We, as world citizens, are standing before history at the crossroads of many social and universal changes. We, as Americans, are directly involved in many of them. In fact, there are few Americans who remember when the USA did NOT stand atop the world. There aren't many who know much about the pre-WWII America of spendthrifts and simpler lifestyles. Even prior to Great Depression, America was a nation of money savers and do-it-yourselfers. We were far from perfect, but there was still an aura of "Anything's Doable in the US" that reached across the globe. We became a melting pot made up of people from all over the world who wanted in on the game.
So what happened?
Internally, the US went from misers in the millions to buyers in the billions. We changed from "Anything's Doable," to "Anything Can Happen." Internationally, we went from a country admired for its unlimited potential to a nation feared for its unlimited potential.
Now, I'm not claiming that pre-WWII, the US was a wholesome country beloved by all, cherished by its citizenry and benevolent towards all nations. Before 1940 we had plenty of problems. The Great Depression unfolded thanks to bank manipulations. The WWI Veterans who subsequently marched on the White House to demand their promised bonuses were attacked by other soldiers. Slavery continued long after it had been deemed immoral and illegal by the rest of the industrialized world. The US had invaded other countries over 100 times by then. And lest we forget, we committed one of the most horrific genocides ever by wiping out nearly all of the Native Americans whose unfortunate mailing address was between the 49th parallel and the border with Mexico. No, the US was no patent pending for the new Eden-R-Us game.
This 3-part series will look at the US post WWII and review its powerful role in the world, both internationally and domestically, since then. Americans policies and their resultant implementations will be focused on in both arenas. I feel it is time that this question be brought to the fore and discussed as a legitimate and deliberate possible outcome in the foreseeable future.
And for those who STILL think that the world has somehow abrogated all desire of self-defense and has asked the US to be the proverbial "Policeman of the World," allow me to be the first to burst your bubble. The world never wanted it, the world never requested it, and the world resented our insistence on it. My sincere advice to all, and especially to Americans, is to do your own research and follow the path of truth in all instances. Sheeple are nice as pets, but they make lousy world leaders.
Is America Worth Saving?
I pose this question today as a response to the Supreme Court's recent decision to unmask the realities of political life in the US and make it official; corporations both in the US and outside the US can now legally buy their favorite Congressperson and president. I am not suggesting for a second that this has changed anything at all, but it has simply removed the curtain from behind the booth to expose the real leaders of this country for whom they are. There is no longer a need for chicanery and silent backroom deals to get their job done. They can do it in front of cameras and bright lights. In fact, I would be willing to set up a pool which tries to identify the first major elected politician who adopts Nike's famous swoosh smile.
But let's not forget the rest of today's news. The financial meltdown that has so endangered national economies around the world was started here in the US. Under Bush we saw a deliberate commitment towards the use of subprime loans created using NINJA methods, something that was heretofore unprecedented. Banks stopped checking backgrounds on purpose and they went after those with the riskiest of credit records to pump up sales, drive up home prices, and create a real estate bubble that is still rippling its effects around the world.
The banksters grew ever more confident in their ponzi scheme by creating financial products and insurance products that pushed the net worth of all monetary holdings in the world past the quadrillion dollar mark, that is to say, almost 200 times the net worth of the entire globe. This concept alone boggles the mind and where this slippery slope bottoms out is anybody's guess at this point.
This has moved entire countries to the brink of bankruptcy. Iceland's three major banks have failed and now there is a major row between Iceland and the UK over repayment for those who lost millions as a result. Other countries are nearing the same precipice. World economies have shrunk tremendously putting tens of millions out of work and destroying thousands of companies both big and small.
To date, the banking rules have remained virtually unchanged. In fact, there is a large movement inside the US to reduce banking controls even farther. Many Americans actually believe that the most unregulated banking system on the planet failed because it was TOO regulated. Even after Alan Greenspan admitted before Congress that his system, which was used to get the world into this mess in the first place, was fundamentally flawed (he forgot that little part about greedy people getting greedier if allowed), there are those who see it as too regulated. Greenspan fully owned up to his error, and now these Americans want to reduce oversight even farther so that small things like bank accountability doesn't interfere with their raping and pillaging of the American economy in particular and the world's in general.
Flawed Foreign Policy
The US is currently engaged in two illegal wars. "What?" you say. "They aren't both illegal. Surely the war in Afghanistan has been sanctioned by the world body." Article VI of the US Constitution states, "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land." Further, the UN Charter, of which the US is a signatory, states that a country may attack another only out of self-defense or by unanimous consent from the UN Security Council. Even if the US were to use September 11, 2001, as the opening salvo of a war, it could not justify why it invaded two countries with no direct ties to these attacks. Not one hijacker was from either country and their training sites were scattered across the globe, including the US. It was totally arbitrary on the part of the US to choose Afghanistan instead of, say, Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Nepal, Sri Lanka, The Philippines, or any other hot bed of terrorist activity. Let's not forget that these guys had been in the US for a long time prior to 9/11. They trained here, met here, and planned here. If anything, the US was a bigger training site for al Qaeda recruits than Afghanistan.
But, you say, in order for a war to be "legal," it must first be declared. There has never been a formal declaration of war against either nation, therefore, none of the stated articles apply. Congress granted President Bush unlimited authority to go anywhere and do anything he wanted whenever he wanted to do it. Here again we see the exceptionalism that has become the US raison d'Ãªtre. We think we are the only nation that can preemptively attack another and, we don't have to given hard reasons why, either. If our reasons change over time, that's tough. Learn to live with it world. If we want to invade you, guess what? We choose, you lose.