Category Archives: Economics

PARTY OF DEATH

The United States is, essentially, a “Christian” nation. We were founded by Christians and our fundamental laws and jurisprudence are inspired by the laws and advisories of how to live and love that are contained in the Old and New Testaments. For hundreds of years the lessons of Christ have slowly converted relative pagans into empathetic Christians. It never worked universally; there have always been agnostics and atheists, but until quite lately, they were the outliers. Virtually automatically, the divine lessons and instructions have been modified, structured and even diluted by men (mostly), since they were first revealed. As quickly as Jesus, the Christ, declared His “church,” Peter and his spiritual descendants have seized Christ’s teachings as the means to political power and economic, let alone intellectual, control of “the masses.”

It was unavoidable. We have “free will” and the daily, hourly, momentary opportunity to choose from evil, which seems to lurk around every corner… when not lurking right beside us. Still, prelates of churches based on multiple emphases of certain teachings and of the traditions of Catholicism or Orthodox Christianity, have continued to prod us toward incrementally closer adherence to Christ’s teachings. It worked for centuries, resulting in the evolution of what we call modern ethics and economics… and freedom. Ultimately, the pinnacle of American success was reached, approximately in 1962.

The forces attempting to unseat Christianity have never wavered. The energy they have employed was noted as “early” as the story of the Garden of Eden. As quickly as God had prepared Man and Woman to take dominion over His “garden,” the serpent offered a great temptation. At the moment of choice, God’s creation chose to accept the risk to enjoy the “benefits.” Today we call those temptations “socialism.” Its “benefits” are the promise of avoiding both responsibility and hard work, while having access to everything in creation. Ancillary benefits include debauchery and license to enjoy sexual perversions and the thrills of hatred. No longer would the “serfs” have to earn their own way or face the responsibility for their decisions. Paradise on Earth.

The simplest, clearest distinction between the “forces of God” and the forces of anti-religious socialism can be stated as Life versus Death. God promises not only life on Earth, but eternal life. Socialism promises irresponsible cavort on Earth and then, lights out. Rather than growing both spiritually and physically by accepting the tests and responsibilities, even hardships and opportunities of life, many are tempted to seek comforts, enjoyments and conveniences of life without hardship, unfairness, or injustice, as promised by the sirens of socialism and, even more promissory, Communists. Throughout the growth of the socialist opposition to Christian-based government and economics, Democrat or Social-Democrat political parties have drifted (if not skipped) closer to outright Socialism while pretending to adhere to the traditions of “Western” civilization and civilian governance. But, like all opposition to Christian influence, their efforts are constant – sometimes incremental, sometimes leaping and bounding as they undercut those same traditions in pursuit of power.

Since that same 1962, leftist forces have assumed control of the “Democratic” party. First, they killed Kennedy… not the ordinary Democrats like Johnson and others, but the rabid defenders of the C.I.A. and other elements of the growing, deep, administrative state – the true leftists. One by one, people who overtly dislike everything about religious freedom – Judaism and Christianity, specifically – managed to obtain election to the House and Senate. First through opposition to fighting Communism in Viet-Nam and marshaling students to widespread demonstrations against the government, and then, cherry on top, unseating President Richard Nixon. A new landscape emerged in American politics and power; trust in government was gone. Rebellions of the ‘60’s shifted morality to the dark side as federalized welfare began to erode family strengths and the raising of children to be new, moral, responsible adults. As the old order, the fundament of governance, liberty and improved standards of living, imperfect but wildly successful, was dumped, the new order of Roe v. Wade was imposed on the flimsy premise that the “penumbra of the Constitution” protects a brand of “privacy” that permits personal convenience to be worth more than human life.

Since the explosion of drug addiction as new streams of tar heroin entered the U. S. market from Southeast Asia (thank-you, C.I.A. and the Golden Triangle), the “War on Drugs” has managed to capture tons of drugs and dollars, but the total flow of both has increased for decades. Drugs provide a foul but profitable – and corrupting – business in cities large and small, and a slow-motion suicide process for thousands of addicts. We’ve never had the upper hand on drugs. As we have helped to feed the growth of Mexican Cartels (and their Chinese providers) there has grown a deep division in American politics: Democrats have favored illegal entrants and “sanctuary” status for cities and states, where police cannot cooperate with federal deportation enforcement. Republicans have been opposed to both, and yet thwarted in every attempt to sanction so-called, law-nullifying, “sanctuary” declarations.

Today, drugs, mainly fentanyl, kill 100,000 mostly younger Americans EVERY DAMN YEAR! If we were facing groups of people who were SHOOTING and killing 100,000 Americans every year, this American hopes that we would marshal our forces and destroy them, saving the lives of our sons and daughters. Yet, for some reason, we have neither the wit nor will to stop drugs. Apparently there is a “right” to suicide by addiction. Did I mention profitable corruption? Who opposes rampant addiction? Well, it seems to be a right-wing thing which is condemned by the left (Democrats) since so many people wind up incarcerated for drug dealing. Boo-hoo. There must be a racist component since there is a preponderance of black and brown people breaking laws involving drugs. So, less than nothing is done. Indeed, in Democrat cities there are varieties of programs that FACILITATE drug use on the basis of… hold on to your brains… SAFETY!

A hundred-thousand lives are not enough. The same forces apologizing for drug users are rabidly in favor of abortion up to the moment of birth AND EVEN BEYOND THAT MOMENT. Indeed, they base their election efforts on appealing to women who agree with having the RIGHT to destroy gestating beings. First they must remain convinced that the growth in their bellies is not a human being.

Finally, the same leftists in the U. S. tend strongly toward both globalism (communism) and wars of maintenance (leftists in both parties) where, in effect, our greatest export are young men and women who risk death or disability for circumstances that have no plan for victory. And, still, there are too many Americans.

Democrats have an affinity for globalist fantasy, like “Climate Change,” as the reason to change U. S. policy to the detriment of our economy and, now, our food supply. They’ve gone so far as to advise numbskulls to consider the climate before having children… not before having sex. After all, if something goes “wrong,” we can always kill the product. Instead of promoting a clean, non-polluting economy, they prefer the more fascist approach of restriction, mandation and coercion through economic leverage, like encouraging banks and others to not do business with anyone who threatens the climate, as they see it, or, God forbid, exercises Constitutional rights. This includes changing the technologies of washing machines, stoves, toilets and schoolbuses, and not for the better. After all, a lot of those manufacturers are white people, and of Euro-centric backgrounds who don’t deserve any consideration for climate and a hundred other reasons, especially if Christian to boot.

Covid-19 showed that the W.H.O., China and the U. N. can fool all the people some of the time, but they were able to kill off only a few million humans with the original bug and then the mRNA shots. They’ll have to do something more, ummm… effective, yes, effective, to get the world population down to their “ideal” of a billion or fewer. That many people could eat beef all they want without damaging the Earth. Still, it will take a lot of dying to achieve the “safety” of our planet in a single lifetime.

When it starts, don’t believe a word they say.

CITIZENSHIP (SH)CITY

The most precious commodity in the World, hard-won and yet expansive, is United States citizenship. Our history as a nation, and as colonies prior, is as well-recorded as that of any nation. Our reasons for independence from our British colonizers and the philosophies upon which we have based our form of government – unique among the nations – are also well-recorded and, indeed, among the best studied in the World.

