AN ON-GOING COMMENTARY ON CURRENT ISSUES
by John Q. Pridger, C.P.
RESCUING THE YEN
June 18, 1998: Billions to bail out Mexico. Billions to bail out the stricken East Asian Tiger cubs. Billions to bail out Korea. Now billions to support the Japan yen. The much bally-hooed "international interdependence" certainly isn't coming cheap to the American taxpayer. But if we don't bail the global economy out, who will? And if we don't, the stock market bubble might burst sooner rather than later. Thanks to our efforts to bring about a New World Order, we increasingly find ourselves between the devil and the deep — a rock and a hard place. We're damned if we do, and damned if we don't. This is the global village we're talking of here, and it's a damned big village. Each bail-out is calculated to temporarily stave off global economic disaster, and prevent panic from infecting our stock-market.
Declining currency values in Asia have a number of negative consequences. They impoverish already impoverished peoples. Bail-outs impoverish them even further — far into the distant future. (Bail-outs only benefit already wealthy investors, by pulling their chestnuts out of the fire.) It makes imports cheaper and exports dearer, contributing significantly to our already obscene and dangerous trade imbalance. It cuts the heart out of our supposedly "growing" export industries — the great economic hope.
We are in a very unenviable position with Japan. Talk about interdependence! We've got to do all we can to prop them up, regardless of what happens in the rest of Asia. Japan owns at least a quarter of our national debt, and if we don't do all we can to stabilize the yen and prevent economic melt-down in Japan, they might start cashing in American Treasury bonds.
The Fed chairman, Alan Greenspan, has recently admitted that our economy is unbelievably strong — a most wondrous thing! Pridger has paraphrased that. He didn't actually say "unbelievably". He gives the impression that he believes it. But he either does believe it, (that we've "moved beyond history") and is baffled, or he is just trying to reassure the public. Read between the lines, and watch out!
"The current economic performance ... is as impressive as any I have witnessed ... It is possible we have moved 'beyond history'." (Alan Greenspan, quoted from "Verbatim", June 22, 1998 issue of TIME)
If we think we have moved beyond history, we haven't learned its lessons.
THE BLIND LEADING THE BLIND
It is axiomatic that the masses will either be herded or led like sheep. The leaders are usually wolves in sheep's clothing, and the shepherd is on the slaughter house payroll. The individual sheep may get a glimpse of truth and reality only infrequently, and dismiss it as an aberration. Charlatans abound, and are heeded by a few, while the vast majority trust in the shepherd implicitly. Every once in a while a lamb will be favored with an insight into an unsuspected and alarming truths. Having no measure by which to gauge such unusual things, a small but perhaps significant truth takes on large proportions and a life of its own. If the lamb has some courage, he'll take that truth and broadcast it loudly, bidding the flock to follow. Many will. Then, likely as not, they will run with that truth into vast mine-fields of error. The blind leading the blind.
Unfortunately, this is the case with many patriots and conspiracy theorists. Fortunately not all, but too many.
WHO IS A CAPITALIST?
If a man owns a shovel and makes his living by digging with it, is he a capitalist? No. Though his shovel may correctly be termed his "capital," and he may think of himself as a capitalist, he isn't truly a capitalist until he hires somebody else to do his digging for him. If he works for and by himself, he is a free agent, a individual laborer for hire, a contractor, or a tradesman — not a capitalist. He engages in free enterprise and the free enterprises system. The capitalist may also engage in the free enterprise system, but but profits from the labor of others. Free enterprise and capitalism are not synonymous, and the popular misconception that they are, causes no end of confusion and trouble.
Henry Ford was not a capitalist while he was building horseless carriages in his workshop. He became a capitalist when he had a proposal to sell and raised "capital" from other capitalists to put others to work building Ford Cars.
Entrepreneurs seldom begin as capitalists. First they are individual thinkers, tinkerers, or innovators. Some never become capitalists, though successful capitalists are usually entrepreneurs.
Unbridled capitalism can destroy true free enterprise as certainly as communism would. Both are collective systems which, given the latitude to do so, stifle individual freedom.
Capitalism can only be good as long as the regulatory hand of government limits its predatory tendencies and requires of it civic responsibility. The advent of the global economy free market system through "free trade," combined with deregulation of corporate monoliths, has produced a new form of tyranny and a return of the robber barons.
Capital has a duty, which it doesn't often recognize without prompting, to serve the greater public as a distributor of the wealth it creates — not only to stock-owners, but to the labor which actually facilitate success.
The necessary prompting must be done in part by government and by labor itself organized into unions. The government's primary function is to level the playing field within national boundaries, and prevent capital from playing the international wage and price differential game to the determent of labor.
NATIONAL PARALYSIS
June 11, 1998: There is no easy cure for the kind of paralysis that grips the nation. Most don't even know that we are experiencing the throes of paralysis. (It feels too good to be bad! The economy is really "cookin'!") Too many think that we are still headed up the river, rather than being sold down the river. Since confusion is almost universal, and our education system exists to perpetuate it, our nation is at the mercy of global manipulators. The majority fail to see the forest for the trees, and others cannot see a single tree in the forest. Government itself has been totally subverted to the ends of global profiteers, aided and abetted by shallow "visionaries" with intellectual credentials, and well-meaning dupes of every conceivable stripe. Our representatives take an oath of office which has become as meaningless to them as marriage vows become to most not-so-newly-weds. Absolutely nothing is sacred, least of all such things as the Bible, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and Bill of Rights — not to mention personal honor. Even most patriots have a very short and spotty view of history, thus many blind spots that render them easy meat for sophisticated spoilers.
In the mean time, we labor under 3-D government, i.e., Deceit, Deception, and Deficits. The deficits are not only budgetary. The term has broad connotations applicable at all levels, and in every branch and agency, of government.
Our national malaise has not cropped up over two, three, four, or five decades. It was predicted by Thomas Jefferson and others of our founding fathers, (who did try to insure against it by limiting and dividing the powers of the central government, and reserving power to the people). It was apparent to Abraham Lincoln long before he was elected president, and more than confirmed to him before he was assassinated. It was apparent to English historian Thomas Babington Macaulay in 1857 when he wrote:
"Either some Ceasar or Napoleon will seize the reins of government with a strong hand; or your republic will be as fearfully plundered and laid waste by barbarians in the Twentieth century as the Roman Empire was in the Fifth — with this difference... that your Huns and Vandals will have been engendered within your own country by your own institutions."
Of course, no individual Ceasar or Napoleon has yet permanently seized the reins of our government, (aside from Lincoln and Franklin D. Roosevelt on a temporary basis) but the reins of government have nonetheless been seized — but not in order to save the republic, but to destroy it. Who can deny that our nation has been, and is being, plundered and laid to waste by Huns and Vandals engendered within our own country by our own institutions? In short, through the efforts of our own representatives, our nation is committing suicide. Yes! And doing it front and center on the world stage, as the rest of the world looks on with a great deal of satisfaction, (yet also in wondering disbelief that the world's "only remaining superpower" and humanity's "once best hope" would do such idiotic things to itself).
