Intrigued: A Ten Year Old Book Predicts a Political Tsunami – Morality Wars

The past few weeks and especially the past few days has been particularly revealing. I have said “only in 2018” so many times this year that it does seem to be the swell one sees before a tsunami. *

(* – actually, not a perfect analogy as the water rushes OUT to sea just before a tsunami hits)

It started this morning when I read this from Lew Rockwell’s fantastic site, an article from Michael S. Rozeff that has a line stating:

America used to greet bringing the boys home from foreign wars with applause. Now there is immense criticism from all components of the pro-empire contingent, who act as if the empire and Washington will crumble because 2,000 American soldiers are leaving Syria.

We are talking 2000 soldiers (if we can trust Pentagon numbers, since they failed their first ever audit and also misplaced trillions, as in, “we can’t account for that money” over the course of the past 20 years) but more importantly is the continued US and coalition efforts in Syrian airspace without Syrian permission!

But I digress, what this article then led me to, which is so intriguing to me, is the relationship between empire, religion and political correctness. I love it when society, and the human psyche can link so many things like this into the “real life” experience here in 2018. Below was my segue:

For an explanation of the relation between the empire and immoral moralism, see here.

It does look to me like I will be spending $20 for this Kindle version of Morality Wars: How Empires, the Born-Again, and the Politically Correct Do Evil in the Name of Good in order to blog about this from time to time going forward. As usual, I have a dozen or so books that I am in the middle of and they all are vying for a blog post or two to highlight my own research and my own learnings.

Here are a few excerpts:

From Amazon reviewer John Williamson, Provincetown, MA shares that the authors of this book point out:

… the US Government has long been involved in immoral actions that have often been justified using arguments suggesting that the action was being taken for moral reasons .. We learn that, “In 1783 George Washington characterized the colonies as `a rising empire,’ and nearly all the Founders saw America as destined to become one of the world’s great empires. A great deal of attention is given to examples drawn from prior empires such as the Roman empire, the Spanish empire and the British empire to name only a few ... They review also describe how the neoconservatives used moralistic rhetoric to justify US involvement in Iraq .. The argument is that PC puts limits on “the range of acceptable thoughts, seeking to outlaw or marginalize those ways of thinking that might challenge the powers that be .. Right PC uses the concept of patriotism to intimidate and silence those on the left who are critical of the war in Iraq. They are vulnerable to the criticism of being unpatriotic .. the PC of the New Left during the 1960s as well as the current identity politics of feminist, gay, and race movements. Their focus is on the ways in which these movements use PC pressures to keep certain issues off the table. For example, in connection with feminist PC such questions as: (a) Do fetuses have any rights? ( b) Or are fathers discriminated against in marriage laws and divorce courts?..

The authors tell a story of the evolution of the American empire or more precisely what they refer to as the five American Empires: (1) The Fledging Constitutional Empire, 1776-1828, (2) Manifest Destiny Continental Empire, 1828-1898, (3) Allied Global Empire, 1898-1945, (4) The Good Empire versus the Evil Empire, 1945-1991, and (5) World Hegemon: 1991-Present. This section of the book basically reviews the many ways in which the US behaved badly – in the name of high moral ideals – like other prior empires during each of these periods.

So a clip from the book’s introduction states (remember, this is a ten-year old book):

I do not know about you, but I do see, especially since Trump’s surprise victory in 2016, quite the storm, perfect in only that there are so many triangulations involved that the average person can’t keep up and they depend on MSM or the government to explain what is going on.

I still say, there is a LOT to learn from history that helps the discerning thinker and reader to consider things that they previously had made up their mind on. Critical thinking is extremely in scarce these days, however, it is these kind of people that will be invaluable in charting the course in this storm and into the world beyond it.

This thinking will be scary to most, however, as I have said before here, a crumbling empire is a perfect environment for a grassroots, black market, underground networking of Love to give hope during and after the storm, as was demonstrated in the 1st century in the Roman Empire. It will be in that environment I do hope many can entertain a thought without accepting it as they try to adjust to a very different world.

Just thinking of my kids and grand-kids yet again, seems to be a theme .. (yes, I am not your typical “boomer”)

Stay tuned


America: Identity Crisis .. Did It Ever Really Have One Identity?

We have civil unions and then we have civil wars, am I right? What was one becomes two (or more) when trust is lost, fear of overt conflict (keeping the peace), lack of commitment, and avoidance of accountability which in fact are four of the “five dysfunctions of a team” in the book of the same name.

