The Last Option

One of the statements of mine that should be converted to a truism is this:

One thing that I have learned from studying history and reading philosophy – peace is the most fragile and temporary of all human conditions.

Let’s call it “Smith’s Law of Partial Political Pressures” (if I make it up, I get to name it, don’t I?)

I have spent Friday and Saturday visiting many historical sites here in Scotland, several battlefields and castles, including both Edinburgh and Stirling castles. In October, I visited the beaches of Normandy. One of the overall themes that I noticed during these visits is that throughout history, the resolution of intractable differences came through violent conflict.

I started thinking about the issues in the Middle East, the conflicts in Afghanistan, the issues between India and Pakistan and even our significant political differences in the US and began to wonder if it is possible to solve the unsolvable.

And then I read the comments on the last post I put up. There are issues here that are not resolvable because we are too different. Just this simple, limited sample is a strong indicator that there exist very different visions of America and the roles of government, business and the responsibility of our citizens.

I think about the conversations that we have here – there is little chance that we on the right will abandon our positions and it is equally as unlikely that the left will abandon theirs – so what happens when the irresistible force meets the immovable object? How is it possible to resolve the differences with enough unanimity to move forward?

While I am not advocating that there be armed conflict to resolve our differences, we would be exhibiting ignorance of history to think that it wasn’t at least a possibility. We Americans have already had one nation dividing Civil War and it is possible that we are running down the path to another such conflict.

Throughout history when two sides reach a point where there can be no resolution and when there is no capitulation by either side, one or the other imposed their will via physical combat – to the point where the loser could neither continue the combat or they decided that the cost of continuance is more than they are willing to bear and voluntarily agreed to abide by the dominant force’s ideology and political processes.

Of course, there have been cases in history where diplomacy has altered the course of history but in reality, those have been few and far between and they have also been temporary at best. It must also be noted that peaceful agreement does not always end the internecine conflicts and one can broker a deal and still get the wrong result. Diplomacy is more often than not about achieving agreement rather than achieving a correct solution, sometimes to the point that the solution is sub-optimal for both sides.

When political systems reach a boiling point, there must be a safety valve or the end result is the violent imposition of one will over another. It is simply not credible to think that any group of people with strong beliefs will allow themselves to be subjugated by another through simple political tyranny.

I think we have achieved such a boiling point in America.

I’ve long said that communism is a failure because it is not scalable beyond smaller groups, it fails simply because the span of control is too great. There is absolutely no way short of totalitarian rule that a country as geographically vast and with a population as demographically and culturally diverse as the United States can be controlled by a central entity. It is becoming apparent that my scalability thesis is being proven as the adoption of communist/collectivist central controls are testing the limits of traditional American rugged individualism and it is putting our Republic on the same path to rigid central control that produces intractable problems. The resulting tyranny will lead to eventual self-destruction, the same as other large scale communist systems have self-destructed…ergo the “boiling point”.

This “boiling point” is exactly what the idea of federalism was…and is… intended to address. Through distributed control that can be tailored to smaller governmental units and political boundaries, the rhetorical temperature can be reduced. Federalism is the answer to a small, powerful group or even a bare majority imposing control over the other half of the country that has evolved differently in culture and political aims.

Federalism is what makes the republican form of government scalable.

Since the Constitution has been corrupted to remove the safety valve of federalism, we are headed for the same fate as all large scale socialist states. It doesn’t have to be this way but the weight of socialist class envy, the welfare state and the resulting over-taxation, anti-Christian/anti-religion policies and a simple Hobbesian disdain of freedom and self government by our “elite” political class have all lead us to this tipping point – and even though its mention is scoffed at by the “smart” people on both left and the right, secession may be the only remaining non-violent opportunity for resolution, the last option.

About these ads

25 thoughts on “The Last Option

  1. I am continually dumbfounded by the ever increasing numbers of people who speak in terms of “fair”.

    http://therionorteline.com/2012/11/19/fair/

    Utah, Joe, Augger, & I, read and understand history. We also have delved into the MISREPRESENTED (lies) ideals and underpinnings of what is currently happening with the federal government. .

    I now realize the REPUBLICAN party played a contributory role in our current mess. And truly are part of the problem.

    The tea party gives me hope. On the other hand, many intelligent people have been successfully indoctrinated and will never allow themselves to see “the forest for the trees” or accept they have been LIED to for their entire lives by an education system and mass media infiltrated & bent upon subjugating them and their offspring.

    Many thoughtful Americans became interested in what America is, and WHY she is different and special.

    Yes, a reckoning is on the way.

    I hope the statists choose not, to make Americans, lovers of liberty and G-d, will never allow themselves to be enslaved.

    God Bless America

    • Typographical error;

      I hope the statists choose not, to make this divide violent.

      Valerie Jarrett has spoken otherwise. She has promised their opponents will pay.