INTELLECTUAL DISCLAIMER
By way of heading off the academic vultures and spoilers — and lest the reader get the idea that Pridger thinks he's some kind of latter day prophet with a direct connection to the Divine data-base, Pridger admits he knows practically nothing. And in his quest for Truth, he may be easy meat for the spoilers, since his credentials lack academic sanction. His opinions don't carry the weight of an institutionally certified B.A., B.S, or Ph.D. No, Pridger isn't a licensed card-carrying thinker. Duly certified academic types can smugly dismiss Pridger as a backwoods provincial and anachronistic dreamer — and they wouldn't be far off. But, nevertheless, Pridger is a one-man think-tub, and will fight on, firm in the belief that Truth has an enduring value that deception, deceit, and hypocrisy can only temporarily eclipse.
CONSPIRACY UPDATE
It's out there, and it stalks the earth — Conspiracy denial.
June 9, 1998: "Conspiracy denial" is the affliction of the gullible, and an important tool of all conspirators. "Responsible" citizens are supposed to have too much sense to fall for and believe in conspiracy theory. The Big Boys just wouldn't do that to us poor kids. In any case, Big Brother will take care of us—the "responsible" citizen knows that, and trusts. He trusts in his government and has faith — or at least enough sense to know that there's nothing he can do about it.
No "responsible" citizen believes there is a New World Order, or One World Government, conspiracy. The New World Order is coming about through a natural progression of irrepressible, unstoppable, free-market forces, not a conspiracy. In other words, it isn't a conspiracy, but a chain of coincidences — happy happenstance. And, of course, it is good. It means cheap TVs, VCRs, bananas, and PCs. It means liberation. In any case, there's no world government in the making. The United Nations isn't the embryo of world government, it's only... Well, it is like a world government, but it isn't world government. It prevents wars and helps feed needy children in Third World countries. The World Court certainly isn't evidence of some kind of a world government is it? Well, never mind that. We need some way of prosecuting international criminals don't we? The International Monetary Fund isn't a world central bank... Well, it is like a world central bank, but it isn't a central bank — exactly, at least not yet. In any case, the United States isn't foregoing any of its national sovereignty... Well, maybe just a little — just to get the cooperation of other member nations, so that the global economy will function according to plan. Plan? What plan?
Renowned author/philosopher Will Durant said, "It may be true... that 'you can't fool all the people all the time,' but you can fool enough of them to rule a large country." He might have said "world" and been almost as correct, except that the world probably cannot be ruled for long. It has been proven, since Durant wrote the above, that you can fool enough people long enough to bring about a new global economic order detrimental to the welfare of American labor. It can be proclaimed (as president George Bush did) "...the opportunity to fulfill the long-held promise of a New World Order where diverse nations are drawn together in common cause to achieve the universal aspirations of mankind." Yes, this can be done, and done without admitting that there has been a plan dedicated to its accomplishment.
But, as Franklin Roosevelt said, "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, it was planned that way."
The dollar, in addition to serving as the international reserve currency, is becoming the de facto circulating currency of the Americas. European Community is moving toward a common currency, according to plan. Through the dollar, the Euro, and the Yen, the goal of "trilateralism" will be accomplished, and the administration of the global economy, (by the IMF) much simplified. Next step, global monetary Union. "Permit me to issue and control a nation's money and I care not who makes its laws." (Mayer Amschel Rothschild.)
A bail-out of a nation by the IMF is a de facto economic take-over of the country. Happy happenstance or design?
LONG LIVE THE NEW WORLD ORDER!
The grand conspiracy has been crowned with such a high degree of apparent success that it is now fashionable for everybody who is somebody in the national government to flout their card-carrying membership in the face of the citizenry. The Roman Empire lasted about a thousand years; the British Empire lasted about half that long; the American experiment in limited republican government, and freedom and liberty for all, but a short two hundred years. The Global Corporate Financial Empire, known as the New World Order, will be lucky to survive the millennium bug.
Meanwhile, the next great Empire is methodically taking shape in the Far East , (with our enthusiastic assistance) and biding its time.
SPECULATION
What kind of a master would China make? Hint: The Chinese, and the East in general, have not forgotten the era of Western colonial conquest, humiliation, and exploitation. China hasn't forgotten the Opium Wars, nor has Japan forgotten Hiroshima and Nagasaki. If these were Christian nations, one might hope they would tend to forgive the transgressions of the past. But these are not Christian countries, (the Philippines excepted). The United States is no longer a Christian nation either. We have joined the "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" crowd, and this may have something to do with our seemingly premature decline as a nation.
SUB-ECONOMICS
(When the Emperor Has No Clothes)
June 7, 1998: What will happen when corporations consolidate their dominance and control of the world? Revolution, of course. In some places it will be violent, traditional revolution. In other places it may be a quiet economic revolution. Pridger hopes it will be the quiet variety which comes to America. Quiet revolution can, and most probably will, be accomplished through "sub-economics."
Sub-economics is to the corporate controlled economy what the underground economy is to the government controlled tax system. The two will merge. Government and corporate rule are merging in the global "free market" economic model, to produce a new hybrid form of international fascism. In the new kind of world government which is emerging, only the police power resides in government, (state, national, and international)—all other power resides in powerful international corporate entities.
The quiet revolution of sub-economics will result from the peoples' desire and need to free themselves from the combined tyrannies, corporate and governmental. It will be a revolution without leaders or organization, and thus the corporate economic, and state police, powers will be powerless against it. The police power will have to concentrate on such things as militias, international terrorists, and urban riots, while the real revolutionaries in the sub-economy undermine the edifice of the corporate "Tower of Babel." This new Tower of Babel resembles an inverted pyramid, thus, in spite of long and careful planning by global plutocrats, is inherently unstable.
Sub-economics is people power. Those who comprise the sub-economy will be a mixed bag. The primary, or spear-head, groups are the same as composed the "back to the land" and "survivalist" movements of recent decades, joined by legions of "downsized labor" forced, by the new globalism, to opt out of the corporate structure to which they had become accustomed, in favor of home-based business enterprises. Amish farming communities are natural, already existent, sub-economic groups. They will act as models for the development of non-sectarian, non-toxic, non-chemical based, sustainable agricultural communities of the future. The organic foods and alternate medicines industries are part of this unorganized movement. It will be composed of both traditionalists and non-traditionalists, utilizing a combination of low and high tech. Many will adopt corporate business structures of their own in order to take advantage of laws favorable to corporations. It will be a return of cottage industry with a new sophistication, and local economics through farmers' markets and direct, producer-to-consumer, marketing.