When talking about America, well first one has to understand that the whole TWO continents of North and South America were considered “America”.  But if we narrow this down to the British colonies in America, we still have to ensure that we are talking to just the thirteen colonies that decided to seek independence from a colonizing empire.

Once you understand this, only then can you see the birth of this republic was one that had thirteen different personalities! Thirteen sovereign entities decided to “federate” (join forces on a temporary basis) to push out or wear down the colonizing effort England had on these territories.

Each of the thirteen entities decided what government to have themselves first and joined at their own volition into a joint effort against the British.

What got me thinking about this was an article from Abbeville Institute which has been addressing this topic all year and since its inception in 2002. In this article they point out several important factors into the current identity crisis we are having in the United States of America:

Since our conferences in 2018 were on the coming apart of American national identity, it’s appropriate to the end the year with some reflections on that topic. After 15 states peacefully seceding from the Soviet Union in 1991, John Updike famously asked, “without the cold war what is the point of being an American?” A good question. Is American identity based on a historic self-sustaining culture, or has it been held together by the constant centralization demanded by War: the Spanish American War, World Wars I and II, the Cold War, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria? War, Randolph Bourne said, is the “health of the state.”

War unifies, rightfully or wrongfully, since those who are not caught up in the patriotic spirit are indeed marginalized in this country. In other countries, that are more collectivist like socialistic, marxist or communist states, this can easily get you killed! What if our whole identity was held together by having a common enemy for 140 years, as I would add the war on the American Indians in the late 1880s as part of this?

What about the time before civil union led to civil war?

The Jeffersonian America that existed from 1776 to 1860 was not a unitary state “one and indivisible” as it was said to be after 1865. Just as the European Union is a federation of nations and not itself a nation, so the pre-Lincolnian America was a federation of sovereign states and not itself a nation state. The closest thing to a “national” identity were state and regional identities. Tocqueville said that in federating the states had not forfeited their distinct “nationality.” Everyone understood this.

People identified to their community and to their state:

An early 19th century New England poem reads:

Amy Kitteridge is my name,
Salem is my dwelling place
New England is my Nation
And Christ is my salvation.

After the civil war where the eleven states were terrorized back into the “civil union”, the effort was made to cement this union more permanently so that this would not happen again:

the America that emerged after the Union victory in 1865 did claim to be a unitary nation state “one and indivisible” from which secession would be unthinkable.

We are now, after the distractions of many wars and many enemies, face to face knowing in our heart that we are united in name only. What is to become of the “united” States?

the conflict between Red and Blue states is here to stay for the foreseeable future. A recent Reuters poll found that nearly a third of Americans believe some sort of civil war will occur within five years, and some security analysts issued similar warnings.

This does not bode well, however, we can learn from history.  The USSR dissolved into 15 republics, and our own history tells us of better times when the culture extremes were tempered with state and local sovereignty:

The only part of our tradition that has anything to say about these disunited Red and Blue states, and the mosaic of conflicting cultures that are drifting toward violence, is the founding Jeffersonian tradition (1776 to 1860) which worked quite well without being a unitary nation state. It was able to check the growth of central power because it was grounded in state and local sovereignty not the fantasy of “national” sovereignty. What is needed today is political devolution, division, and separation, not more unification and centralization. How to do this in a civil and peaceful way, in a country still under the spell of “indivisibility,” is a much needed national debate.

Unfortunately, at this time, it seems that dialog is not even possible as polarized as the factions in this nation are. To peacefully seek our own separate ways and yet hope for each entity to go in peace and prosperity is a very mature attitude. Can today’s society act mature? That is a tough question to answer. Maybe this nation has to go through some major trials and culture storms in order to emerge on the other end a bit more humble.

Time will tell.



The State: Friend or Foe?

Demonstrators wearing Yellow Vests (Gilets jaunes) walk past the Arc de Triomphe (Arc of Triumph) in Paris on November 17, 2018

What brings protestors to state monuments and state capitals? The feeling that they have been done wrong by the state. Was this inevitable? Of course, every state can’t possibly follow through on all the promises its politicians make, ever. There will come a time when the people have had enough of this parasite activity.

The state itself is not being questioned here, just the state’s actions (over time sparked by recent actions as in this case, a gas tax). I question the state because it actually always comes up short on their end of the deal. I think Jesus would agree, when He could have received justice, He got the cross. He knew that would happen, however, it is something we should ALL know, that the state can mean DEATH!