Sadly, our own citizens – there are some – are among those LEAST AWARE of our own remarkable history and founding purposes. To our shame we have fallen into the communist trap of politicizing our past… not that we can change it, but great effort is being made, even in schools, to change our beliefs about it. With new beliefs rampant – not new truths, new beliefs, we can create new tensions, divisions and social decay in the present. It’s a “plan” of action for some, part of which is the denigration of citizenship and of the United States, itself.

The “plan” has a greater purpose than attacking our nation and citizenship in it. We can see it actively pursued daily and hourly: the denigration of fellow citizens as being somehow “White Supremacists” for our belief in the values and purposes of the U. S. A. That epithet can erase any truths we might speak, as though anyone ACCUSED of White Supremacy is so vile that he or she need not be listened to or acknowledged for our opinions about, well… anything. That is, even if our statements are true and evidence-backed, our having been accused of white supremacy makes them automatically hateful and UN-true. Tails we win, Heads, you lose. What are the values of U.S. citizenship that people have died to protect?

First among all is the protection and guarantee of unalienable rights under our exceptional Constitution. Nowhere else on this planet are people so protected – at least in intent – as in the United States. The most common relationship of governments to citizens / residents of their countries is one of dominance and control and subjective law enforcement. Despite the declamations of Barack Obama and others, the United States IS exceptional and our history proves it. Nowhere else has ANY nation fought a civil war in order to improve its legal structure and end slavery. Indeed, in many places, SLAVERY is still practiced! Even more, it is practiced here in America because of the Mexican cartels and the open-border policies and misfeasance of the Biden administration! Sex slavery and indentured labor is taking place under the guidance and policies of one our most racist presidents since Woodrow Wilson. To our shame… and his.

Next among exceptional protections is equal application of the laws. We have virtually emasculated this protection to our long-term danger. No one is “free” if some are punished according to the law while others, for non-legal reasons, are not. That is, if some are punished extra-legally or only through unusual stretching of word meanings in order to craft charges upon which unique prosecutions may be based. In the latter cases, the typical Constitutional protections are rendered inapplicable for some citizens. Perfect examples of this can be seen in the recent New York State conviction of Donald Trump for financial fraud where, in fact, no fraud occurred and no damage was done to anyone taking part in the questioned transactions. As part of his “judgment,” the judge required that the full value of his outrageous fine must be posted in cash or bond in order to exercise the common right of appeal. The Attorney General for the State of New York had campaigned for that office on a promise to “get” Donald Trump because of a series of unsubstantiated opinions of his political statements and policies during his 2017 – 2021 term as President.

The standards of jurisprudence should apply EQUALLY to all citizens of the United States, else the unique value of U. S. citizenship is cheapened to worthlessness. The politicization of law is the corrosive undermining of the United States that cannot be accomplished by external enemies… only by those of our neighbors who have turned against their own country: purveyors of treason.

In the current atmosphere of “open borders” and conscious failure to enforce immigration law, so-called “Constitutional rights” are being freely sprinkled upon illegal aliens, including, but certainly not limited to, guarantees of legal representation if charged with a crime. That is, upon encouragement for political reasons, to breech our legal, national borders, those entering our country ILLEGALLY, are immediately offered legal representation at the expense of the legal residents of the country. Adding to the IN-justice of government promulgated law-breaking are the cash and other direct benefits to people who have no statutory right to those benefits.

The concept of PRESENCE is, step-by-step, replacing the rights of CITIZENSHIP. Various regulations and laws have been emplaced that prevent agencies of governments that are legitimized by the votes of CITIZENS, from even asking about citizenship status in matters as diverse as drivers’ licensing to renting of housing, census surveys, qualification for public welfare, and, effectively, VOTING! One can fairly question how these rights, privileges and expenses can not only be legally conveyed to illegal entrants, but such questionable conveying may then be hidden from the citizenry on whose behalf, ostensibly, the government agents doing the conveying are supposedly SERVING (“public servants,” they). “It’s the law,” they say.

There must be something wrong with this. The “rights” of illegal entrants have taken precedence over the rights of citizens… citizens who are the ONLY LEGAL CONSTITUENTS of elected officials at any level of government. That is, the covenant between government and those who CREATED the government can apply only to citizens, the protection of citizens, the protection of the rights of CITIZENS and the protection of the property of CITIZENS. There is NO COVENANT with non-citizens. Whoever says or acts differently is a traitor. Simple.

Recent acts by leftist jurisdictions are diluting citizenship at an accelerated rate. In various cities non-citizens are being permitted to vote in “local” elections. Residents of Washington, D.C. even went to court to challenge an ordinance that permits non-citizens to vote in local elections and for ballot measures, even to serve in city government offices! Logically, and what ought to be, reasonably, they argued that U. S. citizens have a right, protected by the Constitution, the 5th and 14th Amendments among other provisions, to govern themselves. Therefore, no non-citizen should be able to govern them. The judge, displaying an all-too-common ignorance and bias against Constitutional Republicanism, ruled that since the plaintiffs had not articulated any damage to themselves, THEY HAD NO STANDING to bring the suit! The reasonable among us would immediately see that any non-citizen’s vote that opposed a citizen’s vote has disenfranchised the CITIZEN. This sounds – and is – illegal to do. Judge, are you paying attention… to anything?

In the immediate travesty-treason of the effective elimination of immigration laws and border protections, U. S. citizens have watched an estimated NINE MILLION illegal entrants swarm into U. S. territory with no meaningful resistance from the federal authorities whose legal charge is to prevent those very actions and results. To pour burning salt onto an open national sore, Democrats have fought off a recent attempt by Republicans to require that Constitutionally mandated census counts be limited to CITIZENS, only. What is the result of this intentional ignorance of the Constitutional covenant with the citizenry of the United States? A foul and subversive distortion of the Electoral College and other “representative” relationships of cities, states and citizens to the federal government.

The Democrat subversion effectively changes the number of representatives in Congress to which a state is entitled under the Constitution! Any reading of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, makes clear that it is the CITIZENS of the United States who are ratifying and PLACING THEMSELVES SUBJECT TO the conditions and RIGHTS embodied therein. Illegal entrants DO NOT HAVE THESE RIGHTS regardless of levels of empathy or sympathy from actual citizens. Ours is a nation of laws… until it isn’t. Shame on ANYONE who claims otherwise or who acts to unseat that truth. For shame.

Compounding the subversion of representation, the counted presence of illegal entrants distorts the number of Electoral College votes to which a state is entitled in the election of a President. This effect shifts elections to works of fraud. They are automatically tilted toward left-leaning states where the largest, strongly Democrat cities are located. It has the potential of disenfranchising large fractions of the states, where the election of Presidents is supposed to reside. It is such a blatant crime that reasonable people cannot believe it is actually happening. Democrats walk among us and even look like regular citizens. They live and work in our neighborhoods. Normal Americans who are concerned with external threats to our existence as a free and self-governing Republic, can’t imagine that fellow citizens would be working so deviously against the existence of our nation and our Constitutionally protected unalienable rights.

How wrong we’ve been. It would be Prudent to fight back and reclaim the legal basis of the United States. We have citizenship, after all. May God bless America.

