Tag Archives: war

New Year’s Newsletter — January 2020

cool art8

The dirty secret of capitalism — and a new way forward
In this TED talk, billionaire businessman, Nick Hanauer debunks the assumptions of neo-liberal economics and shines light on the path toward a new economics that promotes a more sustainable, Hanauer_biz_tedtalks_0517prosperous and equitable society. Hanauer argues that neoliberal economic theory has sold itself to us as “unchangeable natural law, when in fact it’s social norms and constructed narratives, based on pseudo science.” He says that “If we want a new economics all we have to do is choose to have it.” Watch it here.

Of course, implementing that choice depends on “we” having enough power to tilt the political landscape back toward something closer to level. I continue to argue that E. C. Riegel had it right when he said:

We have not even made a beginning in democracy by merely putting at the westPointAdjdisposal of man an occasional ballot to choose who should be his governor under a system that is inherently paternalistic and autocratic. Man must have untrammeled command of a daily – an hourly ballot which he casts in the market place to support the things and services he desires and which he withholds from others and which he transmits to the state or denies it according as it merits his patronage. He must have the power to create this money ballot in a measure commensurate with his power to produce and serve his fellow man without hindrance from his servant, the state. The moment we limit or thwart or bias this money power, which is natural to man, and the very criterion of his sovereignty, we pervert democracy beyond the power of any political ballot or any parliament to remedy. Money power cannot be separated from democratic power without miscarriage and ensuing frustration – political and economic. Democracy implies the sovereignty of man; and, since man cannot be sovereign without the money power, there cannot be democracy under the political money system.

Until, through the assertion of his money power, man can requisition from industry all he produces, and put government under his direct patronage, human aspirations will be unattainable.
— From Private Enterprise Money.

 

How to assert our “money power” has been the substance of my work for more than 40 years. See my books, articles, presentations and interviews at my website, https://beyondmoney.net
__________________________________
Presidential Debate
I took a pass on watching the January 14 Presidential debate which pitted Bernie against five establishment candidates in what was a predictably bland rehash that Tulsiwas limited in scope. I chose instead to watch the discussion between Tulsi Gabbard, Dennis Kucinich, Lawrence Lessig, and Stephen Kinzer which was live streamed on YouTube. The discussion focused on the key policy issue, the US interventionist foreign policy, and the fact that most Senators and Representatives of both parties in Congress are beholden to the military-industrial [and banking] complex, and are complicit in the immoral, illegal, and wasteful pursuit of global domination. If you missed it you can still see it at https://tulsi.to/discussion.
__________________________________
All Wars Are Bankers’ Wars
Anyone who wishes to be well informed and understand civilization’s present predicament would do well to watch this video. I may not agree with all the specific details but the basic story is correct and well documented, and congruent with my argument that the global interest-based, debt-money regime that centralizes power and concentrates wealth is the primary obstacle to social justice, economic equity and peaceful relations among people and nations, and indeed, an existential threat to civilization itself. View it here.

Wishing all a happy, productive, and peaceful year,
Thomas H. Greco, Jr.

What in the world is going on? — Part 3

George Friedman, professional geopolitical analyst, founder of STRATFOR and author of The Next 100 Years: A Forecast for the 21st Century seems quite knowledgeable about history and the current status of military and economic power around the world.  In the following presentation he talks about U.S. strategy over the past 100 years and “the real interests of the United States.” He argues that the powers that control U.S. foreign policy have one overriding fear, which is “a united Eurasia”–“Our primary interest is to make sure that Russia and Germany do not form an entente,” neither by conquest nor agreement.

He observes that “Eurasia is now in complete chaos,” Russia and China are both weakening, and that Japan, Turkey, Poland are on the rise. He admits that “We staged the coup in Ukraine.” Regarding the Middle-East, he says “it will come down to Israel, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey to work it out.”

He believes (or claims to) that the U.S. intervention in Libya was ethically motivated, but I find that hard to believe. The evidence of the past century of U.S. interventions around the world shows quite clearly that ethical and humanitarian motivations provide mere cover for quite different  objectives. In the case of Libya, I believe that the attacks by the U.S. and NATO forces, and the murder of Muammar Gaddafi, had more to do with keeping Libya within the global debt money regime than with rescuing the Libyan people from the clutches of a “brutal dictator.”–t.h.g.

The inexorable march toward tyranny and the end of the American Republic

It did not begin with Obama, and it will not end with him, it is a course that has been maintained by all administrations, Democrat and Republican, over many decades, but it is now approaching a climax. It’s all about control—centralized control, which leaves no room for popular participation or democratic government. The oligarchs who control the United States government (along with most of the global power structure) will do whatever it takes to assure “full-spectrum dominance” in their own hands.

