Posted on 10/17/2009 5:58:42 AM PDT by brucek43
All nations eventually fail. Some go peacefully; others in paroxysms of violence and bloodshed. All that I have examined were guilty, at least in part, of nurturing the process. Even given that, one is hard pressed to imagine how a democratic or an autocratic government can be expected to survive.
To wit: Democracies do not start wars (with the exception of the US under Lincoln). Further, citizens are not by nature war like and see no need to shed blood and treasure to acquire an empire. Empires acquired by any means eventually will cause their own demise. FDR had to lie, connive, cheat and, specifically violate the law (Neutrality Act) to foment the Japanese attack and Germany’s declaration to force a reluctant nation into WWII
Autocracies have the ability to easily start and sometimes win wars. They are, however, encumbered by an institutional bias against change. An inability to accommodate change in things economic or military leads to an inability to compete and ultimate failure. The allure of “cheap” money in a faltering nation is rarely resisted either.
The costs of losing a major war are always blared around the world and are obvious, overshadowing the costs of winning. Winning nations have, however, sacrificed their most valued assets in combat deaths and injuries. Further, they debase their currencies in order to sustain the enormous cost and keep the citizens at bay. Currency debasement may be in the form of increasingly valueless paper money or devalued bonds.
Autocrats simply visit fiscal and/or monetary policy upon a powerless nation. Politicians in democracies shrink from forcing voters to sacrifices consistent with maintenance of the war effort. They inflate the currency and pretend that they are not. Until very recently, the average US voter sheepishly accepted this formula.
(Excerpt) Read more at collinsreport.net ...
Someone needs to support this statement with sources
Little more needs to be said.
Lincoln didn’t fire the first shot.
Make up facts to fit your dogma, expose yourself as silly fraud.
Waste of time article from yet another Know Nothing blow hard convinced he is the new "Conservative" messiah riding in to "save us"
Well he does state that his interest include, “bridge, history, politics and cooking.” Dude is as kooky as balloon dad.
Yep, we baited Japan and Germany into attacking. Guess we should have never tried to send food to England...?
Since inciting an attack is morally the same as firing the first shot, then the author of this piece has achieved the incredible feat of contradicting himself in the same paragraph.
I do not think there should be a sanity test to qualify for the 1st Amendment. Let him rave.
He just provoked the first shot.
It has been written the quickest way into communism is through the debasement of the currency....
this is just one of the tools for the destruction of a “capitalist” society.
fill the government administration with leftists
add in more government control, such as Obamacare
attack the cia, strip the military, dump the trading partners and allies etc etc etc
What does that have to do with Lincoln?
Dr. Collins said "Democracies do not start wars (with the exception of the US under Lincoln)"
Dr. Kevin Collins, a member of American Mensa and the Sons of the American Revolution, holds a doctoral degree in Public Administration from Nova Southeastern University, and brings a unique background to his endeavors. He is a Viet Nam era Marine and a retired NYPD Honor Legion street cop, who was assigned to many sensitive positions during his time with the Department.Collins is echoing the sentiment found elsewhere
Lincoln was a traitor and should have been charged with treason (or preferably assasinated much sooner)! The “War for States Rights” (as it should be known as, if the Union didnt re-write history) was just that. It was more of a revolution, not unlike the American Revolution. It was economic oppresion by the Union that caused the Southern States to feel it necessary to secede. Slavery played a very minor role, if any, in the secession of the Southern States. Most southern states had already implemented plans to abolish slavery prior to Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation.
We at the General Jackson School do our best to keep our insanity under wraps as we revel in our preadolescent precociousness (polysyllabic words - suggest you borrow a dictionary from someone who is literate).
We always look forward to intelligent comments and are usually rewarded with same. Perhaps this was not your day to exhibit any intelligence. One hopes it you will someday have some and be able to recognize it. A tall order to be sure.
Lol!
took me a minute...
Sources are usually required but the point seemed to be made by history. Since the Middle Ages, few empires have lasted more than a several hundred years. The Russians did the best but the Bolsheviks got them in the end. Further, as history marches on, it seems longevity is diminished. The Germans under National Socialism being the most gross example. Nations that decline a place on the world’s stage have a better chance to remain static. Geography etc. plays a big role, however. It is is safer to be perched in the Alps than on the Polish plains...
That is literally true. However, even the legions of Lincoln worshipers will admit that he forced the issue at Fort Sumpter. The more salient issue is where is there any evidence that a state or states could not leave the Union. As an aside, I point out that neither Jeff Davis nor any Confederate leader was tried for treason. I submit the reason is that they had violated no law!!! It is a fascinating period and I recommend you dig a bit, if you have not already. I stick to WWII and the never ending shredding of our Constitution.
Now that Google has made available hundreds of thousands of public domain books to download for free, I am reading a bunch of excellent books on observations of life in America in the 1850’s and even during the civil war period.
Very readable in today’s type of English, not like reading Ben Franklin.
Try “Army life in a Black Regiment” by Thomas Higginson Wentworth circa 1863 or “An Englishmans Travels in America; His observations of life and manners in the free and slave states” circa 1857.
No PC back then, these people tell it like it was and what and how the races thought, treated, and expected of each other.
Fascinating and directly related to what is happening today and shocking when one realizes that the Plantation mentality is alive and well and is embodied in the halls of the United States Congress, our Masters, and the democrat party and their constituents, who have become Overseers of us taxpayer slaves.
I'm not sure what that means... but the Illuminati isn't pleased.... beware of the black helicopters... and Dan Brown
China still exists. Greece still exists. Egypt still exists. Britain still exists. Rome is still there. They simply do not dominate anymore. Do we need to dominate?
You make an excellent point and one that I should have more carefully considered. I would be more accurate to write that empires cause wars, mayhem, corruption, and general grief. Most end up losing a major war and emerge with the same name but much poorer for the “empire experience?
We agree that the US should pull in its horns and, in my opinion, have stayed out of WWII, after which we gained an empire. Suppose the Germans and the Japanese did prevail. After all the blood, treasure, bloated government, etc., we had Chicoms and Soviets as opposed to Japanese and National Socialists in a tripartite world. Hardly worth it me thinks.
In any event, thanks for your thoughts as they make me a bit more thoughtful.
Bruce
"Mr. Karlson is a weekend writer for The Collins Report. I don't allow out and out lies or attacks on religion on my site by my writers but aside from that I offer their take on issues as alternative views."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.