THE PARTNERSHIP COVENANT

Scene at the Signing of the Constitution of the United States, Oil on Canvas, Howard Chandler Christy

There is a term that is never heard in modern discussions about governance and government and citizens and citizenship. People who care – and pundits who often do not – spend much breath on politicians and on certain policies, issues, fads and economic problems… but, none employs the term, PARTNERSHIP. It is worth our consideration.

Understanding the place of partnership in the American system requires our grasp of the Constitution and its original intent. The Constitution is a COVENANT, not a LAW, necessarily, but a sacred agreement between the people who ratify it – us, at every election – and the people to whom we have granted power to create and protect an orderly society. It’s a bargain… an agreement to treat people equally under the laws that are passed ON BEHALF OF THE CITIZENS, the private half of the covenant, and it is a set of boundaries to restrain the human tendencies of those blessed with political, legal power, the public half of the covenant, to protect the citizens and to sanction those who commit criminal acts.

This is all well and good, but it is not the real story of the formation of a Constitutional Republic. Why establish a nation, no matter how beautiful or philosophical? Is it because God instructed mankind to take dominion over the Earth, so why not this piece of it and why not our self-selected fraction of mankind? That’s too much hubris for any group.

No. The Constitution was created because people had already formed – and fought for – a nation and national identity called America. People had moved here and were moving here to create better lives in a basically Christian and capitalist format, and their society could neither protect itself or its members without an agreed set of rules and bounds, recognized from within and without. As the Declaration of Independence had proclaimed, upon separation from an unjust form of dominance, the right to “…assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them…” It is part of the Covenant that the existing population clearly proclaim its claim to certain territory AND the right to govern themselves as they see fit. A Covenant.

It seems Prudent to describe that covenant as a PARTNERSHIP. It is formed to protect the SUCCESS of the citizenry or, at the very least, to protect the opportunities to succeed for each citizen and family. Any government that ceases to “partner” and commences to “provide,” will shortly become tyrannical, for its “provider” attitude is based on a belief in the incompetence of its citizen-partners. It is a tiny slide from that attitude/altitude to believe that those at a “lower” altitude of competence will need rules to live by. This is not to say “rules” to avoid criminality, at least initially, but rules to govern daily, family and personal life. Almost abruptly, the sanctions for failing to follow rules governing one’s person, become new laws, the breech of which demand sanction as if criminal: a “police” state.

Lately, since, say, 1964, American politicians have concerned themselves more with countering or imposing incompetence-inspired “rules” for everyone’s life. Prudent contemplation shows this to be true. Combined with a relatively communistic takeover of education at all levels, the average intelligence, competence, maturity and self-reliance of Americans born since 1960 has plummeted. At the same time, as the administrative state has found reason to multiply the number of rules necessary to enable less competent citizens to survive, those who are more competent and politically connected have become wealthier and commercially controlling, often allying with government to impose even more rules on those of lesser economic standing… rules that political forces have been unable to impose. This is called Fascism, a slightly different-colored form of socialism, but still a police state

How refreshing it would be if a candidate for, well… ANY office, would introduce two rare policies into his or her campaign rhetoric and promises: clear, open honesty, and determination to render his or her future office as a tool for PARTNERING with citizens so that each might be more successful in life. Partnership and truth-telling. What remarkable promises to make, let alone fulfill.

How would a government-citizen partnership operate?

First, it would examine weaknesses in current systems, but that implies that it knows what the countervailing strengths ought to be. We could start with strong families.

There is no structure, program or law in the world, let alone in the United States, that is more effective in creation of “good” children and adults, than functional FAMILIES. At risk of offending a few, those are families with a married mother and father, who are able to provide for themselves and their children. Every threat to successful child-rearing is dramatically lessened in a married-couple environment. Sadly, our own governments, federal, state and county / municipal, are geared up and funded to encourage single-parent family units – the opposite of what actually works the best. We know this to be true in every single jurisdiction, yet we keep growing the socialist, administrative welfare state.

Should our “governors” choose to become partners in our success, the welfare state would be the first place to reform almost everything that comprises it.

The overarching question for any successful society as for any family: “How are the children?” – obviously connects with the state of education, public and private. A true partnership between citizens and government would dictate that government schools, at least, be employed to perform their primary educational mission, while reinforcing the desires and intentions of parents. Fighting with parents over alternate ways to raise children is a decided breech of that partnership covenant implied in the Constitution.

Economic freedom is the key social pillar of success in the modern economy. Partnership by a government granted its powers by the people, would imply that government would neither punish citizens through taxation nor destroy the value of the money they earn. Clearly, Washington and the 50 States’ governors have a long way to go to restore partnership in place of financial serfdom. Not only are those on welfare rendered financial serfs, but so are most taxpayers. On our behalf, our “representatives” and governors have contrived a debt greater than the economic output of the entire nation, soon to require payment of nearly ONE TRILLION DOLLARS in annual interest payment. No effort is underway to reduce that debt or to reduce the deficit spending that adds to it. This is a strange partnership.

Economic independence from the government and from welfare, should be the goal of the government in a Constitutional Republic. That is, the success of our Constitutional structure can be measured only by the reduction in dependence upon that government. A bloated, largely uncontrolled administrative state is the glowing example of FAILURE of our Constitutional system. The only reason it has survived as long as it has is its ability – shrinking ability – to coddle the population and businesses with borrowed “money” and comforts. Now that a roughly communistic presidency has been installed, the ability of the government to continue on this path is nearing its end. Both internal and external forces are gathering against the administrative / executive state. The partnership promised by representation is dissolving with every failure to budget the people’s money, and with every thousand-page “bill.” Soon the nation will be unable to afford to defend itself.

The FIRST job of partnership is to protect the citizenry, not the last.

A true partnership… which is to say, the truth of the Constitutional covenant, would be marked by partnering with every CITIZEN to facilitate his or her enjoyment of the RIGHTS guaranteed by the Constitution. Sadly, the federal and states’ governments are currently consumed with using the Constitution and tens of thousands of laws and rules to CONTROL the people rather than helping each succeed in life. “Expertly managed failure” is how our governors measure their success, not ours. Our success merits some form of punishment amidst a set of accusations and sanctions, even to the point of separating us from our own children. Soon, Americans will be looking for partnership with fellow citizens in order to return our Constitution to supremacy. Certainly the present government will not do so.

May God grant us the ability to accomplish restoration through elections, and the strength to prevail should they fail.

BIDEN’S OBAMINATION

After the past 3 years of criminal malfeasance on the President’s part, malfeasance that has spread throughout “his” administration, it is time for all Americans to admit to the gross damage that inserting Biden as president has caused. Democrats have nothing to be proud of – and much to answer for – in the matters of the 2020 elections. The possibility that Biden was fairly elected dwindles almost daily. A fair observer should concede that Trump’s suspicion of unprecedented election fraud and wrong-doing is well justified. His frantic attempts to reverse the certifications of “votes” were justified actions of a chief executive officer. Unfortunately, there is neither time nor mechanism to expose distortions as grand and effective as those employed in 2020. January Sixth played out as the phenomenal political hatchet that certain rabid leftists and anti-Trumpers had only dreamed-of hitherto.