      YOU ARE in that high tech database of theirs, as a friend or an opponent.

  2. The Civil War would be really civil in comparison to a conflict between so-called statists and so-called patriots. It would be neighbor against neighbor, as we don’t separate ourselves geographically due to political differences.
    And don’t think that libs don’t own guns. Even the ones that say they don’t own guns sometimes have guns. I hope to live out my days without enduring such an awful upheaval.

    Instead of hinting at 2nd-amendment solutions (the ‘sore loser’ option), Utah, talk up these ideas; talk to liberals, moderates; find out what their primary concerns are (you’ll see; family, economy, kid’s education) and show how your ideas will bring them or their kids a better life, one with a future full of promise..

    But calling everybody who disagrees with you idiot, stupid, etc. , lumping retired vets and single-parents trying to raise kids alone, into a F-S Army only marginalizes you and the right in general. No will listen to you once they have been labeled and filed them and treated with disdain. You do your message a disservice with your attitude.
    I know, it won’t be easy, but try comity, try ignoring the odd insult and just explain away. You are good at that explication, distilling a subject down to its essentials. Your best writing has no insults.

    Jes sayin’

    • Or as it seems across the country, the haves against the havenots, and we all know the havenots have guns. The country is NOT divided between liberals and conservatives, or Ds and Rs. The country is divided between the “I want yours” and the “I want to keep mine(s)”. There is no middle ground. If it was to come to violence, there would be total anarchy.

      • Which is why we need to talk TO each other, instead of At each other, and we need to listen, because you are wrong, there is a large middle ground, and they don’t want their yards turned into historical battle sites, They don’t want to shoot their baker because he has a Romney sticker in his window, and he doesn’t want his liberal customers to take their business elsewhere. And neither wants to kill the other because of their respective stands on the Federal Reserve.

        Your argument about anarchy, howeve, has meritr. The recent disturbances following Sandy show just how thin a veneer of civilization covers our savage hearts

        • Gotta disagree with you, g. If it comes down to violence, people are not going to care who’s political sticker is in his window, or where the liberal baker’s customers go. It going to be too far gone for that. It will be every man for himself and his family. I don’t believe there is enough left to bind two opposing groups together like there was in the Civil War.

      • Respectfully,
        G is wrong again.

        Force will be used by the Government to TAKE people’s property, what they haven’t already stolen through new taxation and a de-valued Dollar.

        The divide is between the Government and the producers.

        History repeats itself: The Government will use the “have-nots” as pawns against the producers in our country to take their property and enrich themselves and their friends. The Government will give “lip service” to the masses, promising jobs, etc., which will never come. Keeping the ignorant stoked with hate and envy in order to keep them on any kind of Government Assistance.

          • We do need to talk to each other Greg. No doubt. But as long as you, and the other sycophants hold fast to a idiotic belief that the rest of us have to support everyone with unequal taxation, there is little to discuss.

            • Well, we could talk about the fact that you are talking out your navel.
              You are assuming to know how people act and think, but you know there are poor families with hard-working parents, and you know that Romney paid 14% of his income to the IRS, my rate was 20%, btw.

              So we are supporting Romney’s unequal tax break, care to talk about that?

              • “try ignoring the odd insult”

                Well folks. It’s painfully apparent that Greg wishes to dish it out, but then tells everyone else to just accept it and not fire back. Would seem if Greg thinks he has more rights than the rest of us.

                Thanks Greg, you fell right in to it.

                Like I said, until you, and your Free Sh*t Army folks come to the table sincere, we have very little to discuss, and I will just continue gouging you at every turn.

    • As usual Mal-famy….you are “Jes Sayin'” Nothin’ ”

      ALL of what you suggest HAS been said by the Conservatives, TP and what folks like you demonize as “The Wingnuts”. The reponse has been ridicule and Hatespeech….uniformly. And wilful lies and disinfo…..as in your statement…..:

      “But calling everybody who disagrees with you idiot, stupid, etc. , lumping retired vets and single-parents trying to raise kids alone, into a F-S Army only marginalizes you and the right in general. ”

      NOBODY including Romney included Retired Vets and Single-parents in the FSA along with the likes Sandra Fluke…….Nobody that is except the Left in order to rile up their base with lies.

      • I am afraid that you are wrong, Don.Did you even think before commenting? Because you sure as heck did no research.
        Overall, according to the Tax Policy Center, “of the 38 million tax units made nontaxable by the addition of tax expenditures, 44 percent are moved off the tax rolls by elderly tax benefits and another 30 percent by credits for children and the working poor.”