This new market system will once again allow consumers the option of not only buying American, but buying local. Not only local agricultural produce, but all nature of consumer goods. Cottage industry will once again be viable and competitive, because it cuts out several layers of corporate middlemen and bypasses expensive and complex transportation systems which cannot remain competitive in the long term.
The sub-economy already exists, and its continued development is insured by our otherwise economically suicidal march into the New World Order. The New World Order, for all its apparent success, will ultimately fail, as the international interdependence it has strived to produce, in turn produces a chain-reaction global economic collapse. The international plutocrats, who think they are on the brink of total success and control of global markets and resources will find themselves powerless to control events. Their "Order" will be replaced by a "Newer, people-based, Order," as people and local communities are forced to look to their own economic survival.
The Emperor, having believed he has conquered the world, will discover he has no clothes—no following, and no Empire—only hollow corporate structures. When the the cashless economy arrives, and corporate control of every aspect of trade and commerce seems complete, the people will be trading in the local marketplace with goods and services and locally issued script currency.
The process is already underway. Its progress will be dictated by future developments. At some point, the peoples' representatives will awaken and shift their loyalty once again from Wall Street and corporate capital interests, to the interests of the people they are supposed to represent. They will do this or government itself will totally lose its hold upon the people and all political processes in spite of itself.
"IT'S DOWNRIGHT WEIRD..."
Says James K Glassman (in the June 1, 1998 U.S. News & World Report article "Who needs the Fed?") "...Here we are in the seventh year of an expansion—at a time in the business cycle when the economy is usually overheating—and prices aren't shooting up."
The economists and the experts at the Fed are baffled. "As hard as they look... [the Fed] can't find any inflation to fight." But Pridger isn't baffled. What none of the experts want to admit is that this great economic "expansion" has been accomplished at the expense of American labor, (through corporate downsizing, and shifting production from this country to low-wage countries in Latin America and Asia). Prices aren't rising simply because production costs have been de-Americanized, and down-sized American worker-consumers have been on a long-term belt-tightening binge. There can be no "wage-price spiral" inflationary pressure if wages are spiraling downward. This, of course, has never happened before in the history of American capitalism. We can thank the globalization of markets, and the "wonderful new world" (dis-order) for this weird state of affairs.
With unemployment low, and the minimum wage up, the experts may actually believe that labor isn't suffering. But labor is suffering the greatest sell-out in American history. What is up is the number of minimum wage jobs. The industrial wage is down or out. Down to about half it's former level in many industries, or out to Mexico or Indonesia. We've also seen a return of the ten and twelve hour work day, and the six day work week. Union membership is down, as are employee benefit packages, and capital is rejoicing. CEO's, making as much as 326 times their average workers' wage, are smug in their praise of the new global economy. But the machinery propping up this lop-sided "prosperity" is already breaking down.
The illusion won't last much longer. Chickens always tend to come home to roost. What is happening in Indonesia and the rest of Asia, and Russia, are harbingers of things to come. Capital has gutted itself without knowing it, because bottom lines are still up, along with the "hope" for expanding markets. Without the American government's ability to engineer taxpayer-funded international bailout packages, however, the global economy would already be serving up a bitter dose of reality. In the mean time, if we can manage to keep the suffering and privations safely offshore, in Indonesia, Korea, and Thailand, the illusion of prosperity here can be nurtured for a while longer.
The great advantage of the global economy, and the much heralded global village, remember, is that the world's economic fortunes are inescapably intertwined and interdependent. Now that trouble has engulfed Asia, we are somehow supposed to believe we can escape unscathed. We have sown the seeds globalism far and wide, and fertilized them with ample media hype and debt-capital. We will reap what we have sown in due course.
THE MARKET RULES — AND THE RULES ARE CHANGED
June 6, 1998: It was the so-called "Free Market Economics" (of Milton Friedman and others) that derailed the conservative movement and threw conservatives in general into confusion and disarray—even as they gained political power over liberals and democrats. Until the conservatives were thus compromised, the "New World Order" was perceived as threatening from the left, in the form of international communism and creeping "democratic (Fabian) socialism." Before Reagan hit the White House, almost all conservatives bought the line that free market economics were good. During and after Reagan, many conservatives and patriots woke up. But not nearly enough, and many that did wake up, awoke even more confused than before. Those who fail to wake up, of course, are confused too, if they aren't totally blind.
The confusion was intended, of course. Divide and conquer, confuse and rule. Conservatives and patriots have always been freedom lovers. Free market economics seemed tailored to their needs, and thus they fell into a trap from which even awakening has not — cannot — extracted them. The confusion stems from the fact that while free market economics are good and necessary to freedom within the confines of a national economy, when applied on a global basis, they destroy local free markets and local economies. Thus they undermine the freedom made possible by economic prosperity. The free market system within a nation is a national blessing. Global free markets, on the other hand, can be, and usually are, a national curse.
How can this be? It does seem to be quite a paradox. One must distinguish and differentiate between "free enterprise" and "capitalism," and between "individual free enterprise," (economic freedom) and "collective free enterprise" (corporate capitalism). The institution of freedom is both personal and national. The individual is the basis of free market economics conductive to freedom, not corporations. It begins with the individual's ownership of his own mind and body. This ownership is the essence of individual sovereignty. Inherent in this is one's constitutionally protected right to reap the full benefits and rewards of one's own labor; to own land and farm; to own and operate a business; buy and sell goods and services; and to sell one's labor in the corporate marketplace. The problem and confusion begins when people forget this, and begin thinking that the source of economic freedom springs from the corporation. Corporate capitalism, while necessary to modern-world prosperity, can be as oppressive and tyrannical as communism, which of course is nothing more than state capitalism.
Over-empowering corporate capitalism, in the false belief that it is the vehicle of freedom, has led to globalization. This has allowed capital to take on a renewed arrogance, and once again don face of exploitation which spawned the communism movement in Europe over a century ago, and organized labor in this country. We are doomed, it seems, to repeat history with some modern technological deviations. Revolutions—several of them—wait in the wings.
SPEED WORSHIP
June 5, 1998: Finally it has happened. A high-speed train in Germany turned into disaster with about a hundred fatalities. Of course, it was inevitable. High speed trains, and jet-liners, in spite of a surprising safety record, are all disasters waiting to happen. Our worship of speed and bigness dictate that more such disasters will happen with increasing frequency in the future. Europe's and Japan's high-speed trains are the envy of American transportation planners. Someday, if we get the trains, we'll be having mega train disasters too. In the mean time we'll have to be satisfied with Amtrak and freight derailments that produce only few fatalities.
Like the worship of speed, the belief that bigness is good leads to ever-larger disasters. We really didn't learn much from the Titanic disaster. There are bigger, more costly disasters in the making today—bigger cruise ships on the drawing boards. We've already seen what big oil supertankers are capable of. The "economies of scale," in combination with the cult of speed and the creed of Mammon will someday convey some sobering lessons. But nothing has been learned yet.
