international responsibility

[Athena]

International responsibility? LOL. Not gonna happen while we have a Constitution, and while I live and breathe. Our country is not supposed to be a tool for wealth redistribution even though the U.N. likes to think of us that way. People who complain about starvation in poor countries like Africa need to get off their ass and devote their life to it IN AFRICA if that is how they feel, and stop crying for more of OUR TAX DOLLARS to go to help people in foreign nations when we cannot control the corruption in our own. OUR PEOPLE, OUR FOREFATHERS AND ALL OF OUR PAST COUNTRYMEN DEDICATED THEIR LIFE TO FINANCIAL AND PHYSICAL LIBERTY, so to deem their dedication and current following for this is laughable when our entire existence is built around INDEPENDENCE. It's funny how so many of our "Hollywood stars" cry out for these aid benefits, yet when it comes to lowering their living standards to that of a working man, and donating the rest of that money to their pet cause, it becomes less important suddenly.

Osborn

Athena, I really want to change Osborn's name to Zues. For those of you not familiar with Greek mythology, Zues is the father of Athena. The people of Athens debated the same things we are debating today, but today we operate on a larger scale. Athens colonized areas around Athens, and for awhile was the strongest naval power and held control over much of coastal areas. When it abused this power, all the Greek city/states united against Athens, and supported Spartan which destroyed Athens democracy. Here we are again today, discussing our international responsibility and avoiding being attacked.

I want to point out, when the US was founded, the world was nothing as it is today. The US was self sufficient and didn't really need to important anything.

Today we should understand, the abondance of US wasn't just about how it was governed, but was also the result of a mineral wealth that has since been exhausted, shifting the US from an exporting nation building a huge banking wealth, to an importing nation that must borrow from other nations to keep going. Oborn, we must be careful to repeat the mistake the Athens. As was so for Athens, our present wealth depends on our military might, and we are making enemies. What justifies war, is a nation deliberately living at the expense of others, consuming the resources of others, to enjoy wealth while improvishing others.

What prevents war is being too valuable to others to destroy, and we need to work on this.
Human decency today, needs to be about all humans, not just self interest. We face an economic decline on the level that has ended civilizations. We won't like the results of reality if it continues to be the self interested reality we have manifest so far.

[Osborn F Enready]

Athena said:
I want to point out, when the US was founded, the world was nothing as it is today. The US was self sufficient and didn't really need to important anything.

I say:
I agree. Our situation today is much different, but it is not different to the point of necessitating new rules and laws to survive. The problem is that laws have made us much different, and we no longer have a free market, a desire for industrial independence, or a focused concern on economic independence. Most all of this has occured over the last 156 years of Republican and Democrat bi-partisan monopoly on government, which should say quite a bit about the root of the problem. The greatest mistake was the New Deal, and its idea of big government and origins of laws and power.

Athena said:
Today we should understand, the abondance of US wasn't just about how it was governed, but was also the result of a mineral wealth that has since been exhausted, shifting the US from an exporting nation building a huge banking wealth, to an importing nation that must borrow from other nations to keep going.

I say:
I feel the majority is due to how it was governed, especially the lack of constitutional enforcement and the creation of the federal bank and recalling all gold and silver certificates. We created a system that has an appearance of stability, but is truly just a tool of economic management that removes the power from the people, and puts in the hands of the bankers. Bankers and big business, as well as big government, has quite different objectives than the working man, his family, and their countrymen. Now people are forced to resort to revolt for appeal to the government, since almost all forms of redress are done away with. We are at a point where we either must make a stand in unison, or watch the entire concept of the union fall to pieces.

Athena said:
What justifies war, in a nation deliberately living at the expense of others, consuming the resources of others, to enjoy wealth while improvishing others.

I say:
In my opinion not much, but seeing as how our nation was designed to be isolationist in most ways except for free trade, I don't see why you are ASKING ME THIS. I haven't supported most of the wars we have had, nor have I attempted to justify them, if you checked. Our entangling alliances are what caused this mess to begin with, and it is those alliances that must now be broken to ensure our own place in this global power struggle we have helped to create. I applauded Washington for his farewell speech, and I feel it solidly shows all of our mistakes compared to todays system. Every warning he voiced, exists now today in our system, and it is our downfall for not heeding those warnings.