As a result of the various crimes and distortions of 2020, Joe Biden and a gaggle of idiots came into power, including for the third time, Barack Obama. Biden, it is clear, has neither the thoughtfulness nor mental capacity to contrive the policies his administration is following. He has never understood history. Neither has he ever judged the nature of foreign leaders properly, accounting for decades of poor decision-making through his Senate and Vice-Presidential tenures. Worse, he is personally weak, leaving him easily manipulated by stronger personalities like the aforementioned Mr. Obama. His declining mental sharpness places the United States’ existence as a world power at existential risk. Woe are we.

It is hard to isolate a single Biden failure to discuss, but it seems Prudent to consider the open borders policies he has fostered. One must ask oneself, “Why in God’s name would anyone with influence in the U. S. promote or favor or allow such policies?” There are two reasons that have been stated over and over in multiple ways, neither good for the USA: 1) Change the demographic majority of our population (white’s need not apply); and 2) Divide the U. S. against itself and weaken it economically. Accomplishing the first will install Democrats forever in power – priority 1 – and accomplishing the second will enable globalism to replace Independence. For shame. We can see a dozen other leftist, anti-American policies working toward the same goals in education, communications, medicine and constant erosion of religious thought, but none will achieve the two main goals as rapidly as Biden’s flood of 10 MILLION or more illegal entrants.

The premises under which Biden acted to carry out Obama’s long-time plan, derive from “Executive Orders,” and were illegal in and of themselves. An executive order by a president can, legally and constitutionally, impact only the executive branch in terms of how the LAWS, passed legislatively and signed into law by a president, shall be executed. An executive order may not prevent the faithful execution of the laws, or set them aside in favor of un-legislated directives put forth by a president on his or her own initiative. However, as Mr Obama is confident of, there are few remedies available in the case of a president’s abuse of power. The only one is “impeachment” in the House followed by conviction by two-thirds of the Senate – a never-accomplished set of actions. No Congress has yet had the political will to carry through an impeachment (allegation) to actual conviction, even when laws have been broken by a president. Hence, “Biden’s” open border policies have remained in place for more than 3 years despite the breaking of and failure of enforcement of, immigration laws.

Millions of words have been spoken and written about the unfolding tragedy and dangers of the failure to enforce our border and immigration laws… except two: “I’m sorry” (for damaging the Nation, the States and hundreds of communities), spoken by Joe Biden. Oddly, no State, even Texas, has yet sued the federal government for imposing costs on States and municipalities in the furtherance of illegal federal actions. Another suit could be filed in federal court concerning those same States and municipalities being forced to not enforce their own laws on behalf of their own citizens. Nor has Biden, himself, been impeached in the House. An illegal travesty continues unabated.

At some point, when the Chinese Communist Party dictates, there will be an horrendous terrorism event inside the United States, perpetrated by some of the thousands of Chinese who have walked into the U. S. and by some of the thousands of entrants from terrorism-sponsoring Muslim countries. Everyone will be upset and casting blame, perhaps even at Joe Biden, who will be long gone or oblivious when it occurs. When it does those Democrats who engineered the certification of Biden’s electoral vote count on January 6th, 2021, will finally offer two words about the open borders policy: “Who, ME?”

SEPTEMBER (2001) SONG

Credit to ABC News, 9-11-2001

Prudence recently located these comments by a well-known small-business owner. They were written shortly after the U. S. began the war in Afghanistan, following 9-11-2001. Statistics are pertinent to those days, but the heartfelt admonitions are timeless. Americans, in particular, should reflect upon them.

I believe, and could argue, that the Constitution is the best possible distillation into secular law of Judeo-Christian ethics. Indeed its very simplicity shows that without a shared moral foundation, mere mortals could not long sustain a government with so few vested powers. It is self government, raising the individual to virtually sovereign heights and it requires both free will and self-restraint: self-governance most profound.

If one believes in God’s role in the evolution of mankind from beast to gentleman or innocent creation to energetic dissembler, one recognizes the great good humor of God in providing us free will. Thou mayest choose from evil. We believe, in the world’s richest larder, that our view of civilization is part of a prophecy or destiny; somehow we have taken over from God on this leg of the relay. Now that the baton of life is ours, we decide if the unborn shall win their freedom to simply be on earth, and we, alone, should decide whether God has particular relevance or is only a super-agency to whom we appeal when, in our judgment, our stumbling arrogance delays some gilded wants.

History flows, more or less, away from savagery toward civilization, if not civility. Most societies see truth as relatively good and lies as relatively bad; charity and sacrifice as relatively good, too, with selfishness and greediness sort of bad. The birth of children is almost universally good, while murder is almost universally bad. A many-branched river, either in a torrent or a trickle, moves toward a more civilized social order where those less able are cared for by others more able. It meanders from backwater to swamp as it seeks a path toward a better human condition, but always, we like to think in our fatted West, toward a free and rewarding system very much like our own.

Those who bridle Islam with terrorism, ride its billion-plus souls into acts more heinous than war, attempting, they claim, to rid the earth of whole peoples whom they judge to be impure. Only by removing us and our open, licentious indecency can they preserve their self-perceived more pious way of life. To some of these, at least, our movies, music and overt sexuality are a terrifying rain of bombs upon their children, women and paternalist hegemony. What do we suggest is their proper defense?

The “West” is their unholiest of infidels, preaching depravity with a global, inescapable power of electronic, and cheap, media that is a new force upon the Earth. To Muslims who can renounce terrorism, but who are consciously pious and committed to the Koran – “deeply religious” we might say – there is no negotiation with the blandishments of Satan’s pit – no co-existence with perceived evil. Our only response, devoid of much imagination, is military.

History and our whole social and economic belief structure allows us no other. The President had to act, must act, did act. He has done the “right thing,” albeit with the wrong weapons, one might conclude. Bin-Laden has succeeded and succeeded again in directing our battle against the quarter of the planet that is Islamic. Our protestations of separating terrorism from Mohammedism serve to strengthen our timely coalitions, but fall upon non-believing ears in most of the Islamic world. The falling bombs are indistinguishable from America, itself. The fine points of selective targeting and diplomacy are lost on the millions who choose not to be like us, who are readily, almost eagerly, led by practiced haters. We sit in judgment of their failures to lead the world in technology, human rights and materialism. Our comforts and prosperity are not the fundament of their aspirations and our discussions of why certain fellow-Muslims must be killed are strictly one-way. We see ourselves as able to spank the errant billion, followed by immediate hugs and comfortings so they will realize we truly love them, but their bad-seed brothers had to go.

Why do they hate us so much? That is the question posed by our deepest thinkers.

“The West” has not only conquered communications, but has ringed the planet with satellites, effectively creating a sea of electronic trash through which Earth spins and rotates, year upon year. Television shows and movies that extol everything from abortion to homosexuality, murder to free sex, flood the airwaves. Books and magazines replete with same, are hawked from Zimbabwe to Mongolia. Not even China can stem the tide. We are angry at the Falwells and Robertsons who deign to point out that God can bless only the good, that His laws are completely Just, that He, Himself exists according to them with absolutely no ability to compartmentalize sinfulness. But, we say, throughout history America has been kind to its vanquished foes. Surely we can all see that this attack on Afghanistan will soon be good for them? God bless America; sing it loud. Drop the bombs of righteousness.

