rodney
Geo. Read
Tho. M'Kean
Maryland
Samuel Chase
Wm. Paca
Thos. Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton |
Virginia
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Th. Jefferson
Benja. Harrison
Ths. Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton
North Carolina
Wm. Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
South Carolina
Edward Rutledge
Thos. Heyward, Junr.
Thomas Lynch, Junr.
Arthur Middleton
Georgia
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
Geo. Walton
|
We hear about the "New American Century" (meaning the
twenty-first century), as America expends its remaining energy vainly attempting
to bring democracy to Iraq, and deploying its superpower might (at tremendous
cost), in a frustrating attempt to consolidate our international power while
attempting to kill a few Islamic terrorists.
Just imagine what it means when the world's only superpower
expends its remaining energy "bringing democracy" to places like Iraq,
and where one of the predominate national goals has become to kill a certain
individual! What does it mean when the capture or killing of one troublesome
individual becomes cause for self-congratulation and a "victory
celebration"? These are not the activities and goals of a great nation.
These are not great battles – "battles" where collateral damage and
death of innocents always overshadow damage to the enemy. These are not causes
for celebration in a great nation. These are
the goals of something gone haywire – the goals and activities of a dying
regime that do not reflect the high goals to which our founders aspired. And even these
perverse and perverted national activities depend on
foreign credit in an increasingly alienated and hostile world.
Imagine what it means when the supposedly "freest nation
in the world" has not only become the world's greatest debtor nation, but a
nation that has declared by its actions that some men have no unalienable
Rights at all. Any nation that will declare a whole class of people (who
are fighting for something they believe in), as illegal
"enemy combatants" can (and probably eventually will), do the same for
its own citizens. As we treat the lowest "enemy combatant" is the real
gauge of our national humanity and sense of justice.
And how does it come down that the freest nation in the world
has the highest incarceration rate of any nation in the world, with almost a
tenth of the population locked away – many doing long, hard, time for
relatively minor, victimless "crimes"?
America has become a debt-slave to the world even as it strives
to rule it and realize a grandiose euphoria in "global empire" – yet
we have not yet admitted the facts. Our so-called economic prosperity is totally
dependent on foreign creditors, foreign suppliers, and increased foreign trade.
Even where we still shine, in agricultural production, we've missed the boat,
selling our national production – the very essence of our soil – at bargain
basement global prices. In spite of this continued ability to feed ourselves and
others, we are on the brink of becoming a net food importer, if we aren't there
already.
If there was an "American century," it was the
twentieth century. But, like many great nations of the past, we squandered our
national capital, and effectively committed national suicide while we were at
the very pinnacle and apex of our national power and potential. We closed out
that century not even knowing (certainly not acknowledging), that we had already
committed national suicide. We imagined that we would rule the world, and are
striving to do it as our "New World Order" literally threatens to come crashing
down resoundingly all about us.
Our only hope – literally – is that the rest of the world is
(and will remain for the foreseeable future), so dependent on American
consumption and waste, and America's debt itself, that none of those capable of
pulling the plug (Japan, China, the European Union, etc.), will do so. Yet, some of those most capable of pulling the plug
are traditional enemies – some with historical axes to grind with Yankee
imperialism. Our hope is that they will continue to greedily eat at the trough
of Yankee consumerism, and hold our indebtedness notes in order to prevent the
dollars they represent from becoming worthless.
In indebting ourselves to the world, our empire building leaders
feel that we have legitimately bought it and now own it. But we don't own it. In
fact, we've been selling out to the foreign competition at a steady rate.
RETIREMENT SECURITY
Now that Pridger is retired, he has gained that coveted status
that nearly everybody eagerly seeks even during their working years – a steady
and sufficient income without further expenditure of effort. That he has
attained this status seems nothing short of miraculous, since only in the last
few years did Pridger do anything like "retirement planning." But now
Pridger is actually being paid to do nothing, and the pay will supposedly go on
as long as he can manage to continue breathing. Between his retirement pension
and Social Security, he finally (for the first time in his life), has a steady
"fixed income."
But this doesn't spell "security" by any means. The
Social Security System, of course, continues to be threatened with insolvency
because our trusty leaders never managed to figure out what a "trust
fund" is or ought to be. All private pension funds are threatened by the
dual daggers of corruption and a stock market that is massively infected with
multiple ailments such as fraud and derivatives (the very HIV/AIDS of the
financial markets). And, as if all of this were not enough, the value continues
to leak out of the dollar at an alarming rate with no hope of cure in sight.
Before retirement (due to the nature of Pridger's line of work as
a seafarer), it was always feast and famine – go out on the job to make some money,
and come back home to live a "normal life" for a while and spend it.
Just before the money was gone each time, he'd have to go into desperation mode,
leave home, hearth, and family, and journey off to some distant seaport, at
great expense and with no real assurance that a berth would be attainable.
Fortunately, though the American merchant marine withered away throughout
the latter half of his career (and threatened to dry up entirely), Pridger was
fortunately enough to manage to hang on as he became an exclusive member of an
acutely endangered species.