Athena said:
What prevents war is being too valuable to others to destroy, and we need to work on this.
Human decency today, needs to be about all humans, not just self interest. We face an economic decline on the level that has ended civilizations. We won't like the results of reality if it continues to be the self interested reality we have manifest so far.

I say:
If you recall, we became the incredible population we are today by basing our existence on the Constitution which enumerated plainly the rights of ALL MEN, and claiming to be a CONSTITUTIONALLY LIMITED, DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC. Unfortunately, while the peasants were busy working to put food on the table, the laws have been changed, and we are no where resembling that republic we once claimed to be. Whos fault is it? The peoples, and the establishments.

How can we be as pompous as to say we understand the worlds problems, when so many don't even understand our own countries problems?

We must clean our nest, before we attempt to teach others the ways of cleanliness.

[Osborn F Enready]

My overall point is that what made us different was our solid foundation on individual rights and property rights for all. Without them, we are nothing.

[Milton Bradley]

Athena, I see repeated attempts by you to lump the collective "we" all together when you talk of placing the blame. While I understand that that is fundamentally true, I think this is truly misplaced blame. I do not believe you can lay the blame of our foreign policy in the lap of the average Ameican. We have been decieved, and our government hijacked by the corporations, who in turn do the real damage.


It was not until socialist leaning legislation was slipped into our capitalist system that the welfare of the masses was deemed to be the governments responsibility. In truth, our government is not responsible for the welfare of its own citizens, let alone the well being of the entire globe.


The real solution to your prolem is to restore law, and order, so the free American can prosper in a trluy free market. That way, prosperous Americans will be willing to give of their abundance in the form of charity.


Our own modern history proves that forcing socialist policies into a free market system only seems to have exposed the greedy corporations, and politicians for what they really are. The corporations have a clear agenda, and politicians have proven to be for sale to the highest bidder.


We strive to get away from your concept of government, and wealth redistribution. In truth, what you are asking for is more violations of the law. Our government is not empowered to spend American taxpayer monies in the way you descibe.


The other possible solution to your problem is to move to a socialist country where you can practice your idealism with like minded people. Of course, I don't see any socialist countries redistributing their wealth outside of their own borders, so this must all be a big plug for one world government, right?

[Athena]

I want to start with this thread in the morning. Right now, I am concerned it is to all emcompassing and therefore, will not be comprehensive. I like the book "Mineral Resources and the Distiney of Nations" by Youngquist. National wealth depends on mineral resources. The US and the USSR were the mineral richest nations in the modern world. I put that in past tense, because the US has exhausted its mineral wealth, and has shifted from an exporting nation to an importing nation. Exports gave the US banks money to loan to the world. The US is now borrowing money. What do readers think the US standard of living would be if it could not import and could not borrow money to pay for the imports? How long do you think this can go on before the US can no longer claim to be the richest nation? The US economy is bleeding regardless of socialism or free markets. Finite reality can not be denied forever.

[Milton Bradley]

Athena, you are talking in circles.


How do you get from post #1, to post #5 without realizing you are on both sides of this argument?


You managed to traverse the entire spectrum of possibilities without addressing any of the points made by either of us.


I'm going to attempt to stop my head from spinning.

[Athena]

Quote by: Milton Bradley Athena, you are talking in circles. How do you get from post #1, to post #5 without realizing you are on both sides of this argument? You managed to traverse the entire spectrum of possibilities without addressing any of the points made by either of us. I'm going to attempt to stop my head from spinning.

Point- socialism is not that big of deal, compare to no longer be self sufficient and accumulating wealth by exporting to the world. Food stamps was not the result of socialism. Food stamps was about protecting farmers who were making good money during the war years, as we fed the allies. When the allies could feed themselves the surplus of food threatened the farmers, so we arranged to feed the poor.