What's wrong with reasonable scales and reasonable speeds? Unit sizes in which mishaps only endanger small numbers of people at a time, and speeds at which survivability of inevitable accidents is possible? Are we in such a hurry, as a society, that inevitable human sacrifice on a large scale has become acceptable in the name of scale and speed?
A train wreck at 70 mph is bad enough, and 70 mph ought to be fast enough for anybody. But the dream is to cart thousands of travelers from city to city and coast to coast in mega-trains at 500 mph! The safety issue is always settled with things like airbags and, in the case of air travelers', life jackets!
Remember "Say alive. Drive 55!"? It was pretty difficult to drive 55 in automobiles engineered to cruise comfortably at 85, on highways engineered for unlimited speeds. The government didn't think of limiting speeds to 55 until all systems were engineered to function at 85 or more, (official speed limit, 65 by day and 55 by night with expensive double reflective speed limit signs in place nationwide). This is typical government planning. Speed first, safety later. Only a government that would send an elementary school teacher up in a space shuttle can be this safety conscience. Make sense? It isn't supposed to. When Mammon is god, only the bottom line counts, and the bottom line is profit, not human life, regardless of the propaganda the Surgeon General puts out.
Ever-bigger corporations, with ever-increasing powers, combined with ever-increasing urban populations, increasingly dependent upon them for sustenance and survival, are particularly scary. Combine with these, the on-going toxification and debasement of the soil, and agricultural systems, resulting in an increasingly toxic, nutrient deficient food supply, and the raw materials of nightmare are upon us. (Recommended reading: Small is Beautiful, by E. F. Schumacher, and Ecology of Commerce, by Paul Hawken).
AIR BAGS AND PARACHUTES!
Air bags are expensive, inherently dangerous, and required. They sometimes save lives and sometimes kill children when they work properly. The government, in all its wisdom, (and with the righteous firmness of a Big Brother) has mandated that drivers and front seat passengers travel with a literal explosive charge ever-ready to go of in their faces. Pridger feels somewhat uncomfortable with this sort of safety insurance. When these systems get a little age on them, they might be subject to malfunction. Where's the guarantee that potholes, or some other act of God, won't set them off at an inconvenient time?
It took Pridger a while to adapt to the somewhat practical idea of wearing a seatbelt. Government requiring them in cars is arguably sensible, (but mandating their use is petty tyranny and infringement on an individual's right to live dangerously in the fast lane). At least one can control a seat belt, but try controlling an airbag when it fires off. Try controlling your car when this happens unexpectedly in rush hour traffic, or at 95 mph on the interstate! Yet school buses and public transportation buses haven't yet been provided with seat belts, nor air travelers with such practical safety devices as parachutes.
Ships require lifeboats and life rafts. One would think aircraft would require at least the same level of survivability in the event of a craft "going down" unexpectedly during flight. No, the "cost-benefit" equation doesn't justify it. Big Brother agrees. Yet aircraft seldom wreck until they hit the ground, in most cases giving crew and passengers plenty of time to "ejected" through a tube or door in the underbelly of the aircraft, and perhaps land safely. Parachutes in airliners make more sense than air bags in private automobiles, the way Pridger sees it.
PROPHECY
"GOD IS GOING TO RATTLE OUR CAGE SOON."
BARRY GOLDWATER
May 30, 1998: Pridger laments the passing, yesterday, of one of the century's great conservatives. Goldwater had his flaws, but his focus was pretty clear for the most part. He was an anti-communist hawk, and that scared the electorate back in 1964. That is, the media and president Johnson scared the electorate away from Goldwater. In his own "anti-communist zeal," Johnson didn't mind waging a "small police action" under United Nations auspices against a fifth-rate power, but he didn't have the stomach to seriously challenge international communism. Johnston effectively jousted at windmills, and lost, at unprecedented cost to the nation, in terms of lives and money squandered, and loss of national prestige.
The media has made much of Goldwater's alleged "conversion" to progressive ideas in his later years, such as on abortion and gay rights. Perhaps Goldwater's mind was failing him. More likely, Goldwater was a libertarian conservative all along. There is much confusion arising from the fact that "conservatism" itself has undergone some rather radical change since the sixties. It split during the Reagan era into two distinct branches. This split has never been properly digested, and confusion is the rule in the two major branches of so-called conservative political thought.
The abortion issue, like the gay rights issue, when approached from the libertarian viewpoint, are particularly difficult to deal with. Pridger, it must be remembered, has some libertarian leanings, so he feels he can relate to the Goldwater paradox. Take abortion. A woman should have the right to an abortion if her spiritual values do not hold human life sacred. In other words, if the right to kill her baby in the womb is her idea of "right for her," let her kill her baby. In fact, the baby, at that point, is arguably really still part of herself. Let her kill part of herself if it seems convenient and she can live with it. Killing is a manly art, and women today aspire to manly arts. That the act might abort a great future president, or even the SECOND COMING, is irrelevant. Women's right to be the equal of men at any cost, is the real issue here. That we still draw the line at birth, and keep it illegal to kill the baby once it's born is the badge of modern civilization. Also at issue is whether or not the federal government has any right at all to tell anybody specifically what they can or cannot do on non-federal property. That simply isn't a federal function, thus the separation of church and state.
On gay rights. Of course gays ought to have equal rights—but only if they can qualify as human. However, if they are human, (which, of course, most of them are) they already have equal rights. Passing special legislation to specifically protect something known as gay rights would be like passing special legislation to protect atheist rights or Jehovah's Witness's rights. There would be no end to such special legislation. In short all such special interest legislation is counter-productive and ridiculous, and serves no other purpose than to debase the concept of universal human rights.
If Pridger isn't mistaken, Goldwater actually believed in limited government—government chained to the few powers enumerated in the Constitution, and further limited by the Bill of Rights. A federal government operating under that limiting mandate cannot rightfully burden itself with micro and macro management of moral and social issues. The body of statute law, which purports to regulate majority-held beliefs and morals, is a prerogative of state and local jurisdictions, and the people themselves, (who are presumed to be capable of responsible self-governance). The Ninth and Tenth Amendments should have made that perfectly clear.
May 29, 1998: Pridger has gone on record as an American Patriot who favors such things as American Independence; freedom, liberty, and justice for all; and preservation of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. He believes the Militia is comprised of the whole people—at least those willing and able to bear arms in defense of the Constitution and the freedom it represents. As a citizen willing to fight for what he believes in, his weapon of choice is the pen, and not the rifle. Unfortunately, as historian Charles A. Beard, (1874-1948) once wrote:
"One of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the great struggle for Independence."