From The Burning Platform, in an ongoing dialog with Doug Casey reflecting on the 1st amendment to the US Constitution that has in it a fourth provision stating the right of assembly:

I’m opposed the very existence of the State. I’m opposed to it on moral grounds, because its essence is coercion. I’m opposed to it on economic grounds, because it’s more a threat to everyone’s property than a guardian of it. On practical grounds, since it’s necessarily inefficient in doing what it’s supposed to do, and does everything it’s not supposed to do. On aesthetic grounds, since it inevitably draws the worst kind of people to its employment. On evidential grounds, since its main products are wars, taxes, regulations, inflation, pogroms, and the like…

… I’ll just say that it speaks poorly of the average person, that he not only thinks the State is necessary, but enthusiastically supports it. And a constitution—whatever its positive aspects—enshrines and legitimizes the idea of the State.

I favor individuals cooperating as individuals, not as cogs in the State’s machine.

Doug Casey – Transcript from Interview with “JB” on The Burning Platform

I contend that while the US police forces, under direction of the federal government in times of crises (“insurrection”) may put up with peaceful assembly that does not destroy property (especially the destruction of state property in their eyes), in time they will remove this right (we still have the natural right, just that the government will not protect us to have this right) as they have done with all the others.

In the future, if the economy gets as bad as I expect, there will be serious riots—which are always a danger when the hoi polloi assemble. There are now means of crowd control much more effective than tear gas. There are beam weapons that, when directed at you, make your skin feel it’s on fire, and will absolutely make you run away and hide. Directional sonic weapons that will make you cover your ears, and run away. Ultra-slippery chemicals that make it impossible to walk. And of course they have means of identifying people in crowds, both with facial recognition and gait recognition. It may not be against the law to assemble, but the “authorities”—if they choose to– can certainly make it unpleasant.

Doug Casey Transcipt in Interview with “JB” on The Burning Platform

Beyond this, there is the whole marginalization scheme that technology has afforded centralized government in measuring individual’s adherence to state policy and narratives and thereby giving them a score that reflects on what a good citizen they are. This then plays a role in what interest rate you might be eligible for or IF government benefits are due you, or not.

There’s no question that the Chinese Social credit system will be adopted in the U.S. You can tell by the way people cherish their Experian and credit scores, even now. Although you’ll theoretically have a right to protest and gather, you could put yourself at risk by doing so. Freedom of Assembly is on its way to becoming a dead letter, if only because of technology.

Doug Casey Transcipt in Interview with “JB” on The Burning Platform

So what is there to know about the recent efforts in France toward making a case that their government has gone to far or failed to uphold their part of the “social contract”? For a more global view of these events in context I will refer to two sources (that I do not always agree with), Eric Margolis via Lew Rockwell and Moon of Alabama:

The storm that is hitting France came out of what looked like a clear blue sky.  The angry demonstrators, known as ‘gilets jaunes’ (yellow jackets), for the warning vests all motorists must keep in their cars, inundated Paris last weekend in peaceful  protests over the government’s planned increases in fuel prices, which were already among Europe’s highest.
As too often in France, violent vandals known as ‘the breakers,’ infiltrated the demonstrators and sought to put the most beautiful parts of Paris to the sack.  I watched with horror as the magnificent Arc de Triomphe, France’s premier war memorial, was befouled by spray-can graffiti.  The majestic Champs Élysée was ravaged by hoodlums, who smashed showroom windows, burned cars, looted luxury stores and set scores of fires.

Paris Under Siege By Eric S. Margolis

As is often the case, a movement, peaceful at first, gets hijacked by those with no principles. This is the hardest way to get government to retract and to do the right things as usually the revolution gets you something worse than what you already had. France’s history has proved this before! (Us in the US should know this as well, for how many of us would willingly go back to the British Empire’s tax rate of 3% that was effective in the American Colonies before the Revolutionary War?)

In a France24 report from a small town in the country side shows extraordinary solidarity between the people. Police passing through an occupied toll road entry sign the protesters petition, other pass by and gift food to the middle-aged protestors.
One woman makes an good point. Yes, the violence as seen in Paris last weekend was not nice. But only after last weeks protest went violent were the yellow vests really noted by the media and by the otherwise tone deaf politicians.

Moon of Alabama

It is too bad that the politicians are not close enough to kick in the butt when they misbehave and squander tax revenue for their pet projects and also enter into alignments with other countries that the people do not always appreciated (i.e. EU) This is the very fact that makes me think secession into smaller republics, states, city-states is the peaceful way forward. Having to use violence against private and public property carries its own negative long term unintended consequences.