How will we know if the war on terrorism is won? So far we have proven that we can destroy Afghanistan’s tallest buildings as a sort of grandiose tit-for-tat. They are, of course, only a few stories tall. The political support for war, however, depends on both clarity of mission and conclusively good news about its fulfillment. There isn’t going to be much of either. We may not find Bin-Laden very quickly and already proclaim at every juncture that he is only one of many and that catching him is not the only goal. Will we, as in the war on drugs, proclaim the capture or death of some terrorist functionary to be of equal importance? Can we manufacture some interdicted tons of success sufficient to justify the whole war effort? Will Americans buy it? When the next terrorist action occurs will we accept that the need for more war-making is ever more justified? And the next?

And the next?

These questions are are not asked idly. A couple of ounces of powdered anthrax spores have place the nation on edge as almost no other mechanism might do. We readily conceive of fighting fire with fire, as it were, but with what do we fight disease? There is nothing. Cure the sick and worry. Cure the sick and fear.

Imagine a balloon-borne twenty pound tube of this anthrax stuff freely dispersing its load over, say, Chicago. A couple of square miles of city could be powdered and the ensuing panic, growing from media-spread spores of its own, would effectively shut that city down. People would flee, perhaps only to be prevented, possibly(?) from leaving until tested. Some sort of quarantine would be deemed necessary and, most certainly, travel to that entire region would cease. Talk about ripples in the economy. With the populace already so on edge as to run from spilled confetti, so many activities would cease that depression, not recession, would follow.

Not even the U. S. can absorb the costs of abject fear and still prosecute an endless war. The costs of terrorism we have only slightly begun to imagine. The politics of terrorism are also waiting to be unleashed.

The risk is greatest for President Bush. Everyone is backing him, now, in our newfound patriotism, but such high approval ratings are fleeting, in our history. George, the first, had a ninety percent rating eleven months before losing to Bill Clinton. With limited war news to prove his policies are both righteous and right, Bush will quickly be blamed by his enemies when the next big terrorist attack occurs. Every speech made includes an admonishment to prepare for more attacks and some comment about how we are preparing, nationally, for what, everything? But, when the ax falls, it is the President who will be blamed, however unfairly. Careful, methodical thinking and planning could fly out the window, then – and covert operations become overt.

Internationally, should America strike out in political anger rather than simple righteous vengeance, coalitions will fracture into alliances, neutral states and declared enemies. Then what? Terror groups will unleash everything they have; the U. S. will bomb population centers, world trade will slow to a trickle and a dozen opportunities to settle old differences, like Taiwan, Kashmir, Israel and South Korea, will be exercised by virulent enemies who are held in check now by our flexible willingness to oppose them. Like Gulliver, the Lilliputians will tie America down with a thousand tiny battles.

The most dangerous condition in the World is a lack of understanding of what the United States will finally fight for. So long as that point is not reached, we can push and pull and trade and buy a continued flow toward civilization. But when that line is crossed and should enemies in waiting decide that then is the time to fight their own battles, the possibilities of either a huge escalation or retreat into armed isolationism become real. Then the global power centers will shift. Wartime alliance or power vacuum. Either way, the future we have been hazily expecting will be replaced with another that we won’t control. A dark, sheer precipice terminates many of the paths we might take.

I see no one in the Congress who has the wisdom to advise the President better than what he is doing already. Neither do I see a happy ending for most of the right actions he might take. How I wish we, as a nation, had not been spending so much effort to turn our backs on God and His commandments. Perhaps we should have let in some of those aborted in the past thirty years. Now would be a very good time to turn to Him if He is still willing to hear us. With love, Bob Wescott.

AMERICA – Article III

A major factor in the success of the United States and its economic freedom (among other freedoms) is the honesty and relative strictness of its judiciary, both federal and State. The honesty of contracts at every level, including the contract between the American people and the federal government: the Constitution, relies increasingly upon the Supreme Court, the final arbiter.

Article III details the legal circumstances that require original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which means that the supreme court is the first, and only Court, that can hear those cases and rule upon the issues in conflict. In all other cases – and there are hundreds – the Court must agree to accept an appeal from litigants who not only aren’t satisfied with the decision made, but who also believe there is a Constitutional issue involved in their conflicting claims. At least four Justices must agree to accept a case, and one of them is likely to write an opinion, if not THE opinion that will form the Court’s ruling. It takes time. When the majority opinion is delivered there usually is a dissenting opinion. Lawyers everywhere study both. Crucial interpretations of Constitutional issues will form arguments in other cases. Sometimes the issues raised in the dissenting, or minority opinion, will be refined to bolster other cases. The written words of the Supreme Court are critical to our success as a nation.

The Congress is given the power to establish inferior federal courts and charge them with certain authorities over types of crime or types of conflicts. There are courts for immigration matters, for example, or for tax issues, and several others. The country is divided into 12 “Circuits” and Justices often visit those Circuits. See https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/court-role-and-structure for a comprehensive view of federal court structure.

Leftism consistently challenges our Constitutional Republic. Socialism / Communism is inherently counter to the structure of morality and individual responsibility that is embodied in the Constitution. Freedom includes the freedom to fail, to try again and to make choices about how to advance in life. Forces of the left consistently attempt to tie individuals to government rules and regulations. This can be seen in attacks on religion and in unionized “public” education, itself. Little by little, leftist philosophies, even direct Marxism, like “minimum wage” laws, constantly distort our economy and increase dependence on government. These stresses generate social-issue conflicts that threaten domestic tranquility and even personal safety. This places immense public, if not mob pressure, on the Court and on individual Justices. Starting with Judge Robert Bork in 1987, the left – personified by Senator Ted Kennedy, an avowed socialist – has attacked and refused to compromise with “conservatism” in any form.

Leftist, or “Progressive” policies, inherently are on the attack against the premises and ideas expressed in the Constitution. The Supreme Court was and is charged with primary defense of the ideas underpinning the Constitution. Judge Bork represented a shift away from leftist activism on the Supreme Court. The retiring Justice, Lewis Powell had often been the swing vote on issues like abortion, tilting the Court to the left. Bork was a strict constructionist, unswayed by social pressures. To leftists like Kennedy, that threat of a shift away from the attack on original intent, was a threat so serious that the destruction of the reputation of an esteemed legal scholar like Bork, was well worth the effort. The attacks continue, as evidenced by the violent reaction to the reversal of Roe versus Wade in the “Dobbs” decision in 2022.

Among our “Unalienable rights” listed in the Declaration of Independence are “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” Within them has developed a severe conflict, mainly due to the equality of status that women have acquired since the beginning of the United States. “Liberty” and “Happiness” both depend upon freedom of action by individuals. Pregnancy, uniquely, with its 9-month period of physical commitment and subsequent lifetime obligations, can interfere, unquestionably, with happiness and liberty of the pregnant woman. So far, we have not found a balance between the rights of the mother/parent, and those of the baby growing inside her.