Every once in a while Pridger receives e-mail from people wanting to "join a militia," or even wanting to join "Pridger's Militia." Sorry to disappoint, but Pridger hasn't got one. If one doesn't already know he or she is a militia member, then seeking to join one isn't going to help very much. And anybody who can surf around the Web and find Pridger's Index, ought to be capable of finding just about anything else he is looking for, such as a "militia group" of one stripe or another. Pridger doesn't give out, or even have, such information. In fact, he is pretty careful to distance himself from all public and private "groups" and organizations of all sorts. Pridger is in the education business, (for whatever his humble contribution may be worth) not the militia business. Nor is he engaged in any anti-government activity. In fact, Pridger is very much pro-(American Constitutional) government, and would very much like to see it cured of all of its many current long-term illnesses. (Though he fears some of these illnesses may have become terminal and irreversible).
Sick entities often do sick things. (Like becoming cranks, busybodies, snoopers, and tyrants.) So when Pridger receives e-mail queries, (particularly repeated inquiries from the same source) seeking information on militias and such things, he tends to suspect the sources of being "hostile probes," either from some Big Brother agency or other hostile "non-profit" organization. This isn't paranoia, it's simple prudence and common sense. Pridger would like to caution sincere people seeking information on the Internet on joining militias. Big Brother is bound to be out there, "under cover" on the Web, and in a big way. It couldn't be any other way. But don't be alarmed. Just be prudent, and know that the "militia" group you connect with on the Web may be none other than our friends at the BATF, FBI, CIA, DEA, ADL, or MOSSAD. There are bound to be many wolves in sheep's clothing out there. That's not to say that all the wolves are government or foreign agents either. At least some of these operate under the auspices of "high motives" and purpose. (For example: If you are a pedophile seeking child pornography, the pornographer you find is more than likely a government busybody looking for you. It works the same for militias.) There are plenty of "regular" (non-government) criminal elements out there too. This includes all nature of hucksters, shysters, and predators with the "lowest of motives."
As for Big Brother and the Web, note this: The Internet, to a very large degree, owes its existence to none other than Big Brother. And Big Brother wants all of us to become totally and unequivocally hooked, and dependent, on this new medium. In any case, Pridger is flattered when anybody, or any thing, takes an interest in his pages. In fact, Pridger writes not only to the American Patriot, but Big Brother types as well, in hopes that a little light might positively influence policy and inspire a vestige of true patriotism even in some of the intellectually hollowed halls of government.
Pridger does not, (in fact cannot) put anybody in touch with any group of weekend warriors. This is not to say, however, that Web links to such groups cannot be found through Pridger's Links. (Pridger doesn't investigate them far enough to pretend to know the good guys from the bad guys, real patriots from government agents, cranks or snoops.) Pridger Links to the world of ideas, and militias and patriot groups are part of that world.
THE FINKELSTEIN BOX
 |
Arthur Finkelstein is a Republican consultant
who set the pattern for Republican triumphs in 1980's. The graphic at left describes two different political countries within the United States. The "box" roughly shows the new Republican strongholds— the South and the Mountains—the "non-cosmopolitan" heartland that encompass the Old Confederacy, the "border areas," the great plains, and mountains which reflect the remnants of the frontier and "cowboy" cultures considered anachronistic by modern liberals, progressives, and neo-conservatives. |
Pridger finds Finkelstein's box interesting. Though the boundaries may not be all that precise, it points to some cultural realities that have very little to do with party politics. Call this box the area of the REMNANT—that is, the remnant of America's traditional southern and western cultures, or America's true Heartland. The cosmopolitan areas outside the box represent America's "New Age" cultural Headlands—those that embrace big government, multi-culturalism, and the Global Village. The New Age culture is at odds with traditional American republicanism and the concept of limited government. Since the Headlands encompass the nation's major population centers, limited government has long ago effectively been voted out.
The Finkelstein Box was featured in the current Atlantic Monthly (June 1998) article by Christopher Caldwell, a senior writer for the "conservative" Weekly Standard, "The Southern Captivity of the GOP" was the name of the article, and it's twelve pages were an indictment of what Pridger would call traditional ideological Americana in favor of the New Age variety of "conservatism." It focused on the Republican party, and essentially established that "The Republicans' biggest problem is not their ideology but their lack of one. Stigmatized as rightists, behaving like leftists, and ultimately standing for nothing, they're in the worst of all possible worlds... it will be a long time before the party is again able to rule from a place in Americans' hearts."
Pridger agrees, but the same ailment that has infected the Republican party also infects the Democratic party. In short the Republican party is no longer a republican party, and the Democratic party is no longer a democratic party. Both are "republicrats," which means no real ideology, and certainly no loyalty to traditional American ideals based in the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights. New Age conservatives, (or neo-conservatives) such as Caldwell—like everybody else that counts these days—stand for "Free-market economics," (a euphemism for the the corporate utopia being peddled as the "New World Order," a corporate republicrat/globalist money machine and control mechanism).
THE STOCK MARKET-ECONOMY
Republicrats in general stand for a Dow 10,000 by the by the year 2,000. In 1994, stock market analyst, Ed Yardeni, predicted the Dow would hit 10,000 by the year 2,000, and it probably will. William G. Camden went out on a limb some time ago, (NAAAP Perspective, Spring, 1996) and predicted a Dow 2,000 by the year 2,000. Maybe he was being a little too pessimistic. Both predictions are possible, of course. The Dow now seems certain to reach 10,000 well ahead of schedule, allowing it plenty of time to hit 2,000, or something approaching that figure, by the end of the millennium.
Ask yourself this simple question. What is the "substance" of the stock market's spectacular increase in recent years? Have the actual values of corporate assets increased apace with the market values of their securities? Of course not. The rise in stock prices is, to a great degree, a speculative bidding frenzy. Much of the increase has been through the processes known as "securitization." Securitization is essentially the smoke and mirror value-added elements of corporate net worth. Its substance, such as it is, rides upon a lot of assumptions contingent on projections of future growth, including perpetually expanding markets and unbounded consumer demand. Much of the "value growth" in recent years has been in the form of personnel "downsizing," i.e., the wages of labor appropriated to stockowners. This, however, isn't sustainable growth. It isn't even sustainable psychology. At some point worker downsizing meets the assumption of increasing consumer demand like a sledge hammer meeting the forehead of a cow at a slaughterhouse.
There is an amazing degree of confidence in Wall Street stock prices. Pridger suspects that it, at least in part, stems from a suspicion, bordering on faith and unshakable confidence, that the government will step in and prevent a 1929-type crash. Even if the crash should become catastrophic, there is faith in the governments ability to bail the large institutional investors out, and along with them at least the largest of the small-fry. Maybe even the International Monetary Fund can be called in to "help out." (Help out: When applied by government bureaucrats, means "to remove from within" or "disenfranchise.")
