How would you describe your political philosophy?
A Chicken in every pot — or freedom for all?
When I was 17 years old, I was provincial and naive. But my girlfriend was from New York. She had seen Nureyev and the Broadway production of West Side Story, and her world view was broader than mine. One day she asked me, “How would you describe your political philosophy?” I was flummoxed because I didn’t have one. I was completely unprepared to give an intelligent answer.
“Political philosophy” sounded like dusty, old books — something of interest to a very few, very ancient scholars. But she said political philosophy is simply your own personal view of politics. Do you want the government to take care of you, or do you want to take care of yourself? If you expect the government to give you freedom, you have to be willing to assume responsibility for yourself. If you want the government to take care of things for you, you have to be willing to give up some of your freedom. To know your political philosophy, you have to ask yourself what you believe.
So I started thinking about it. My father was a Republican and my mother was a Democrat, and most of their political arguments left me somewhat ambivalent. I had always liked President Eisenhower (R), and I had liked Kennedy (D), too. My answer, “I’m not sure,” didn’t satisfy my girlfriend. She explained that within any political party, there were conservatives, moderates and liberals. Near the “middle of the road” were conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans, who weren’t very different from each other. I asked myself, “Where do I stand?”
That was about 50 years ago, so I’ve had plenty of time to develop my own political philosophy. Like a growing plant, shown in time-lapse photography, swinging from side to side in pursuit of sunlight, my political philosophy has been both liberal and conservative; both Democrat and Republican; both moderate and independent. But in recent years I have learned that this old way of looking at politics — the liberal to moderate to conservative paradigm — is only a part of political philosophy. A very small part. And yet the bulk of voters are oblivious to that fact, and continue to think it’s all a matter of liberal vs conservative.
Today, the defining struggle that shapes the new political paradigm is globalism vs nationalism. Globalism may be expressed as a political philosophy that considers the “greater good” of all humanity (euphemistically referred to as “The International Community”) a fundamental consideration in the decision-making process of local politics. This philosophy was boiled down to the phrase, “Think Globally, Act locally.” and was commonly seen on bumper stickers in the 1970s and 1980s. It has since seeped into most political thinking, regardless of party.
An example of this is California’s “statewide efforts to implement global warming emission reduction” (see http://www.climatechange.ca.gov/climate_action_team/index.html ). In this case, a State that is barely solvent, with high unemployment and having to cut services to its own residents, is adding to its fiscal burden by trying to solve a global crisis which actually doesn’t exist. But because it’s “global”, the politically correct view is that it must be addressed.
Globalism has become such a significant, driving force in politics that it carries the weight of a moral imperative. Children are taught we need to come together, across borders, to “save the planet”. And nations are seen as divisive impediments to that end because of their narrow, petty, self-centered interests. Nations each want to go their own way and fight against each other, so that we need international agreements to create regional “stability”. This has fostered what Michael Savage calls “pan-Leninism” in his book, Trickle Up Poverty. Globalism requires big government. And big government is best suited to Communism. It doesn’t have to deal with troublesome obstacles to the global agenda, such as individual freedoms or the democratic process. It just has to talk a good talk.
The globalists make their vision sound noble, but they end up destroying the sovereignty of nations. And without sovereignty, there can be no freedom. This is particularly true in the U.S.A. The Constitution does not allow laws from foreign nations to have any legal standing in U.S. courts, and yet some federal judges, even on the Supreme Court, have cited international laws. This undercuts our freedom because American citizens and American law makers have no recourse to change or challenge international laws. At that point, American citizens are not being represented or protected by either government or law. That’s tyranny and that’s unconstitutional.
Nevertheless, many of our elected officials, from the President, to Congress, to Governors and State legislatures to local city and county leaders, feel we must be responsive to “The International Community” as cooperative citizens of the world. This attitude basically controls our State Department. And when was the last time they did anything pro-American? Shouldn’t our politicians be 100% responsive to us? Shouldn’t they be accountable to the constituents who elect them and pay their salaries?
Here is the basic philosophical question: Should elected politicians
1.) do what their constituents want, or
2.) do what is in the interest of “The Greater Good”?