Does the right to LIFE take precedence? Many think so. Do the rights of the mother take precedence? Many believe this is so. Mainly non-religious, non-Christian or anti-Christian persons, are pleased to take dominion over natural life, and grant women the absolute right to abort their child. Religious people tend to support the rights of the new life to be born and to thrive after birth. They are “pro-life.” Abortion absolutists have done their best to pervert the meaning of conception and of what a fetus actually is: a human baby, growing. Inevitably, this conflict landed in the Supreme Court. Sadly, Roe versus Wade resulted in more than 60 Million Americans being aborted, most of whom were growing inside women of color. It is a number that should give Anti-life believers some pause.

The Supreme Court makes mistakes. The “Dred Scott” decision is recognized as the worst of them, as Chief Justice Roger Taney attempted to undo several state and federal laws governing the status of slaves and even of any free negro citizen. Taney went so far as to declare the Missouri Compromise un-Constitutional and to state that the concept of “free soil” and freedom of slaves who resided there, was constitutionally unenforceable and need not be recognized by other territories or states. The decision helped to push the South to secession and proved to be recognized in its disregard among free states and territories. The 13th amendment made Taney’s decisions moot.

Another simpler, but still egregious decision was the “Kelo” decision: a 7-year battle over the “taking” of private property for public use, that was decided – many feel, wrongly – in 2005. The city of New London, Connecticut, decided that development of land next to a new Pfizer plant, would increase tax receipts to the city, and therefore qualified as a public good. Unfortunately, Suzette Kelo and her neighbors lived on that land, many on long-time homesteads, in perfectly acceptable, non-condemned homes. The city turned the land over to a new, semi-private development Commission along with the power of “eminent domain,” with which the Commission forced homeowners to sell their real estate. Tragically, The Supreme Court interpreted the “taking” clause in the 5th Amendment to include not only the clearly stated “public use,” like a school or water treatment plant, but for an amorphous “expected benefit” for the public, such as increased tax revenues might provide. In other words, amazingly, “public use” was interpreted to include “private use” if it raised more taxes than current landowners provided. Several States have amended their own laws to prevent exactly the premise of the Kelo decision.

The American public is right to challenge the Supreme Court and, through the Senate, to carefully examine the beliefs of nominees to the Supreme Court. As political conflicts, largely fomented by the Left, become more heated and hateful, the ability of Justices to ignore such matters becomes ever more difficult. It is more crucial than ever that the strength and intention of the Court must be to preserve the originating ideas and ideals of the Constitution, resisting all attempts, regardless of political heat, to drift, stumble or run-away from them.

AMERICA – Article I

Our Constitution has seven Articles, or “topic sections,” in a sense. The longest and most important, is the first. It describes the bi-cameral Congress. While both Senators and Representatives are members of Congress, we have customarily called Representatives, “Congressmen or Congresswomen;” Senators are Senators. However, members of both “Houses” are members of Congress. Congress OUGHT to be the most important of the three branches of government. It represents the people of the States (Representatives) and the States, themselves (Senators), at least that is the original design. That design has been weakened variously and repeatedly by those who don’t trust small-r “republicanism.” Those are they who proclaim that the United States is a “democracy,” which is intentionally NOT the basic covenant embodied in the Preamble or in the Constitution, itself.

Before we dig deeper into Article I, we must illuminate the problems inherent in “democracy.” Like many, you have probably been convinced to revere democracy when, in fact, it must be carefully constrained in order to serve the government proposed by the Constitution, a real vessel for reverence. Prudence would instruct that democracy is only a mechanism for selecting our representatives, the most crucial of the members of Congress.

Inevitably, the more power allowed to democracy, the more likely that the government will become authoritarian and no longer a partner with its citizens in their success. Democracy gains power from majority action, only. The majority rules in “a democracy.” There are no protections for minority interests. The intended partnership role of our government of the people, by the people and for the people, will quickly degrade to protection of the government and the governors, which we see now in 2023. What has this to do with democracy or the Senate?

The Senate was originally designed to represent the interests of the STATES, whose sovereignty in our FEDERATION, was paramount for many in the Convention and many in the country (and still should be). Every State had its interests and every Senator had reason to respect the will of his or her State’s legislature. In other words, Senators had to answer to a very small set of representatives of their State’s population. Those worthies ought to have had the needs of their States uppermost in their minds, and could not be ignored at the times of choosing their Senators. Senators were supposed to be responsible to their States’ interests.

The Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution was ratified in 1913, a most dangerous period for our Republic and for republicanism. It changed the election of Senators to statewide popular voting – pure democracy with almost no accountability, in fact. Since then, the quality of Senators has declined significantly, on average. Democracy places more power in the hands of power and money “brokers,” as it were. Being accountable to everyone has meant being accountable to no one… no one, that is, except the leaders of the Senate and their control of their parties, and of sources of campaign funds.

Pure democracy also is subject to temporary, sometimes mob-like majority emotions. This was recognized in ancient Greece and is an even greater threat in the world of social media, 24–7 news media and widespread (planned) ignorance of reality and history. The mechanism of a Republic filters out those emotions. Citizens must choose the best among them to represent their interests TO the government; States would go through two stages of selection: first to their legislatures and Governors and then to their subsequent appointments of Senators. The Senate, with its longer terms, limited membership and fractional replacement, should be the more thoughtful and, dare we say, wise house of Congress. It’s design is intended to prevent emotional response and to be more accountable for its actions. Much of that “shock-absorber” function was thrown out with the switch to direct election in 1913. For shame.

Still, there are two houses of Congress and both must approve legislation, ostensibly a brake on foolish ideas. In the two-party fog of war, however, and the lack of limits on terms, it serves more effectively to stop good ideas. Abortion, for example can be hotly defended while balancing the budget is set aside. Worse, the Congress has, since the end of the Civil War, rushed to devolve its responsibilities and hand them to the (unelected and virtually un-fire-able) administrative state. About three-fourths of the federal “budget” is in the realm of entitlements or pensions, and “State-aid,” Federal dollars paid out to a thousand programs that States ostensibly control (or misapply). Those dollars twist the sovereignty of states and the thought processes of representatives and senators: No state should receive an unfair allotment of federal largesse. Federal dollars come as if by magic, with many of them being borrowed from the unbelievably distant future, sidestepping the responsibility of raising taxes to obtain them. Congress, both Houses, have “bought into” this sham. There is little statesmanship to point to among the whole number of them.

The most important power of the House of Representatives is to initiate any raising or, as virtually never happens, reducing of revenues. This includes raising taxes or changing tax rates. The Senate must concur, including amendments to bills, so they are nearly as involved in budgets as the House, including in terms of shucking responsibilities in favor of the administrative state.

Other powers of Congress include BORROWING against the full faith and credit of the United States; Coining money and regulating the value thereof; Set uniform rules of naturalization (for legal immigrants); to regulate commerce with other nations and among the several States; to promote the advancement of the sciences and protect invention and copyrights; to declare war including raising the Army and the Navy; to provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the laws of the United States, and to suppress Insurrections and repel invasions. Among other things.

The Congress is also charged with making laws necessary to effect Execution of the laws passed for operation of the Government and any agency or Department thereof. This last has proven to be the greatest threat to the “Blessings of Liberty” ordained in the Preamble. Hence the administrative and nearly perpetual state, busy passing regulations that are enforced as if at the status of enacted Law. For shame.