William Camden called "derivatives" the "AIDS of the global market economy." Pridger agrees. It's out there, the system is infected, but nobody knows how bad. Add to this the on-going and worsening Asian and Russian economic crises, India/Pakistan nuclear proliferation, the Millennium bug, general Millennium Hysteria, and we have a frightening witch's brew that threatens all systems, financial and otherwise.
Camden, of course, carefully qualified his gloomy prediction and left himself an out. Both the deceptive and creative nature and potentials of Voodoo Economics may yet save the day, allowing debt expansion to push infinity without coming up for redemption. As economic and monetary theory and policy begin to transition into the arena of cyber space technology, there will be much new room for creative accounting practices to preserve the integrity of balloon economies and smoke and mirror prosperity. Reality may become as irrelevant as family farmers to the economic sciences, providing for perpetual motion in the realms of debt and wealth creation. Remember, credit expansion has the potential of being infinitely flexible when Voodoo Economics is added to the mix. Long-term payouts can be extended well beyond the seventh generation of debt servants. Principle can effectively be launched into deep space without causing undue hardship, as long as there is sufficient promise of future generations to at least pay a few percentages points of interest in perpetuity.
THE POWER OF THE MEDIA
"WHAT WE FOCUS ON—EXPANDS."
May 22, 1998: Well, there's been another child-killer rampage—this time in Oregon. Two children and the killers' parents dead, and several others wounded. The kid entered the school and "coolly sprayed bullets" like Arnold S. Terminator. Well, let's see, that's—Kentucky, Arkansas, Pennsylvania, and Oregon—four such incidents in a matter of months, (to mention only the white, middle-class school shootings—46 states to go). Everybody is baffled by this on-going spurt of white kids killing kids and parents. Even the NRA is at a loss as to how to respond. "Enforce the laws that are on the books," is about the best they could do. Only the Handgun Control people know exactly how to attack the problem. In fact, such tragedies literally animate them. They joyfully go into frenzy mode, while dutifully wiping tears from their moist eyes and cheeks. They love the publicity given such tragic incidents, because it gives them ammunition to further their goals of disarming law abiding citizens. They blame guns. (Certainly not the youthful murderers—somebody put a gun too close to them, and they just couldn't he'p it.)
When the incidents occurred in southern states, they blamed the "southern gun culture," but the Pennsylvania and Oregon incidents don't fit the pattern. In fact, the Edinboro, Pennsylvania incident was really awkward. Another "gunman" stepped up to stop the killing, so that incident was rather quickly dropped from the media after the initial reports. If you didn't catch it the first time, you missed it. But news of the southern slayings reverberated for days or weeks. They were presented as "typical" examples of the southern and rural fixation with guns—where everybody owns a few guns and hunting and shooting are common and traditional pastimes.
There will be a frenzied attempt to address the problem with quick-fixes. If Handgun Control has its way, the solution will come in the form of more anti-gun laws. Perhaps hanging gun-owning parents whenever their children shoot somebody will be proposed. Death without parole to the parents! How about going cold-turkey and making gun-ownership a felony? (As the anti-gun people would love to do, and intend to do eventually.) Since felons aren't allowed to own guns, PRESTO! The problem would be immediately solved. Oh, how "they" would love to do that!
(But it is only a matter of time before a knife-wielding youth "bravely" and "coolly" enters a classroom and shows that he doesn't need a gun to do mayhem. All that is required are a few prime time T.V. docu-dramas showing how it might be done.)
All "sick-joking" aside, there is no quick fix. The problem has been decades in the making. A decadent culture doesn't happen overnight. Repairing a sick and morally deprived culture would take at least a generation, if anyone ever happened to think of fixing it at all, or knew how to do it. But don't worry, they won't think of that, (and if they did, they'd get it wrong)—they'll just attack guns and gun ownership, and hopefully complete the abolition of the Bill of Rights in the process.
In pondering the cause of such rashes of teen shootings, (in respectable neighborhood schools) it would be well to remember a statement attributed to a media mogul some time back in the eighties: "WHAT WE FOCUS ON—EXPANDS." The problem isn't violent programs and movies so much as it is the NEWS itself, and what passes for news. Programs like REAL TV do more to promote the psychology of fear and violence than any combination of violent fiction. MUSIC, in the form of violent RAP does its share too.
This is a truth the media really doesn't want to own up to. The media thrives on sensational news, and sensational news, conveniently, begets sensational news. It begets "ratings" and advertising dollars too. Since our media is national, every isolated local incident is magnified into a national incident. The more shocking the better. Even if violent incidents are actually in decline, the all-pervasive media cultivates a sense of a rampant increase without even trying. The message is that trouble is coming soon to a neighborhood near you. And it probably will. The urban culture is subject to mass fear and mass hysteria. (The riot itself, of course, is an example of urban culture.) Mass fear and hysteria are the most fertile seedbed imaginable for government tyranny to take root a flourish.
Public Health types are brought into the debate on gun violence. Like violence in general, youth and school gun violence is being equated with a public health problem—an epidemic that spreads like a disease. It crops up from time to time in different places, spreads and dies out, then it crops up with renewed vigor elsewhere—seemingly without rhyme or reason. In the case of a disease, health investigators usually attempt to determine the carrier. Then they attack it. What if it is a disease, and what if the carrier is the nation's mass media? Do they attack it? Of course, not. In fact, to solve the problem would be to radically change our media-crazed culture, and nobody wants that, even if it is recognized and acknowledged as the source of the problem. Among other things, it's protected under the free speech clause of the First Amendment.
Hollywood, of course, is a large part of the "media problem." Will Hollywood ever clean up its act? Not likely. First it would have to rediscover what "clean" means. Don't hold your breath on that one.
The gun problem is indeed a cultural one. We have an urban culture and rural culture, and a black culture and white culture. All four are in constant conflict. The urban culture long ago eclipsed the American agrarian culture that Jefferson sought, and blacks have come to dominate urban culture—at least the seedier, crime-ridden, side of it.
Jefferson's famous quote, enshrined on the Jefferson Memorial in Washington, D.C. states that the negro shall be freed. Not quoted on the memorial is the rest of the context, in which he said, "Nothing is more certainly written in the Book of Fate than that the two races, equally free, cannot live under the same government ." Of course, we do live under the same government today, for better or worse, and it is this clash of cultures between white and black, rural and urban, that has transformed our government into an overseer government. Jefferson also said:
Cultivators of the earth are the most valuable citizens. They are the most vigourous, the most independent, the most virtuous, and they are tied to their country, and wedded to its liberty and interests, by the most lasting bonds. (Letter to John Jay, 1785)
The mobs of the great cities add just so much to the support of pure government, as sores do the the strength of the human body. (Notes on Virginia)
When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become corrupt as in Europe, and go to eating one another as they do there. (Letter to Madison, 1787)
This pretty much explains our current cultural conflicts. The so-called gun culture is part of the culture of self-government and self-reliance, and is incompatible with modern urban culture. The urban culture is a culture of dependence on government micro and macro protection and services—the antithesis of the freedom and liberty envisioned by our forefathers.
