Wednesday, April 22, 2015

Anger, Fear Growing Rapidly in America

Anger, mixed with a little bit of fear, is increasingly prevalent in America.

Recently, I spoke to a friend from Nashville who shared an alarming tidbit of information. Her son, serving in the military had a patch on his uniform. It read, "Geneva U.C." Or, so she thought.

What does "Geneva" have to do with American troops stationed in Tennessee?

No real answer. Just like all of the ready made coffins recently discovered somewhere in Michigan. Not to mention "camp like compounds," seen near Flint. What is this?

The N.S.A. is supported by members of both parties. I noticed this morning on Facebook how Jeb Bush is singing the accolades of the N.S.A., professing that they are "keeping us safe." As I understand it, however, the N.S.A. can arrest any American who is deemed a terrorist without due process. They can intern the suspected terrorist; without telling the family where. And, they can hold them indefinitely. This can't be right! Can it?

I am not one for conspiracy theories. Nor, do I consider myself a paranoid person. But, if all of this is true, we have big problems!

Friends have urged me to purchase a couple of AR-15's, and plenty of rounds. I listened but didn't respond. Then, I read that the President is attempting to rid the country of AR-15 rounds. Marketing? Or, could it be something more? I certainly hope not!

Everyone from Survivalists to Mormons have been secretly hoarding food over past years. Under alleged N.S.A. rules, no American is allowed to keep more than a month's supply of food and would be breaking the law, if they did. This can't be!

Fear paralyzes. I am finding that many sane, rational, non paranoid people, including my brother, urge caution when communicating on the phone or via email or Facebook.

Senator Rand Paul pointed much of this out in the Republican Leadership Conference, held this past weekend in New Hampshire. It's time that somebody had both the insight and intestinal fortitude to do this. Hopefully, it's not too late!

There is a growing divide in America. For illustrative purposes, I will call the opposing parties the "Centralists" and the "Federalists." The Centralists want an America that is more uniform, preferably run from Washington, D.C. The Federalists believe in the 10th amendment. They see the states as individual laboratories of innovation.

Both Centralists and Federalist strive for the same objective. It's a matter of how to accomplish it. Or, that's how Rick Perry sees it! Hopefully, he's right! At the very least, the former Texas Governor gets an "A" for diplomacy!

Paul supporters aren't so sure. Neither are Ted Cruz followers. From both camps we're hearing about a "plot to bring America into a New World Order, a one world government." Those who resist will be dealt with accordingly.

Are these Americans merely paranoid reactionaries? Or, are they simply a step ahead of the rest of the country? For those who have taken the time to read, G. Edward Griffin's, "the Creature from Jekyll Island," you will have Paul's perspective. Cruz is a brilliant legal authority on the constitution. Both are "Federalists."

Most of the Republican Party leadership are "Centralists." I watched Mitt Romney discuss the GOP contenders last night on Hannity. He mentioned five would be Republicans who figured into the race. Neither Cruz or Paul was mentioned. Neither was Perry. Jeb Bush was mentioned! So were Chris Christie and Lindsey Graham. I guess "Centralists" like "Centralists."

In two previous posts, we discussed "New Conservatives," AKA "Neo-Cons." They are the "Centralists." But, all Centralists are not conservatives! Barack Obama is surely a Centralist. In fact, most all of the Democrat Party is comprised of Centralists.

Thus, Centralists, Jeb Bush and Lindsey Graham have more in common with Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton than Rand Paul, Ted Cruz or Rick Perry. No wonder much of the party refers to both men as "R.I.N.O.s!"

Two-Hundred-Twenty years ago, Bush, Christie and Graham, not to mention Romney, would have been referred to as "Hamiltonians!" Like Alexander Hamilton, they believed that power should be more concentrated in Washington, implemented by the better educated, more affluent. Today they are, as Carly Fiorina described them, "the political class."

Does this mean that they would support measures such as N.S.A. spying? Evidently so!

Wait a minute! Wasn't this "Centralist versus Federalist" argument settled at Appomattox in 1865? Supreme Court Justice, Antonin Scalia thinks so!

States rights was then and remains a thorny issue. Southerners and to a large degree, Westerners take the 10th amendment more literally than those from the Northeast. Most believe that the issue remains unresolved. The Midwest continues to be divided on the issue. Indiana and to a lesser degree, Ohio and Iowa hold Federalist leanings.

Over the past two decades, the electoral map has reflected these paradigms. Thus, it's understandable that Centralists would be more open to Obamacare and Common Core, while Federalists would oppose both programs.

Nominating a Centralist has been a GOP trend since 1988. Ronald Reagan was the last Federalist President. Most agree that the GOP base is firmly in favor of choosing a Federalist in 2016. But, who does that eliminate? It was disquieting that Romney also mentioned Marco Rubio and Scott Walker.

Rubio is talking like a Federalist. Yet, there are slips, such as his positions on Marijuana legalization and gay rights. Both indicate that he might be a closet Centralist. Scott Walker hasn't been too vocal either way. And that could translate to his being courted by Centralists, in the event that Bush or Rubio fizzle!

Nobody is talking about Mike Huckabee. But if he declares his candidacy on May 5th, you will hear his name frequently. Maybe as a possible running mate for Bush! After all, there are Evangelicals who consider Federalists, "Relativists." They might ultimately prove pivotal in Centralists maintaining party control...

Why the significance?

In a previous post we traced the Neo-Con origin back to Leon Trotsky and the fight between Bolsheviks and Mensheviks in Russia. It is easy to trace Hillary Clinton's origins back to the Frankfurt School. These mostly Jewish Europeans were Stalinists. In essence, when discussing Centralists in America, we are essentially resuming the Stalin versus Trotsky debate that took place in 1913...

Most conservatives deem a Hillary Clinton presidency a ticket to the ruination of America. Yet, are they completely powerless to prevent it? What if there is a closely contested election that ends in the manner that 2000 ended?

It's probable that the Obama administration and most Centralists fear a citizens uprising. Especially in light of the growing trend for increased second amendment protections. The million dollar question amounts to, "what would be the disposition of the military and other law enforcement officials in America."

A Nevada Tea Party activist refers to the five star generals as "perfumed princes." That's a fitting description for CFR members, David Petraeus and Wesley Clark. No doubt that they would stay with the crown!

But what about the one stars? Not to mention those officers cashiered by the Obama Administration! It's fairly obvious that most fraternal order of police members are sympathetic to the conservative cause! Homeland Security? Who knows! And we still haven't gotten to that "Geneva something or another.!"

By weighing this additional consideration, the choice of a Republican nominee takes on a second dimension. In the event that we encountered an impasse, would law enforcement officials and the majority of the military follow them? And, would they be capable of assuming the immediate role of commander-in-chief?

Fear is a great motivator. It can paralyze. Or, it can bring about action! Anger can start as rage and ultimately end in joy. It is never a good idea to push people too far. True, 98% of the country will remain apathetic. But the rest won't! Those who studied the Bolshevik revolution will remind that only 60,000 or so brought about the change.

Thomas Jefferson concluded that "when people fear government you have tyranny and when government fears the people, you have liberty." Perhaps those truly loving America should look to Jefferson for insight.

Not to mention the almighty.

No comments:

Post a Comment