The discussion of Article I has, unfortunately, been mostly a rendition of what is failing in Congress and in the operations of Congress, and how far afield from the intentions of republican governance Congress has strayed. It is intensely advised, and Prudent, that Americans study Article I and reflect on history and the events of the past 30 years or so. Congress needs reconstruction as much as the South did in 1866, for it has engaged in insurrection against the Constitution, attempting to overthrow it by divesting Congress, itself, from its responsibilities. The United States is nearly $34 Trillion in debt.

[ See: https://www.prudenceleadbetter.com/2020/09/27/knife-edge-election/ ]

ONCE UPON A TIME

Americans are, to a greater extent than at any time since the “Great” Depression, unhappy and untrusting of others.  For all of our history as the United States of America, we have shared several senses of hope: economic, health, safety and cleanliness.  We might also add a sense of religious hope.  These hopes have slowly been… and are now quickly,  being erased from our shared beliefs.  It is unsettling.

Our origins as a people are exceptional as are our philosophies of governance and religious freedoms and numerous other rights protected by the Constitution.  The fundament of American exceptionalism is that the government(s) are formed and defined by the people.  Yet, since the beginning, those forces that believed the exact opposite: that governments are formed to control the people, their styles and means of living and their status in society, have been hard at work to undo the exceptionalism that once defined us.  Starting in 2020, the virtual Communist enemies of America have believed that success is within their grasp and, sadly, very many Americans, particularly young Americans, agree with the destruction of our culture and nation.

We are losing our hopes.

Every person has grown up with a pattern of habits and beliefs imprinted by or in reaction to our parents or guardians or lack thereof.  Other key people and childhood friends and classmates – and TEACHERS – all contributed to each of our belief structures and general outlooks and reactions to problems and opportunities.  Huge industries of psychologists, child-psychologists, counselors and psychiatrists have developed to channel our feelings, guilts or irrationalities relative to our upbringing.  In one way or another, at some level, we are, all, “screwed up” and seeking someone to blame for how we are.  How is it, then, that most of us have, throughout the history of the United States, turned out so well?

Indeed, through the times of greatest tests: The Civil War, various economic crises, World Wars One and Two and the Civil Rights movement, Americans have impressed the world with our drive to “do the right thing.”  Perfectly?  Naturally not; but, overall we used to tend toward the best response to challenges – personally and nationally.  Was it a miracle?  Was it a set of millions of coincidences?  Were children raised more perfectly then?

A qualified “yes” to the last question, but it was no accident that most of us grew up reasonably rational and morally straight despite our imperfect parents and circumstances, and the fundamental reason was culture.

We had a beautiful culture based in honesty and responsibility.  The rest of the world envied it and struggled to emigrate to our land of opportunity.  Our laws were equally applied, mostly, and our contracts were honestly enforced, mostly, and our private property – the fruit of our labor – was fairly protected by civil authorities, mostly.  We rewarded initiative and success and, mostly, forgave failure for those who strove to do better.  We honored churches and charity and respected marriage – even encouraged it in policy.  We respected learning and the learned, and the inventors who kept our economic future bright.  Parents could reasonably expect their children to have better lives than they had.  It almost sounds funny to recount these “American” qualities.

Our culture was the best there was, in our capitalist democratic republic, and we tried to share it with others.  Americans, individually, were enormously charitable toward one another and with the rest of the world, and we supported our nation being the same toward other peoples.  American citizenship was a golden possession, yet anyone who applied to be one had to meet only the simplest tests and commitment to be welcomed into our nation as an equal possessor of our “gold.”  Our basic Judeo-Christian ethics made us tolerant.  What have we done?

In spite of obstacles, our young people used to grow up in pretty good shape, and the reason was culture.  Schools, churches, libraries, police departments, pronouncements from the work of Congress, the military branches, radio programming, music and lyrics, television programming and news reporting, and even cinema… all reinforced our shared cultural beliefs.  Today?  Today, nearly all of these institutions challenge, if not tear down, our basic cultural norms.  Parents are nearly alone in their efforts to pass our culture along to and in their children.  What have we done?

As society becomes, almost daily, less and less honest, and our institutions less and less trustworthy, young people facing difficulties tend toward immediate suicide or the long-term suicide of drugs.  Adults seem to have no valid response to this.  Indeed, we allow for policies that make drug-addiction SAFER!  We don’t even want to enforce sanctions for criminal behaviors!  What are we doing?

None of what is going wrong is inevitable or guaranteed by the Constitution.  We human beings created the mess we’re in and we can “un-create” it the minute we decide to be adults, again.  What are we going to do?  God save us.

BIDEN, BIDEN, Who’s got the Biden?

Information flows take the form of “news” stories – often opinions – social media scattershot (watch the spelling, there) some print media, and then there are “Special Reports.”  Among the “Special Reports” we can include White House press briefings.  In the “Biden” White House, though, press briefings provide almost no information: Mostly they provide obfuscation.  Still, many “news” sources can manage to create “news reports” that parrot the daily obfuscation – which is what “The White House” intends, while others make news of the gross failure of “the White House” to tell much, if any, truth.  Still, as Prudence has instructed us, there ARE truths about what is happening to our nation and the rest of the world, and careful sifting will reveal kernels of it… much like an archeological dig where arti-facts are revealed from under the crap and detritus of imperturbable soil.  Digging and sifting.

More than any other people, Americans deserve to hear the truth – all of it.  Unlike most other “Westerners,” however, Americans are about the least likely to hear it.

Competing countries – and forces – have their own “truths.”  We can see this most glaringly in the stories and hatreds and imaginings of Palestinians, although we should not discount the elements of truth amidst some of their “histories.”  That’s the trouble with hatreds and competing hatreds:  each employs truth to justify the hatred and to maintain the political power that comes with it.  Hating Jews, for the worst example, did not start with the Balfour declaration, and certainly not with the German Nazi Party.  Many Christians harbored hatred of Jews for centuries, ostensibly because they “killed Jesus.”  Plus, Jews banded together, kept their own customs, helped one another to succeed financially, and did not accept Christ as the Messiah.  Jews became bankers, often perceived and in fact, unsympathetic towards inabilities to repay debts.  And, they became jewelers, purveyors of expensive things for which prices had to be paid.  Plenty of reasons to dislike them in the eyes of many… or to hate them if cajoled relentlessly.  Rather than seek understanding, refined potential haters found it more comfortable to ignore or ostracize Jews even as they lived among the majority.

Almost every “Western” society has been unwelcoming to some degree toward Jews, despite the immense contributions to science and medicine and other highly educated pursuits in which Jews tend to excel, and prosper – even the great United States.  Yet, the treatment of Jews – “Hebrews” – by political leaders in the U. S. is far from exemplary, most particularly during World War II.  Despite American sacrifice to defeat Nazi Germany, Franklin Roosevelt was heartless toward Jews attempting to escape Nazi Genocide.  Based on spurious fears that even Jewish refugees might be Nazi spies, the Roosevelt administration refused entry to thousands of Jews seeking asylum.  Many of them were forced back to Germany where a large fraction of their numbers would die in the Holocaust.