SPEAKING OF THE MEDIA
David Rockefeller, in Baden Baden, Germany, 1991, is reported to have said:
"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine, and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years."
Who was grateful, and why? Hint. The "meetings" referred to are those of notorious "Bilderbergers" of international conspiracy fame. Pridger only months ago heard Nightline's Ted Kopple smugly snicker at the idea that such a group of men exists. What are we supposed to believe? That the Bilderbergers and an international conspiracy doesn't, and never has, existed? Of course. By 1991, however, it was considered safe for global leaders to speak openly of a "New World Order." President Bush, himself, boldly pulled the term out of the closet on several occasions during the Gulf Crisis. By then it was considered a done deal, and the global plutocrats could laugh at conspiracy theorists while joking about pulling off the greatest coup in history. When James Warburg, (son of Paul Warburg, of international banking fame) told a U.S. Senate Committee decades ago, "We shall have world government whether we like it or not," few people noticed. But we are getting world government whether we like it or not.
Would the press have prostituted itself to an alleged international "one world" conspiracy? The former Chief of Staff of the New York Times, John Swinton, answered that question many more than forty years ago. In fact he said it back in 1883, speaking to fellow journalists when he was obviously about to retire:
"The business of the New York journalist is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of Mammon, and to sell his race and his country for his daily bread... There is no such thing in America as an independent press... There is not one of you who dare to write his honest opinions, and if you did you know beforehand they would never appear in print. I am paid $150.00 a week for keeping my honest opinions out of the paper I am connected with... You know this and I know it... We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping-jacks; they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes." (From The Great Quotations, compiled by George Seldes)
Speaking of the Bilderbergers, there is little attention paid to the fact that Prince Bernard, of the Netherlands, was the alleged founder, (1954). This "group" of global movers and shakers, in informal combination, actually goes much further back into history. It constituted an international plutocratic alliance that has reaped great profits playing both sides in this century's many conflicts, including both great world wars. Prince Bernard had Nazi connections, as an SS officer attached to I.G. Farben company. Paul Warburg, (prime architect of the Federal Reserve System, [1913] and later the Council on Foreign Relations, and a strong advocate for world government) was director of I.G. Faren's American subsidiary, (Max, Paul's brother, was was director of the German parent company). Former U.S. Ambassador, George McGee, once pointed out that, "The Treaty of Rome that brought the European Community into being was nurtured at a Bilderberger meeting." Curiously, the current European Union closely resembles Hitler's visions and aspirations for Europe. (Ref. World Order, by Eustace Mullins).
"This business of playing off one part of the world against another—with war or trade—with taxpayers paying for the advantages thus manufactured, has been a driving force behind so-called world government." (Charles Walters, "NEWSLETTER", Acres U.S.A., June 1998)
PRIDGER SUPPORTS STRIKING RIVER PILOTS
May 13, 1998: The on-going strike against river towboat companies being staged by the newly formed Pilots Agree union promises a rebirth of the labor movement in America's heartland. What better place to take a stand against corporate exploitation than on the nation's vital water river transportation system—the very arteries of the nation's mid-section? The era of corporate dominance in all facets of national life, combined with the advent of the Global Village, have given corporations the upper hand against labor in recent years. The last two decades have been a time of declining union membership and climbing corporate arrogance in almost every important industry. Jobs, factories, and entire industries, (both union and non-union) have been exported to the cheap labor markets of Mexico and Asia, thanks to our government's wrong-headed push for a New World Order, (GATT, WTO, NAFTA, etc.).
Joining in the spirit, if not the practice, of massive downsizing of personnel, river transportation companies have joined the corporate bandwagon toward lower wages and fringe benefits for workers. (Downsizing by demanding more work for less pay.) Long hours, low pay, no overtime, no paid vacation, and dangerous working conditions, have long been the story of the river professions. River workers put in 12 hour days, seven days a week, (84 hour work weeks!) with no overtime pay, and enjoy nine times the number of deadly accidents of other industrial workers. They work 30 days straight on a hitch, and get 15 days off without pay or transportation allowance. Their wages are very low in comparison to other industrial and maritime workers. With wages low, and risks high, the pilots have some very legitimate grievances. But the companies have refused to bargain.
To put things in perspective, UPS drivers' wages approximate the current wages paid to river captains and pilots. Yet, in addition to regular wages, they also receive overtime, have 401-K and pension plans, sick leave, vacation time, and holidays off with pay, and get to go home every night. The truck and parcels entrusted to most UPS drivers cannot be worth much more than their own yearly salary of somewhere around $50,000.00. Double that at most. River pilots, however, without any of the "extras" enjoyed by UPS drivers, are expected to have a master knowledge of hundreds, even thousands, of miles of shifting river channel, and navigate boat, nested barges, and cargo valued in the millions of dollars, (up to $10,000,000.00 worth and more!). That's an awesome responsibility. In addition to the value of the cargo and equipment, there is responsibility for the crew, who work in the most dangerous industry in the nation. Then there are the environmental worries connected to the job, and the threat of severe penalties for mis-haps and violation of myriads of Coast Guard regulations, (all of which the pilot is expected to know and conform to). There is no getting around it—river captains and pilots are grossly under-compensated, and under appreciated, by their companies for the job they do.
The river pilots, however, have apparently finally awakened to the fact that they are in a rather unique and strong position—a position of previously unsuspected power. As professionals, their companies are even more dependent upon them than they on the companies. Unlike their deep-sea counterparts, the domestic river-boat and towing industry cannot simply reflagged and go foreign. They are stuck with American workers for better or worse! (GASP!) The river pilots, despite the fact that they are highly trained professionals, have been sold down the river in the past, but now they have drawn a line in the Mississippi mud, and intend to start forcing their way back up the river. They finally realize that the towboat industry itself is "stuck with the river." The standard corporate ultimatum "take this, or we'll move our plant to Mexico" can't be applied. River towboat companies can't "move the plant" offshore to exploit cheap Third World labor markets as most other industries can. This is the pilots' ace in the hole.
If the river pilots of Pilots Agree can hold together, (and there's no reason why they shouldn't, for this is truly a golden opportunity if there ever was one) they can have a great and positive impact, not only on their own industry, but on behalf of millions of downsized and under-paid American workers across the nation. Unionism, for all its ills, is the one very effective avenue by which labor can fight the arrogance of the great corporate trend toward more exploitation and less wage equity which is endemic to the new international order. Union members are activists, and voters. If there is a rebirth of union membership and power, thanks to the actions of Pilots Agree, we may see our representatives once again begin representing the interests of the whole people, (the American people) rather than merely the corporate interests of big international capital.