From Mint Press, who I use to get a more unbiased view (at least not a US Empire centric MSM view) of world events:

The Yellow Vests held their first demonstrations on Saturday, November 17, on the Champs-Elysées in Paris. It was totally unlike the usual trade union demonstrations, well organized to march down the boulevard between the Place de la République and the Place de la Bastille, or the other way around, carrying banners and listening to speeches from leaders at the end. The Gilets Jaunes just came, with no organization, no leaders to tell them where to go or to harangue the crowd. They were just there, in the yellow vests, angry and ready to explain their anger to any sympathetic listener.
Briefly, the message was this: we can’t make ends meet. The cost of living keeps going up, and our incomes keep going down. We just can’t take it any more. The government must stop, think and change course.

Mint Press By Diana Johnstone

This is the “sound” of tax slaves that are at the end of their rope. 50% plus income taxes in addition to all the other taxes in place or proposed makes for a life for those on the margins a very tough go with no hope for the future!

There were young women who were working seven days a week and despaired of having enough money to feed and clothe their children. People were angry but ready to explain very clearly the economic issues. Colette, age 83, doesn’t own a car, but explained to whoever would listen that the steep raise of gasoline prices would also hurt people who don’t drive, by affecting prices of food and other necessities. She had done the calculations and figured it would cost a retired person 80 euros per month.

Mint Press By Diana Johnstone

The very real failure of socialism is on display here as it has been in Venezuela for several years, the state in the long run will never live up to its propanganda of utopia!

A significant and recurring complaint concerned the matter of health care. France has long had the best public health program in the world, but this is being steadily undermined to meet the primary need of capital: profit. In the past few years, there has been a growing government campaign to encourage, and finally to oblige people to subscribe to a “mutuelle”, that is, a private health insurance, ostensibly to fill “the gaps” not covered by France’s universal health coverage. The “gaps” can be the 15% that is not covered for ordinary illnesses (grave illnesses are covered 100%), or for medicines taken off the “covered” list, or for dental work, among other things. The “gaps” to fill keep expanding, along with the cost of subscribing to the mutuelle. In reality, this program, sold to the public as modernizing improvement, is a gradual move toward privatization of health care. It is a sneaky method of opening the whole field of public health to international financial capital investment. This gambit has not fooled ordinary people and is high on the list of complaints by the Gilets Jaunes.

Mint Press By Diana Johnstone

In the end, the state is a parasite, and efforts however novel (i.e. US Constitution), will fail time and again in this broken world.

Putting your trust in the state is madness IF you research it long enough. Do not forget history, even if the state indoctrinates you to.

‘Democracy, the God that Failed’ is an epic book by Hans-Herman Hoppe that suggests that a monarchy is better than democracy [which is better than socialism, marxism and communism, but are all collectives in nature].. at least with a king, they want to give their heirs a better kingdom .. but as 1 Samuel 8 shows, even God says there are some significant drawbacks to having a king:

“.. Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking him for a king.He said, “This is what the king who will reign over you will claim as his rights: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots.Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots.He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers.He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants.He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants.Your male and female servants and the best of your cattle and donkeys he will take for his own use.He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves.When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, but the Lord will not answer you in that day. ” – 1 Samuel 8:10-18 

SF1 in an e-mail sent out this past week

So if God’s view is that even monarchy is never ideal, what is?

More on that next time! Stay tuned.


Do Elected Officials in Representative Government Really Keep Us Free/Safe?

I am pretty sure most people vote to get the right people in office so that they, their family, their community and their people can enjoy safety and freedom from generation to generation. If only we get the right person in the right position .. what can go wrong?

Well, in an enlightening well documented effort, James Corbett once again weaves transcript and audio (with video graphics that paint the picture) together to bring about some understanding of WWI. I believe that this world war (called the Great War) is a good place as any to frame the problem of democracy in the short and long term. This effort also shows to what lengths a declining empire will go to in order to remain the “main thing on the global stage” even as its power diminishes.

Part 1 of this series (located at the top of this post via YouTube) is all I have listened to at this point, but it is much better than anything I might be able to dig up on Below is a clip from the transcript that includes the key of what we can still see remnants of today, a world order that was handed-off from the British Empire to a ‘3D’ US Empire (not your mama’s empire) was achieved post-WWII and is now in a state of decline and irrelevance to more and more nations around the world. Only our military, CIA and deep state threats keep the remaining nations hostage. It is only a matter of time that this New World Order (President HW Bush spoke of this openly) unravels, destroying the elite’s generational dreams of global control:

… the machinations that led to war (WWI) are a master class in how power really operates in society. The military compacts that committed Britain—and, ultimately, the world—to war had nothing to do with elected parliaments or representative democracy. When Conservative Prime Minister Arthur Balfour resigned in 1905, deft political manipulations ensured that members of the Round Table, including Herbert Henry Asquith, Edward Grey and Richard Haldane—three men who Liberal leader Henry Campbell-Bannerman privately accused of “Milner worship”—seamlessly slid into key posts in the new Liberal government and carried on the strategy of German encirclement without missing a step.