Today, the U. S. holds itself out as a great defender of minorities, especially against “hate crimes.”  This extends even to cultural/religious groups that have been frequent, even documented, threats to Americans and to our nation.  Things are different.  No longer are we governed by parties that both want to protect and defend the United States, just with different methods.  One party appears to be in thrall of globalist forces that are essentially Communist, and that same actively appeases – or cooperates with – Communists and other totalitarians.  Indeed, one party seems determined to convert American politics to a totalitarian model… in the interest of “safety.”  At the same time – in the interest of idiocy – that party has dropped all defenses of its international border with Mexico, and facilitated the illegal entry of some eight Million aliens, a million of which have not even been interviewed: the “gotaways” who specifically avoid interview.

There may be a logical value to an open-border policy (that flies in the face of all existing immigration law), but no variation thereof seems Prudent.  The President of the United States, at the direction of – probably – former President Obama, has set policies by executive fiat, that must serve some interests, albeit not those of the citizens of the United States.  Dissolving a nation’s border is tantamount to dissolving that nation, and a citizen of that nation would be advised to ask his or her President why, and on what authority, he would allow such a crime?  For, a crime it is.  Indeed it has accumulated to several million crimes, and then it has become a federal imposition of unlegislated expenses – one might say, “illegal” expenses – upon the sovereign states that are protected(?) by the federal covenant we call the Constitution.

Those on the left defend the facilitated invasion of illegal entrants as some sort of “humanitarian” sacrifice the United States is obligated to make.  It is as though we are to blame for other countries’ crappy politics and socialist-totalitarian economics.  But it has become a grandiose lie being told hourly at our southern border – a lie told to the actual citizens of our country.  Illegal entrants from over 150 countries have crossed that ephemeral border, including thousands from “hostile” countries… those who are actively working to weaken, if not destroy, the United States.  The Biden administration is solely responsible for the breeching of our border(s) and the illegal release of illegal entrants into our nation.  One has to wonder.

Over the next decade we will have to capture and deport most of the Biden illegals.  Very, very few of them are legitimate asylum candidates.  According to international law, an asylee must accept asylum from the first country that allows him or her entry.  We’ve had illegal entrants from 150 or more countries.  Many had to pay for passage by air or by water to enter Mexico and then the United States.  Their presence at the Rio Grande is ridiculous and outrageous.  Why aren’t Americans outraged?

One of these days, it is sad to contemplate, there will be a significant terrorist event inside the United States.  We have, thanks to the President’s illegal policies toward an open border, INVITED terrorists into our nation and communities.  Nineteen radical Muslims executed the September 11th attacks; we know that some much-larger number of terrorist types have snuck into America in the past 3 years.  We know that both Muslim and Chinese espionage has undermined the federal government agencies and departments, even members of Congress and major cities’ governments.  Do we think that unfettered access to “The American Way” will magically convert these professional America-haters into Boy and Girl Scouts?  Not under the Biden administration… they seem to hate America, too.

IMAGINING RESCUE

WILLING TO BE RESCUED?

Prudence has noted in the past that 2020 seemed to be the year that the globalist, anti-American far left determined that it could overthrow the American system.  The manufactured “pandemic” surrounding COVID-19 and resulting destruction of civil liberties, social structure and logic following the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, seemed to be making the long-planned destruction of America possible.  The primary tool to make such a profound change in the direction of history, is managed hatred.

The largest hatreds over the millennia are spiritual, if not identifiably religious.  This is sad, in many ways, but also understandable given the nature of non-compromise at the heart of most organized religions.  The power lies in belief.  Shared belief is the strongest human force.  Rare are they who can listen to alternative beliefs and subsequently change their own.  Beliefs direct the actions of individuals, even to the point of destroying those with opposing beliefs.  When added to “mob” coherence, shared beliefs account for more deaths than any other social circumstance.

To a great degree, religions are – or began as – tribal belief systems, and in the earliest periods they had few alternative ideas to resist.  This fact makes the interesting similarities among early origin stories and beliefs about gods and an afterlife, even more remarkable.  However, fairly small differences between belief systems can spark enormous conflict, like that between Protestants and Catholics or between Sunni and Shia sects of Islam.  The religious differences translate readily into political and military differences, but at their core, they tend to be conflicts between which humans are in charge of the “religions,” not the deep principles underlying the beliefs.

Sadly, some belief systems are based in hatred, such that no form of compromise will permit even suspicious co-existence: the premise of one system being the elimination of the other system.  If success appears to find the “destroyer” system, that system prepares to take on the next system it opposes.  We can see this pattern with Marxism/Communism.  Its basic opposition to private property is enabled by its fundamental opposition to religion of any form.  However, one of the most hateful systems appears to be Islam, the premise of which is that the entire world must become Muslim; there is no workable form of co-respect or co-existence with other religions.  We have become a world governed by competing hatreds.

In a Prudent view, that is not the way any God of humanity would have wanted mankind to develop.

Regardless of the scale of the groups toward whom hate is directed, the act of hating is still a very personal one.  Pressures to convince large groups to direct their hatred at certain targets – politically in purpose and effect – can be successful only if lots of individuals are personally convinced of the “legitimacy” of that hatred.  It’s not the same as “following orders” issued by authoritative leaders.  And it’s not the same as “hating” those who are simply different from oneself – different sounding, looking, acting – which is closer to fear rather than actual hate.  It is fairly easy to learn to stop fearing others, to gain understanding of those differences, to eventually become neutral toward the different and, perhaps, friendly.  Soon, we’re marrying one another and blending our differences in beautiful children who will be less fearful than we used to be.

But to become hateful of particular others is a commitment with oneself.  It’s hard to casually hate, but relatively easier if one can be convinced to do so, whereupon he or she becomes more comfortable in hatred if he or she convinces him- or her-self that hatred is part of a belief system to which he or she is committed.  Soon, the haters are not being led to it, but are pushing for increased purity of hatred, often punishing or rejecting those leaders who seek compromise.  Hatred is an awful way to guide or lead people.  But, it’s cheap and effective.

America was once described as a melting pot.  Ostensibly, people from all places could “become” Americans.  Without offering multiple forms of welfare and help – including taxpayer-financed attorneys – in multiple languages and multi-lingual public education, people came only because freedom was offered.  Everyone learned English and agreed to live within our legal system, one of the most honest… not perfect, but fairly evenly applied under the Constitution.  “Melting pot” was not the most accurate description: “salad bowl” is probably better.  America invited the best of the world to join us.  Despite our mistakes, particularly with slavery, we learned to respect everyone who was willing to make and pay his or her own way.  Things have changed.  American “representation” has, in the past 30 years or so, become the politics of competing hatreds.  From the Clintonian “politics of personal destruction,” we have devolved to the “politics of social and familial disintegration.”

There is a certain ease of slipping into hatred, for most humans, not all.  Hating some one else or millions of someones else, requires justification.  If a person can find justification for hatred, no matter how flimsy, additional scraps of justification will stick to that hate like double-sided carpet-tape, bonding it just as tightly to one’s beliefs – perhaps to one’s soul.  Add in the power of group (mob) psychology and soon a novice hater is leading the charge.  Somewhere or somewhen along the spectrum from distrust to embedded hatred, every individual must decide to continue in that direction or to take another.  Every person, regardless of justifications, is responsible for his or her actions – including hatred.

Every person can choose from evil, which hatred certainly is, whether political or something else.  Every one of us can make that choice.  In spite of decades of public indoctrination, our ability to choose to be responsible still exists.  We are Americans, still able to lead, including ourselves.