The first choice is called REPRESENTATIONAL GOVERNMENT (democracy, in the vernacular). The second choice means being subject to a ruling class whose agenda does not necessarily have public support. The first choice means politicians with low approval ratings get voted out. The second choice means politicians with low approval ratings remain in office, because you — the voter — aren’t qualified to judge what they do. They are the “professionals” and you should let them do their job.
Do you want a professional ruling class governing the world? Because, that’s exactly what the globalists want. They want the masses to accept whatever laws, taxes and restrictions that are imposed on them, without questioning. The more discouraged voters become, the happier the globalists are, because the fewer people that vote, the easier it is for the globalists to accomplish their ends. An ignorant, confused public becomes apathetic and is easily swayed. Globalists work hard at keeping it that way.
Globalists can be very professional in their lying. After all, it’s for “The Greater Good”. They have convinced a lot of people to believe in the noble lie that greater “sacrifices” are needed to help those less fortunate than ourselves, and Americans should feel guilt and shame for having it so good. They talk about “giving back” as if we have taken something from someone else in the first place. But in truth, the small in number ruling class ends up taking what’s ours and keeping it for themselves. Poor people remain in poverty and the middle class joins them. And those who thought their government would carry them find out they’re being taken for a ride.
So, how would you describe your political philosophy? Do you believe that politicians should do what their constituents want? If so, you need to accept the fact that a globalist will never represent you or your vote. You have to vote them out. It doesn’t matter whether they are Republican or Democrat. Chelene Nightingale has called those two the “U.N. parties”. Their opinions of what is good for Americans will always be colored by their international interests. The money in their pockets will tell you whose pocket they are in.
The issues that differentiate Democrats from Republicans are the old-fashioned concepts of liberalism vs. conservatism, which are significant only to a point. Whether a politician is liberal or conservative makes little difference if factories are being shut down here and moved to China (which continues to happen under both Republican and Democrat leadership). Politicians like Diane Feinstein have directly impacted trade agreements with China which have made her husband rich. And Obama’s “Job Czar” has created lots of jobs in China by moving them from America to China. And of course his company, General Electric, paid no income taxes this year, despite huge profits. These are the kinds of people who benefit from Globalism. You think they’re for the “little guy”?
Are you going to continue to vote for those who gave us Obamacare? Who gave us the so-called stimulus and the bailouts for banks and corporations “too big to fail”? Why haven’t there been any consequences for those who created the housing crisis and the banking crisis? All those CEOs and their friends in Congress are doing fine. They didn’t lose their livelihoods, their homes, their savings, their retirement. Are you going to continue to vote for those who promised jobs and an economic recovery? Are you going to continue to vote for politicians who called for the end of war in the middle east while Bush was President, but support war under Obama? Do you still believe in “Change”? Are you still willing to chase the carrot year after year? Don’t you see the game these globalists play?
I believe in freedom. With a few exceptions, I don’t see the kind of leadership this country needs to preserve our freedom. Instead, both Republicans and Democrats have led us to the brink of disaster. Not only in terms of our economy, but in terms of how we see ourselves. Historically, Americans have considered themselves the champion of Liberty, not by military might, but by living as a free nation, demonstrating the superiority of freedom by example and inspiring the world to follow. That is what being the leader of the free world used to mean.
But our globalist leaders have put a stop to that. Both the Republicans and Democrats owe too much allegiance to the United Nations and have allowed the national interests of the United States of America to take a back seat to international concerns. Both parties have trampled on the Constitution. And the sad fact is that most elected politicians don’t really pay any attention to the Constitution at all, despite the fact that they take an oath to protect and defend it.
If you believe that politicians should do what their constituents want, then take action. Start by reading the Constitution. It’s a very small document and is easily purchased. It wouldn’t hurt to read the Declaration of Independence, either. That’s what gave birth to this great nation. It’s what we celebrate on July 4th. Second, find candidates who will represent you and whose only agenda is to govern according to the Constitution. You will have to look beyond the Democrats and Republicans to do that.
They aren’t the only two political parties. There are others. Look them up on the internet. You may find a so-called third party that inspires you. I recommend the Constitution Party. It is a small group, but they believe in the essence of America: freedom for all, as enshrined in the Constitution. All they need is you, the American public, to join in their dream (and in the work) and together we can make our country the embodiment of freedom again.
You have to ask yourself what you believe in. “I’m not sure,” just doesn’t get it.