In fact, the details of Britain’s military commitments to Russia and France, and even the negotiations themselves, were deliberately kept hidden from Members of Parliament and even members of the cabinet who were not part of the secret society. It wasn’t until November 1911, a full six years into the negotiations, that the cabinet of Prime Minister Herbert Henry Asquith started to learn the details of these agreements, agreements that had been repeatedly and officially denied in the press and in Parliament.

This is how the cabal functioned: efficiently, quietly and, convinced of the righteousness of their cause, completely uncaring about how they achieved their ends. It is to this clique, not to the doings of any conspiracy in Sarajevo, that we can attribute the real origins of the First World War, with the nine million dead soldiers and seven million dead civilians that lay piled in its wake.

But for this cabal, 1914 was just the start of the story. In keeping with their ultimate vision of a united Anglo-American world order, the jewel in the crown of the Milner Group was to embroil the United States in the war; to unite Britain and America in their conquest of the German foe.

Yes, hatched before the end of the 19th century, this “world order”cabal was being formed behind the curtains from the world stage. The fact of the matter is, “how power really operates in society .. [what committed] the world—to war had nothing to do with elected parliaments or representative democracy..”, means that your votes really do not matter.


Hosts (Taxpayers) and Parasites (Government): Simple Example of How Parasites Suck

Back in the day, even being employed in a private corporation (publicly traded), the joke  went like this:

  • Q: How many people work here?
  • A: About half

From this article on The Burning Platform comes a very simple example of how the parasite always increasingly feeds on the host … (and you know when the parasite leaves right? When all the blood is gone!)

1860: 60% of American’s people are farmers

1862: Centralizer’s (A. Lincoln’s) response, during wartime, create the USDA:

In 1860, about 60% of America’s population lived/worked on farms. Farmers had many needs, and the nation needed a steady reliable source of food, so in 1862 president Lincoln created the Department of Agriculture.

Central control of yet one more part of society and yet further away from the Articles of Confederation political philosophy that depended more on STATE level options, where some states would want that kind of control, and others would not. This key aspect allowed farmers to more to another state IF the state controls became counterproductive (which they always do when people attempt central planning verses allowing the market to adjust to the real time supply, demand and technological changes). Today, your options are:

  • Move to Somolia
  • Move to South Africa (not recommended if you are of the white race)
  • Move to Russia

In typical US government style, add 150 or so years and now we see the following:

  • 2% of people are farmers (1.2M)
  • USDA employs 105,000 people, in 15,000 locations, in all 50 states AND in 80 foreign countries with a $150B budget

So 11 farmers per USDA employee, so much for farmers being the “independent” type, seems like these relationships are highly CO-DEPENDENT!

Government LOVES these relationships, remember, they are parasites!

So what have we gained. Don’t tell me that it was government that introduced higher technology to allow less farmers to produce more food, that was the market. However, with this government link, there were many shortcuts encouraged along the way. Can someone say Round-Up, GMOs and other non-ethical ways for certain companies (i.e. like the sugar industry) to monopolize the US food supply? The result (humorous) is that:

In 1862 there were about 650 obese Americans, most of them in Kentucky — due to fried chicken. In 2018, more than 150 million Americans couldn’t fit their fat asses in fifty-bushel basket even with a case of Vaseline and the jaws-of-life. Thank you, USDA.

This article’s next target is the Department of Education. Thanks to Jimmy Carter, in 1979 he formed the DOE. The results:

When Jimmy Carter formed the DOE in 1979 about 95% of high school students knew that Australia was an island continent. Today, the same percentage think it’s a small country in Europe!

OK .. you get the picture. Just like the War on Poverty (which was put in motion when poverty was at its LOWEST in the US), the War on Drugs and even the War on Terror (plus all those three lettered agencies that keep that myth going), it is just a matter of time that like the Roman Empire, with its currency devalued, would slowly unravel and implode.

The US Government has been able to still spin all this into a big PLUS in its marketing campaigns via mainstream media, so well that:

Americans want even more government! A stunning 62% of American agree with this (here) — ” “we need a strong government to handle today’s complex economic problems”. Only 35% want less government.

There you have it. Americans want what they want:

This is not sustainable .. but might go on for years or even decades longer. Hang on!