With the economy perpetually on the very brink of
catastrophic collapse, there isn't a great deal of security in retirement or
Social Security. The pension fund could dry up, and maybe disappear almost completely,
as the result of a stock market crash, and that nice Social Security check which
can today purchase about 480 loaves of bread, or gallons of gas, may someday
only purchase one small loaf or one gallon of gas.
In the mean time Pridger will be living the life of Riley, as if
he had half a million bucks in the bank and is living off the interest.
Of course, it's an uncomfortable feeling to know that his Social
Security checks are being underwritten by those who are still out there slaving
away in the work force. Pridger feels a little guilty about that.
John Q. Pridger, retiree
THE MINIMUM WAGE
Though Congress has seen fit to reward itself with another
nice pay raise, there is a lot of resistance to raising the minimum wage from
$5+ to $7+. The argument against raising the minimum wage is always that doing
so will cut jobs and curtail job growth.
Yet there has been nothing more effective in hurting domestic
industry and causing job, factory, and whole industry export than the national
policies cobbled together by Congress and a succession of presidential
administrations going back at least to Reagan. The "new international
economic order" was (and continues to be), the mother of all domestic job
export programs.
Of course, it's been the best jobs that have been exported –
the jobs that literally made the American industrial middle class what it once
was, and provided the nation with the broad-based prosperity we once enjoyed.
The "fair to middling" jobs (including those much ballyhooed
"knowledge worker" jobs), are now being outsourced.
Because so many "good jobs" have disappeared, the
the minimum wage issue has become much more important than it ever was before.
The lion's share of all the new jobs being produced in the new economy are
minimum wage jobs. A much larger percentage of the working population are now
today working at minimum wage – and this includes a much larger percentage of
family "breadwinners" than ever before.
Back when Pridger first burst forth into the job market,
minimum wage jobs were the first stepping stone in the job market. An actual
family breadwinner needed to do much better. But, increasingly, the minimum wage
job is the best young workers can aspire to – and they need a high school
diploma, if not some years of college, to be considered competent to work at
all. Two breadwinners are now required to support a family at something close to
the official poverty level. It would take about four minimum wage breadwinners
to approximate the income of what might still be termed a decent American
industrial wage of above $20.00 an hour.
When the past decades of inflation are taken into
consideration, the minimum wage should probably be closer to $10.00 an hour.
Pridger uses the 60/10 formula for making this calculation. The present dollar
is worth about a tenth of what the dollar was worth in 1960, when Pridger
entered the job market. Minimum wage was about a dollar an hour then, and a
dollar would purchase about what ten will purchase today, though pricing is
pretty warped now. But a good restaurant breakfast that would cost $.50 back in
1960 will now demands about $5.00. Back in 1960, a ten cent tip would have been
considered decent after such a meal, but who would walk away from the table
today without leaving a dollar or more? Three dollars an hour was a good
industrial wage in 1960, and $30.00 an hour would be a comparable wage today.
Gas was twenty-five to thirty cents a gallon back then, so
$2.50 to $3.00 gas today is roughly just keeping up with what it should have
been. But not so for the minimum wage.
The minimum wage has lagged back and is now about half of what
it should be, and $10.00 an hour is fast becoming the new industrial wage
standard – the standard that's making entry level construction job
unattractive to young "Americans" while attracting illegal aliens to
the trades.
On the other hand, congressional salaries, and the pay of
elected officials, have kept up with inflation rather nicely, if not exceeded it
considerably.
For the working class, things are going backwards. The 40
hours work week is endangered. Overtime pay is endangered. Pensions, health
insurance, and other benefits are endangered.
There's one thing that is fairly certain, raising the minimum
wage to $7, or even $10 an hour, would not cause McDonalds, Wendy's, KFC,
WalMart and the service industries in general to flee the country. But it might
tempt Congress to hire illegal aliens to clean up the Capital.
ECONOMY TOTALLY OUT OF WHACK
Back in the old days, when we were an industrially independent
nation, and the government had the good sense to protect our industries and
borders, raises in wages usually resulted in higher prices for the goods being
produced. This was only natural. That's the way things work – or worked. But
today, higher wages in productive industries lead to the jobs merely being transferred
to Mexico, China, or elsewhere, and the goods imported.
Industries that cannot flee the country are today forced to
compete with foreign industry even in the domestic market. If they can't make
it, operating in the red (and eventual bankruptcy – or bale out, in the case
of a few "critical" industries), is the only answer.
It shouldn't take a rock scientist to figure out what the
problem is. Trouble is, our government (and the brain trust it depends on to do
its thinking), are not made of rocket scientist material – nor even practical
economists (and nary a philosopher is evident anywhere) – they don't have an
ounce of genuine patriotism, national loyalty, or civic responsibility in their
bodies. Wall Street has holds their loyalty, the world is their market, and
Mammon is their god.
John Q. Pridger
|
vs.
The New