Now, as they beat the drums for a war against Iran which they seem determined to have, a war which the majority of Americans are opposed to, they are putting us on notice that everything we think we own belongs to them and will be used to further their agenda. Through a series of legislative acts and executive orders, they have given themselves the “legal” cover for increasingly intrusive and heavy-handed actions to deal with public opposition. The article below from the Washington Times describes the latest of these. Although the author seems confused in his characterization of the kind of government we now have (National Socialism, ala Hitler’s Germany, seems to be most apt), his basic argument is compelling.

I also recommend that everyone read Naomi Klein’s book, The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism.—t.h.g.

Obama’s power grab

Executive order expands presidential prerogative

By Jeffrey T. Kuhner  –  The Washington Times  Thursday, March 22, 2012

President Obama has given himself the powers to declare martial law – especially in the event of a war with Iran. It is a sweeping power grab that should worry every American.

On March 16, the White House released an executive order, “National Defense Resources Preparedness.” The document is stunning in its audacity and a flagrant violation of the Constitution. It states that, in case of a war or national emergency, the federal government has the authority to take over almost every aspect of American society. Food, livestock, farming equipment, manufacturing, industry, energy, transportation, hospitals, health care facilities, water resources, defense and construction – all of it could fall under the full control of Mr. Obama. The order empowers the president to dispense these vast resources as he sees fit during a national crisis.

“The United States must have an industrial and technological base capable of meeting national defense requirements and capable of contributing to the technological superiority of its national defense equipment in peacetime and in times of national emergency,” the order says. “The domestic industrial and technological base is the foundation for national defense preparedness. The authorities provided in the act shall be used to strengthen this base and to ensure it is capable of responding to the national defense needs of the United States.”

In short, the order gives Mr. Obama the ability to impose martial law. He now possesses the potential powers of a dictator. The order is a direct assault on individual liberties, private property rights and the rule of law. It is blatantly unconstitutional. The executive branch is arrogating responsibilities precluded by the Constitution without even asking the permission of Congress. The order gives Mr. Obama a blank check to erect a centralized authoritarian state. This is a law one would expect to find in Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela or Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

The backdrop to the executive order is the looming showdown with Iran. The administration says the “window for diplomacy is closing.” Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta warned Tehran’s mullahs that “all options are on the table” – including military intervention. Mr. Obama stresses that his patience is running out. He vows that Iran will not acquire the bomb. Mr. Obama wants several more months for sanctions and international isolation to bring the ayatollahs to heel. Yet the signals are clear: Mr. Obama may be ready to launch devastating airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.

If that should happen, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has promised massive retaliation. American troops will be targeted by Iranian proxies in Iraq and Afghanistan. American embassies will be struck across the Middle East and North Africa. Most ominously, Iranian-backed Hezbollah cells could launch devastating terrorist attacks in major U.S. cities, killing numerous citizens. The war may well come home, triggering domestic chaos. These are the very real risks of a major conflict with Iran.

Which begs the question: Would that tempt Mr. Obama to claim a state of emergency and thereby implement his executive order? No one knows the answer. And we shouldn’t have to find out. The president does not – and should not – have the authority to subordinate the entire private economy to the government, especially without the consent of Congress and the American people. It is national socialism masquerading as military security.

This is why conservatives – those who are serious about defending our constitutional republic – should demand that the executive order be repealed immediately. Liberals argue that President Clinton issued a nearly identical mandate. President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the first national defense resources preparedness order, which has been amended by successive presidents, including George W. Bush. Hence, according to the progressive left, if it was good enough for FDR, Mr. Clinton and Mr. Bush, why not Mr. Obama?

The answer is simple: Because the Constitution matters – or at least it should. For more than 70 years, liberal Democrats and corporatist Republicans have been slowly dismantling the old republic, imposing a creeping social democracy. The Founding Fathers’ vision of limited government and federalism has been replaced by a new ruling class. FDR, Mr. Clinton, Mr. Bush – all of them were militarists expanding the size and scope of government. They were Wilsonian globalists, and they shamelessly violated civil liberties. FDR was the worst, by forcing Japanese-Americans into internment camps.

Mr. Obama’s executive order represents the culmination of the welfare-warfare state. He is walking in the footsteps of his predecessors, those who enabled the rise of the imperial presidency. And it leads to only one tragic end: the gradual deterioration of our democracy.

Jeffrey T. Kuhner is a columnist at The Washington Times and president of the Edmund Burke Institute.