When property values go from $57,000 to way over $100,000 all those people providing services such a cashiers, janitors, etc. can not keep up with the cost of living and adjustments only the government can make need to be made. Excuse me, but in the beginning of this country, no where was there the populuation problems we have today!
The industrialized north was the worse, but people move west relieving the problem. Hello, today is nothing like the beginning.

Not long ago, an education wasn't needed for a job. My father in law thought everyone should be working, not in school. In 1958 we began preparing students to be products for industry, and for a technological society with unknown values. This a huge change from what industry needed in the past, when education was liberal and about citizenship. The damands of industry and therefore our economy, have changed. Not all humans can keep up with this change. It isn't that they are unwilling to work, but there are more low skilled people than there are jobs. When the do work, their jobs do not equal buying a home and supporting a family, while the wife/mother stays home to be a full time homemaker.

Your opinions do not seem be dealing with a changed reality.

Along with that changed reality is the bombing of Pearl Harbor and then nuclear warfare. This radically changed the world. Why do you keep talking of the past, when the present is nothing like when our forefathers designed our constitution? We could not feed the world then, but we can today, and I think this gives us a moral obligation. I faulted British empirialism for exploiting nations and not advancing them, and the US has followed the heels of Britian. Chevron is making an effort to do things differently. It is attempting to maintain peace in its oil territory by advancing the people. You know the little guy! Empower the people and you are less likely to have tyranny and Saddams. Yeah, I think we have international responsibility and if you want to discuss the good and evil of socialism then create a thread for that purpose. This is about international responsibility not our founding fathers or socialism.

PS- I can hardly believe I am making this arguement, considering my main objective is to increase awareness of democracy and the intent of our forefathers. I don't see much activity in threads about Locke or Newton or Naturalism. You want to talk the origin intent? Where are you in the discussions of the beginning of our democracy?

[Osborn F Enready]

WE NEVER HAD, NOR WILL NEVER HAVE A DEMOCRACY.

DO you understand what the difference is between a democracy and what WE have, a Constitutionally Limited, Democratic Republic?

[Athena]

Well, I see I didn't ease all of what I wrote, only half it, and I am going to the leave what is here alone and take a break.

Quote by: Milton Bradley Athena, I see repeated attempts by you to lump the collective "we" all together when you talk of placing the blame. What blame? I think in terms of cause and effect and the word "blame" through me into a fit of confusion. While I understand that that is fundamentally true, I think this is truly misplaced blame. I do not believe you can lay the blame of our foreign policy in the lap of the average Ameican. We have been decieved, and our government hijacked by the corporations, who in turn do the real damage. In the 1920's a newspaper warned, Given our known oil supplies and rate of consumption, we are headed for economic disaster and possibly war. I think it is terrible that we have had no understanding of this and continued down the path of economic disaster and war. I think public education has greatly failed the people. Darn thing about ignorance is you can't really fault the ignorant, and when the ignorant make presidents out of the ignorant, who even brag about not thinking, well, the human failing is pretty huge. It was not until socialist leaning legislation was slipped into our capitalist system that the welfare of the masses was deemed to be the governments responsibility. In truth, our government is not responsible for the welfare of its own citizens, let alone the well being of the entire globe. I can not agree with you here. Democracy is an ideology that began in Athens, and this democracy was adjested imitation of Sparta's socialist/military state. These became essential when the Persians were invading, because Athens few rich people did not have the ability to hire enough people to defend Athens, and the non propertied people needed for the defense of Athens, just walked away and waited for the invaders to leave. They didn't care that property of a few was destroyed. The real solution to your prolem is to restore law, and order, so the free American can prosper in a trluy free market. That way, prosperous Americans will be willing to give of their abundance in the form of charity. Our own modern history proves that forcing socialist policies into a free market system only seems to have exposed the greedy corporations, and politicians for what they really are. The corporations have a clear agenda, and politicians have proven to be for sale to the highest bidder. We strive to get away from your concept of government, and wealth redistribution. In truth, what you are asking for is more violations of the law. Our government is not empowered to spend American taxpayer monies in the way you descibe. The other possible solution to your problem is to move to a socialist country where you can practice your idealism with like minded people. Of course, I don't see any socialist countries redistributing their wealth outside of their own borders, so this must all be a big plug for one world government, right?