Pilots Agree has wisely chosen to affiliate with The International Organization of Masters, Mates & Pilots, the nation's leading maritime union for licensed deck officers. This will give Pilots Agree the professional backing, additional political clout, and staying power needed to succeed in their demand for fair compensation and safer industrial working standards. Pridger salutes the rivermen, and wishes them the best in their battle with their corporate overlords.
More commentary on PILOTS AGREE: A
renewal of organized labor in the Heartland!
THE ECONOMICS OF CATTLE
The Hillary Clinton cattle futures deal is old news. But Pridger would like to point out how a twisted economics system works. Pridger is a small-time cattleman, so he has at least part of a leg to stand on when he makes the following observations. In February, 1987 Pridger invested $1,623.00 in the beginnings of his small herd. He hasn't bought a cow since, but his herd has prospered modestly. As of May, 1998 gross sales from that herd have totaled $15,072.00. That's a gain of $13,449.00 in eleven years, not counting expenses and feed. Deductions for expenses would cut the true return down to about an eleven year profit of $5,000.00 or so—or $454.54 per year for all the work and pain of caring for a herd of cattle through thick and thin. A lot calf deliveries were difficult, and many calves have fallen victim of dogs and coyotes. At one point, blackleg took a toll of fine yearlings. Fences had to be built and maintained. Hillary didn't have to do any of these things, and she can afford to dine on the finest beef. Why does Pridger continue to do it? Damfino. At least Pridger dines on the finest beef too.
Hillary invested $1,000.00 in cattle futures and reaped a reward pushing $100,000.00 in about a year's time. Who paid for that "windfall?" Beef consumers and taxpayers, of course. The lesson here is that to really make money in the beef industry it helps to be an astute investor, rather than a raiser of beef cattle. It also helps to be in a coveted position of political influence, for few astute investors are favored with the luck that visited itself upon Hillary.
If things go as well in the future as in the past, Pridger has hopes of topping Hillary by the year 2218 if he lives that long. But he has some advice for young people. Stay in school. Go to college. Become a lawyer, doctor, and/or a politician. Don't smoke tobacco, or drink beer. Don't take your guns to school. You can grow up to be more like Hillary than Pridger.
DOES THE UNITED STATES HAVE A RIGHT TO EXIST?
May 11, 1998: Now that's an easy question to answer. But the answer depends on who you ask. Some native and hyphenated Americans may answer it in the negative, while most of the rest of us would answer in the affirmative. But if the United States has a right to exist, it is because, (and only because) of the right of conquest—complete and utter conquest. This time-honored "might is right" philosophy is under serious attack in today's enlightened, (or muddled) world. In particular, modern liberals attack this philosophy. Though the right to exist may appear to be "grandfathered in" for us and all older nations, the grandfather clause can only be considered temporarily at best.
The Palestinians and Arabs who occupied Palestine for at least two millenniums had probably imagined their rights of possession of the land were grandfathered in too. Then, along came two great global powers, Great Britain and the United States, to upset their apple-cart. Great Britain pushed the camel's head into the Palestinian tent door, and soon the camel had the whole tent. Having "got in," the Jews fought tooth and nail for "their right" to sole ownership of "their homeland" and soon the state of Israel was proclaimed. The "great powers" recognized the state of Israel, and its right to exist, even if the Palestinians and neighboring Arab states did not. The Zionist Jews had "reconquered" their homeland, and everybody was happy except the neighbors with whom they will have to co-exist at least until Armageddon.
Of course, nobody in the western world questions Israel's right to exist—at least not any more, (certainly nobody sensitive to charges of anti-Semitism). But nagging questions still persist. Did the Palestinians have any rights in the area? Did they have any rights at all? And did Britain have the right to "give" the Jews a homeland in Palestine? Does the United States have the right to guarantee Israel's security in Palestine? Will the tables turn again, and favor the Palestinians and Arabs over the Jews? Those are tough questions. If the Old Testament and subsequent Jewish history provide any indication, God's Chosen People could be due for another chastisement at any time.
At least in terms of relatively recent history, there was a time when the answers would be easier than they are today—when the rule of "might makes right," reigned supreme. That's the way things were right up until the time of the formation of the Israeli state. Now things are a little different. They're changing. Some people say might isn't always right, and that no people has the right to dominate or rule another. Today, the United States is powerful enough to stomp all over any Arab nation that threatens Israel's security. Israel itself can do some stomping of its own too, but cannot cope with all of its neighbors without the United States for backup. But the United States may not be able to guarantee Israeli security in perpetuity. It's own security may at some future time require its full resources. These are serious dilemmas with far-reaching implications.
This brings us back to our original question. Does the United States have a right to exist? Yes. But only until their is a greater power willing and able to challenge that right. The United States is hastening to insure that such a power develops—and that when it does develop, the United States will not be able to meet the challenge. (That power won't be the United Nations, for the UN was fashioned in America, and embodies this nation's most flawed attributes and none of its great ones). Who might it be? Hint. God helps those who help themselves.
PROGRESS
May 4, 1998: True progress is not a destructive process,
but a growing process, (but never "over-growth"). As things get
better, or more modern, the good things of the past should not be obliterated,
but preserved and improved upon if possible. We Americans have not learned that
all-important lesson. This is true to the extent that what might be called
"charm" in art and architecture have literally disappeared from the
American scene except in certain isolated places. Many of those charming places
have been artificially preserved as historic sites or theme parks.
GIVE ME TOBACCO OR GIVE ME DEATH
Pridger is not totally convinced of the dangers of nicotine and tobacco. He is, however, convinced of the dangers of toxic chemical residues in our food-chain and environment. The toxic residues and additives that find their way into our food-chain, are also present in tobacco, of course. Common sense tells Pridger that smoke—any smoke, (most especially that inhaled directly into the lungs)—is toxic, or at least detrimental, to the lungs and body. (This includes tobacco and, most particularly, cigarette paper smoke.)
Too much of anything is bad for the system. Why pick on tobacco? The cigarette manufacturers, are only one of the many industries that threaten human health, and certainly not the worst. The cigarette makers seem to be the scapegoat for all the toxic industries currently poisoning the global population.
The anti-smoking campaign is supposedly aimed at preventing teenagers from smoking. Actually, it is a federal and state money-grab. Kids have never smoked because of Joe Camel or the Marlboro Man, but because it is "adult," "cool," and/or illicit. Government cannot stop it, and their efforts will merely make the forbidden fruit all the more alluring. Anti-smoking adds will merely be smoking adds to the kids who would smoke anyway. To the extent they do succeed in curtailing youth cigarette smoking, our wayward youth will turn to other "adult," "cool," and illicit alternatives, such as marijuana and other drugs.
The axiom of Big Brother government is: Whatever government touches it corrupts. Let the government stay away from our youth. Let president Clinton, in particular, stay away from our youth.