        Moreover, only 18.1 percent of American households paid neither federal income taxes nor payroll taxes in 2011, says the Tax Policy Center. Of that 18.1 percent, 10.3 percent were elderly and 6.9 percent were non-elderly households earning less than $20,000 year, which include low-income families and students. About one in 20 is non-elderly with income over $20,000.
        The unemployment rate for male Gulf War-era II veterans age 18 to 24, at 29.1 percent,
        was higher than that for nonveterans of the same age group (17.6 percent). The rate
        for male veterans age 25 to 34 also was higher than the rate for their nonveteran
        counterparts (13.4 and 9.5 percent, respectively).

        here is some info for you to chew on, choke on, or complain about….
        http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_10_3YR_C21007&prodType=table

        According to the US Census, there 968,000 homeless veterans in America. Do you really doubt that most of them are 47 percenters?
        Okay, Don?

        • You just prove that you are an idiotic Taker with each passing post.

          I clearly said Veterans were NOT what Romney or others are talking about when mentioning the FSA…….it was the Leftists who lumped them in.

          And Viola !! Here is “Mal-famy- the- Ill”……doing just that…..trying to own the Dialogue. Put words and definitions in people’s mouths….(I ) decide what I mean….NOT you. Romney or anyone else DECIDES what they mean NOT you.

  3. I hope you post pics! Personal pics of places are the best! My sister goes to Ireland every year and their pics are way better than those in a magazine…….unless it’s an Irish cooking book with food porn…….shhh….

  4. Back to the safety valve, federalism.

    For every special interest with offices in Washington, there is a collection of people who will kick and scream if you try to take that special interest away. Just the notion of making entitlements sustainable brings up accusations of not caring for the poor and elderly. So much is tied up in Washington. Washington doesn’t want to give it up, and Washington has more than convinced the populace that they don’t want to give it up, either.

    Why do Americans put so much faith in Washington? We already know that many of the nation’s wealthiest counties are neighbors of DC; what does that say about where a good chunk of the revenue goes? Follow the money from big government, where does it go from there? Wall Street investors? Foreign countries? Solyndra? Did you know a huge chunk of welfare money never reaches recipients, but only sustains the bureaucratic structure? Washington is good ol’ boys on steroids, the place is hemorrhaging funds all over the place. How many of Romney’s “47 percent” are actually millionaires made rich by waste in Washington; how much of the 47 percent is an army of bureaucrats with cushy jobs and generous retirement packages?

    Also see Milton Friedman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VofQIu_Ifo&feature=youtu.be

    Can everyone agree that it is just a bad idea to have so much power consolidated in Washington? Isn’t it obvious? Then why do we keep falling for Washington’s tricks?

      • Your Original Post grasps the essence of our situation today…….”when the irresistible force meets the immovable object? How is it possible to resolve the differences…?”.

        I have noticed on many Blogs this tendency towards a kind of Zealotry in regards to justifying one person’s or group’s desire to control other’s actions, thoughts (speech) and property. Especially on the Left……But even by certain folks who claim to not be Progressives / Statists. It is very pervasive.

        I agree with your conclusions about Secession…..although I’m not sure it can occur without a resort to arms. For the simple reason that the Takers will not allow what they see as their ownership of your property to be taken from them. The Answer for the future is truely adherence to Federalism……but to the left Federalism means they won’t have access to your property and Labor (Tax)…….which they have warped into their “Right”. Ie….they have a “Right” to your Labor and Property.

        That defines an irreconcilable difference. If someone is standing outside your door Demanding your Dining Room Table as their “Right”….with the DHS and the Sheriff behing them, eventually when they return for the rest of your Furniture, decisions have to be made. However much the left uses their Hatespeech and calls your resistance the “Sore Loser Option”.

        • The one thing that doesn’t stop while we argue is time. While we argue over what to do, the clock keeps ticking and with every tick, the national debt grows. It continues while we sleep, while we have coffee and when while we are at work.

          Eventually, the weight of events will force a decision one way or the other and we all suffer the consequences. We already have Republicans, like Lindsey Graham, saying that they will break the no tax pledge “for the good of the country” – what we won’t get is any Democrat pledging to take real cuts in spending, without which, we all lose again, especially our kids and grandkids.

          There is no easy answer. There is no answer without some pain but there is an answer to keep this from ever happening again – and that is the turn to true federalism.

  5. Did you know a huge chunk of welfare money never reaches recipients, but only sustains the bureaucratic structure?

    That is the best argument for eliminating the Federal government’s role in other areas as well. The Department of Education’s budget is $70 billion/year.. The average state would have almost a billion and a half bucks added to their education budget. Say 200 million for a school that is 6-7 new schools, or pay raises for teachers, who deserve it, they shape and mold our most precious resource.

  6. Exactly, Greg.

    Here’s another question. What percentage of local and state reps are little more than Washington sycophants, who pride themselves on being able to fill out a federal grant application?

    Does anyone think Greg wants Washington’s influence in his county where he is trying to launch his Marxist Mosque Empire? No way. We share common ground with Greg on the federalism issue.

    Back to: elect local reps who are willing to ‘just say no’ to federal funding, and the rest will fall into place.

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s