I just spend about an hour replying to what you said and accidentally erased it. I think I will go shot myself. Or may be just take a break and go get some milk and clean my kitchen and try again. The issues are not as black and white as they have been presented. In a democracy where people have self government, it is the people who can held accountable for what their government does. Does this mean they are to blame when they are poorly governed? I guess so.

Who is to blame when a very wealthy town becomes a ghost town? When this happens it is the fault of all those who allow it to happen. It is darn stupid, short sighted planning, and the whole mid east faces this problem now, as their only resource is oil, and when it is gone the economies come to an end, unless they plan better than the people who filled the mining towns of the west. How totally stupid to live by each man out for himself, establishing towns with property value and thriving businesses, and run this into the ground, leaving a value ghost town. Human beings survive by working and planning together, and this is how democracy works. Failure to do so well, is failure for all.

[Osborn F Enready]

Democracy:

“A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.”
-Thomas Jefferson

“Authority has always attracted the lowest elements in the human race. All through history, mankind has been bullied by scum. Those who lord it over their fellows and toss commands in every direction and would boss the grass in the meadow about which way to bend in the wind are the most depraved kind of prostitutes. They will submit to any indignity, perform any vile act, do anything to achieve power. The worst off-sloughings of the planet are the ingredients of sovereignty. Every government is a parliament of whores. The trouble is, in a democracy the whores are us.”
-P.J. O'Rourke, Parliament of Whores

“Democracy is the most vile form of government ... democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention: have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property: and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”
-James Madison, 1787, Federalist Paper #10

“A democracy is a volcano which conceals the fiery materials of its own destruction. These will produce an eruption and carry desolation in their way.”
-Fisher Ames, author of the words of the First Amendment

“Democracy ... while it lasts is more bloody than either [aristocracy or monarchy]. Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did not commit suicide.”
-John Adams, 1815

“World War I had far reaching implications for America that still haven't seen the light of day. This was the beginning of the fall of the American republic, the rise of the American democracy, the loss of American innocence and the death of the American dream through a still undeclared federal bankruptcy. Most Americans have been asleep to the truth ever since.”
-Johnny Liberty

“Republics decline into democracies and democracies degenerate into despotisms.”
-Aristotle

“I believe that if the people of this nation fully understood what Congress has done to them over the last 49 years, they would move on Washington; they would not wait for an election ... It adds up to a preconceived plan to destroy the economic and social independence of the United States.”
-Sen. George W. Malone, 1957

“Socialism has a bad name in America, and no amount of wishful thinking on the part of the left is going to change that.... the words Economic Democracy are an adequate and effective replacement.”
-Derek Shearer, in Economic Democracy: The Challange of the 1980's (1980)

“You see, the left isn't forgiving or civil. Instead they are violently, feverently committed to their unholy war to tear down American democracy and replace it with their version -- an Americanized version -- of communism.”
-David Horowitz, 2000-Jan-31

“The simple fact is that when I took up my little sling and aimed at Communism, I also hit something else. What I hit was the forces of that great socialist revolution, which, in the name of liberalism, spasmodically, incompletely, somewhat formlessly, but always in the same direction, has been inching its ice cap over the nation for two decades. This is not a charge. My opinion of that revolution is not at issue. It is a statement of fact that need startle no one who has voted for that revolution in whole or in part, and, consciously or unconsciously, a majority of the nation has so voted for years. It was the forces of that revolution that I struck at the point of its struggle for power.... No one could have been more dismayed than I at what I had hit, for though I knew it existed, I still had no adequate idea of its extent, the depth of its penetration or the fierce vindictiveness of its revolutionary temper, which is a reflex of its struggle to keep and advance its political power.”
-Whittaker Chambers (born Vivian Jay Chambers in 1901, Soviet agent turned right wing Christian activist, and exposer of Soviet agent, trusted aide to FDR, and UN co-architect, Alger Hiss), 1952

[Athena]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready WE NEVER HAD, NOR WILL NEVER HAVE A DEMOCRACY. DO you understand what the difference is between a democracy and what WE have, a Constitutionally Limited, Democratic Republic?

