Back   OpEdNews
Post a Comment
Original Content at
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

July 2, 2012

Has Our Defense of Freedom Made America Less Independent?

By Hugh Campbell

Our trade deficits are weapons of economic destruction, fueled by a laundry-list of free trade agreements. They have eroded America's independence and are enabling al-Qaeda to achieve its central goal of: "bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy". Senator Obama's concern in 2008 has evolved into welcoming free trade agreements with open arms, why? To keep capital happy! It's bipartisan Kool-Aid drinking at its worse.


We are often told that we live in a more interconnected world as a result of globalization and many of us have been lulled into complacent acceptance of the status-quo.   Where, however, is the balance of power in this status-quo? If as a nation we are becoming less independent, how did we get here, and should we abdicate our right to return to a time when power was more balanced and our national independence was not in jeopardy. The U.S. Revolutionary War, our war of independence, was waged because "We the People" refused to accept the balance of power which had swung in favor of the aristocracy and its monarch, King George III. Today, the ever increasing wealth gap gets much attention, yet the ever increasing power gap gets very little.

Few would argue with the assertion that that the American miracle was the result of almost 200 years of stimulating production, and our decline is the result of the last several decades of encouraging excessive consumption.

If you count yourself among the citizens that believe America is less independent, how did we get to be less independent? One would think, as a result by more bad government than good government. A contemporary of Thomas Jefferson, Jean Baptiste Say, contrasted good and bad government with the following quote:

"It is the aim of good government to stimulate production, of bad government to encourage consumption."

If America is less independent, is it primarily caused by the events of the last 3 - years or the events of the last 3 - + decades?  

Since consequences and root-causes are often separated by time and space, adequate time is usually necessary for truth to develop fully and become apparent.

The title of Dr. Stephen R. Covey's most recent book, namely, The 3rd Alternative: Solving Life's Most Difficult Problems implies that there is a globalization alternative that moves beyond the polar-opposites of isolationism and free-trade. Such a 3rd Alternative is a balanced trade model highlighted in a November 2003 Warren E. Buffet and Carol J. Loomis Fortune magazine article, titled: America's Growing Trade Deficit Is Selling The Nation Out From Under Us., which can be found at: .  

In the article, Buffet describes the U.S. trade deficit this way: "In effect, our country has been behaving like an extraordinarily rich family that possesses an immense farm. In order to consume 4% more than we produce--that's the trade deficit--we have, day by day, been both selling pieces of the farm and increasing the mortgage on what we still own." Given this scenario, America can return to the status of a colony, thereby losing its independence.

More U.S. resources, in terms of the amount of treasury and the duration of time, have been expended over the last decade in the name of defending freedom than was expended during World War II. In our interconnected world, there is a direct connection between the trillions of dollars of accumulated trade deficits since 9/11 and the federal budget deficits arising from the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, the tax-cuts, unfunded Medicare prescription drug plan and the post-financial melt-down bail-out/stimulus costs. The direct connection is that dollars were transferred to foreigners, via the trade deficits, to fund the war, tax-cuts etc. What is not mentioned by our public officials is that all these dollars in the hands of other governments, via the trade deficit has enabled foreigners to gain significant control over the U.S. economy.

Most of our freedoms as American citizens are dependent on the United States remaining independent. Many U.S. multinational corporations boost that the majority of their income comes from outside the U.S., yet the Supreme Court of the United States has given them the power to spend unlimited amounts of money to sway U.S. voters to complacently stand by and let America continue to lose its independence.

Trade deficits are weapons of economic destruction, enabling al-Qaeda to achieve its central goal of: "bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy". A balanced trade model is a sustainable alternative to the laundry-list of free trade agreements, which have vastly increased our trade deficits. Concerned voters can just tune-out and totally ignore the free trade agreement propaganda that is eroding America's independence and vote for candidates that support balanced trade. What could be more fair to all Americans, than balanced trade? It's the only alternative for sustaining our independence as Americans!

Submitters Bio:
A seasoned financial professional, currently providing subject matter expertise on a variety of regulatory topics, including the Dodd-Frank Act, the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) and overall compliance monitoring. He has previously held positions as Chief Risk Officer (CRO), Chief Audit Executive (CAE) and Director of Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) Compliance, is a son of a Philadelphia, Pa. Steelworker and very concerned citizen with regards to the fate of our Republic.