Democracy is not a form of government, but an ideology. The oposite of democracy is autocracy. We entered WWI crying "democracy and autocracy can not co exiest".
Unfortunately, that was in denial of the fact that our industry was modeled after England's autocracy, and we have never corrected this problem. The Deming Institute teaches the democratic model, but there still isn't wide spread understanding of why it is important.
Personally, I would like to see it made a city law that only industry using the democratic model, gets the scarce industry land.

I do not think you know what you are arguing against when you insist we are not a democracy and never were. Therefore, you don't know what you are arguing for. Please, consider, Germany was a Christian, Republic before it began Nazi and fascist. We have been on the same path since the 1958 National Defense Education, because only when democracy is defended in the classroom, is it defended, and we stopped doing that in 1958. We stopped transmitting our culture, and began praising efficiency, and left moral training to the church. Now we are like the Germany we defeated in world wars, than the US that played a major role in defeating Germany.

The New World Order Bush is proud to say we are, is the same New World Order Hitler promoted. It was orginally the concept of Dr. Fredrich Naumann.. "Dr. Fredrich Naumann has emphasized the fundamental differences between the war of yesterday and the war of to-morrow, and has pointed out what will be the chief difficulties the military command will have to contend with.

The war of the future is a problem of economic organization of the most difficult nature and the highest technological achievement, such as has never been hitherto demanded from any army. The old military qualities must give way to the organizing qualities. No doubt the courage and endurance of the individual soldier must remain for all times the foundation of military power, but organizing genius is required in order not to waste that courage and endurance. This is clearly shown from a mere examination of the colossal numbers engaged. To transport, to locate, and to feed these masses of men is the daily preoccupation of the military authorities. That they rightly understand the nature of the problem is certain, but it is very doubtful whether the problem can ever be adequately solved by commanders who are recruited from the Junkertum. Mere military capacity does not suffice here. Both enemies and friends admit that our corps of officers possess such military capacity. Anxiety only arises with regard to the other qualifications. We know that our industry possess in its industries successful organizers, brains accustomed to direct great quanties of material and "personnel"- men who create new conditions of life for whole economic districts without having to appeal to any authority. As democratic politicians we may often have to oppose bitterly those captains of industry, but if it comes to war we shall be willing to be led by them, because we know that they have the brains. It is true that they must not meddle with the technical duties of the officers, but the administration of the war material must be their province. And even with regard to the technique of war, it becomes from year to year more questionable whether this can be managed more efficiently by a corps of noblemen than by the representatives of middle class technique (industrial leaders). However much we may value the moral qualities of the ruling class-and, with all political difference of opinion, we shall not minimize those qualities- we must admit that we are witnessing a transformation of methods of attack and defence which in addition to the old question of iron discipline raises the modern question: how far shall we be able on the battlefield to replace the human unit through machinery? " 1915 "The Anglo-German Problem" by Charles Sarolea.


I hope you thought of Cheney and our economic structure and therefore the changed relationship between citizens and the federal government. People who insist we are not a democracy do not know the harm they are doing to everything we have valued. The New World Order has order, and unfortunately while the Bush dynasty and Cheney understand that, the general population does not.

[Osborn F Enready]

Athena, I find it very hard to reply to that because you are not understanding of my critical points. I have to claim as Milton has said in the past. You are talking in circles, and placing blame on the wrong entities.

[Milton Bradley]

The government has a binding legal contract with its citizens. As benevolent as it is to desire to extend those services to others outside the borders, it is wrong, and illegal to use government for this purpose. Our governmet was not designed to enable wealth redistribution. For charity to be legitimate, is has to be voluntary, and not extorted from the taxpayer. Non-voluntary wealth redistribution is a crime. That is why I suggest that your true goal should be to do charitable in nature, and not legislative.

[Athena]

Quote by: Milton Bradley The government has a binding legal contract with its citizens. As benevolent as it is to desire to extend those services to others outside the borders, it is wrong, and illegal to use government for this purpose. Our governmet was not designed to enable wealth redistribution. For charity to be legitimate, is has to be voluntary, and not extorted from the taxpayer. Non-voluntary wealth redistribution is a crime. That is why I suggest that your true goal should be to do charitable in nature, and not legislative.

The US gives a lot of money to Israel and Columbia, in exchange the US has a say in what these countries do. This is not exactly charity, and is considered in the best interest of the US. I do know if I agree or disagree with this policy, I just know in today's world that US has extended its powers far beyond its geographic boundaries.

I know a result of world wars was thinking it is best for everyone for be as kind with each other on a global scale as we some think we should be on a smaller nieghorhood scale, or within our families. Like there is some consideration of what does it mean to be a good human being, and another consideration of avoiding war by promoting peace.

The result of acting without consideration of what other nation's think of us, has not been good. Instead of being saver, we hear more nations are developing nuclear weapons and are less concerned about what we think about it. If we teach people how to improve their water supply and improve theiragriculture, isn't this like preparing a citizen for some form of social contribution? Not only is the individual helped, but like a stone thrown in a pond, the benefits radiate out. Some does the result of dropping bombs.

What would happen if we isolated ourselves and lived as though the rest of the world didn't matter?

[Autolykos]

Quote by: Athena What prevents war is being too valuable to others to destroy, and we need to work on this. Human decency today needs to be about all humans, not just self interest. We face an economic decline on the level that has ended civilizations. We won't like the results of reality if it continues to be the self interested reality we have manifest so far.

Jesus Christ said about the same things, and see how little has changed since then.

There is a Turkic tribe in Russia with the saying, "A people with no past have no future". Sadly, many Americans seem to be people with no past.

- Rob

[Samildanach]

The only people who should ever rule a country are those who don't want the job. Wanting the job should automatically preclude you from having it. another way to pick your president and senators would be through random lottery...it would probably make things a lot more interesting and give people back a bit of faith in the system....mind you knowing the USA the lottery would be subverted by the people in power...you really can't win in your country.

[Milton Bradley]

Athena, I find it very difficult to reply to your posts.


I want to be clear that I do not lack compassion, or empathy for the situation that others find themselves in, but I feel like you are automatically assuming that because I am an American, I am better off than the others you wish to help. This is the point I want you to address. Charity has to be voluntary, or it is a crime in this country. The government has no authority to extort monies from its taxbase to redestribute in the name of humanitarian aid. While I understand it is benevolent, and well intentioned to do so, you cannot justify this type of policy in legislative form. Charity must be voluntary.


You need to find a way to appeal to people who wish to contribute to your charitable intentions, and can afford to help you reach your goal. You do not have to be rich to be a philanthropist, but you do need to obey our laws. Particularly if you are attempting to rally people to your cause.

[Athena]

Quote by: Milton Bradley Athena, I find it very difficult to reply to your posts. I want to be clear that I do not lack compassion, or empathy for the situation that others find themselves in, but I feel like you are automatically assuming that because I am an American, I am better off than the others you wish to help. This is the point I want you to address. Charity has to be voluntary, or it is a crime in this country. The government has no authority to extort monies from its taxbase to redestribute in the name of humanitarian aid. While I understand it is benevolent, and well intentioned to do so, you cannot justify this type of policy in legislative form. Charity must be voluntary. You need to find a way to appeal to people who wish to contribute to your charitable intentions, and can afford to help you reach your goal. You do not have to be rich to be a philanthropist, but you do need to obey our laws. Particularly if you are attempting to rally people to your cause.

International responsibility does not mean charity. It means morality.

I am opposed to feeding the starving people around the world. This only makes matters worse, because then they breed and increase the problems of human beings attempting to live beyond the means of their environment to support life.

Oh the post in the feminism thread about using immigrants to care for the children of working women, is more along the lines of international responsibility that I am thinking about.