Posted on 11/28/2005 5:39:36 AM PST by beaureguard
Since the United States is the first and only example, it's a bit disingenuous to point to history as a precedent. Now it's true that empires usually only last about 200 years, so if the currently evident transition of the US into the world's preeminent military empire with plenty of bread and circuses to keep the slackers quiescent continues, we probably won't have more than 200 years left - or 130, if you start counting from the advent of New Deal economics.
5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. (The Federal Reserve Bank, 1913- -the system of privately-owned Federal Reserve banks which maintain a monopoly on the valueless debt "money" in circulation.)
6. Abolition of all rights of inheritance. (Partially accomplished by enactment of various state and federal "estate tax" laws taxing the "privilege" of transfering property after death and gift before death.)
Having said that, there are several other historical events that truly defined this nation as a modern, socialist state. I would include the following: 1) the Civil War (after which the United States became a single nation defined by a Federal government, rather than a confederation of quasi-independent states); 2) the Spanish-American War (the first time the U.S. engaged in an imperial war overseas for reasons that had nothing to do with the protection of our sovereignty); and 3) the admission of New Mexico and Arizona to the Union in 1912 as the 47th and 48th states, which effectively marked the end of our nation's expansion and the beginning of the modern era in which some nebulous idea of "national interests" replaced "national defense" as the driving force behind every U.S. military engagement.
Sort of. In 1707 Scotland and England agreed to join together as Great Britain. Some 220 years later, Great Britain and Northern Ireland formed the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. ;)
The history of civilization would tell us that a country based on freedom and economic liberty generally last just a bit over 200 years
You can't effectively argue that England remains a "free" country based on economic liberty. Individual rights in the UK have eroded tremendously since WWII. Look at the national healthcare system where hospitals go to court (successfully) seeking to end care of a child who is improving and on her way to a normal life. Who did the hospitals go to court to fight? Her parents.
You can't fox hunt in England for crying out loud. You can't protect your property. You are very limited in gun ownership.
As far as economic liberty or freedom in any European country, just look at the EU's constitution. They may have rejected it initially, but that is the future of Europe. Freedom is dead there.
It isnt the rule of the majority that is destroying America, it is the rule of the minority.
When one Shiitebird can take away the words Under God from the pledge, When the ACLU can make war on Christians,when the government bends over backwards to every minority in the country,when jobs are given to those in the minority because they make the quota and not the grade. When homosexuals can demand to have their sickness taught in schools and have homosexual clubs in high school.When the media can make war on the President of the United States, it isnt the rule of the majority which will destroy America, but the sniping of the minorities.
You are correct.Walter and his brother Victor were leaders of the welfare state who went to Russia for their training in the early 1930's.
I don't know; I hope so. It was the first time I'd ever listened to him; I'm quite impressed with this man.
Have a nice one...heading out.
Just lovely :(
Then DIE STANDING UP! ;)
Walter Williams sometimes fills in for Limbaugh. Usually when he does he'll interview Thomas Sowell. The two of them together are great.
Townhall.com carries Sowell's columns which I try to read regularly.
Sure you can---it's more free than Cuba. It's more free than China. It might be less free than you'd like it, but "free" is one of those moving target-type definitions, is it not?
Boortz is using this argument as a rhetorical device; nothing more, nothing less. In order to whip the faithful into a frenzy.
When these "projects" crater like the Hiroshima bomb, will the studios and networks wake up and realize that the consuming public is sick of America-bashing? Will they understand that an edgy public wants movies that comfort them, that reassure them, that tell them they're doing the right thing? Or will they continue to invest millions in products nobody wants to buy?
So you disagree with him?
No doubt.
Funny thing is...this isnt the first time the Hollywood types have rolled out something like this. There was that stinker. "AMERIKA" with Kris Kristofferson in the early eighties.
How about Hollywood have a good ole future war movie where the US gets attacked by roving bands of jihadis that crossed the border...regular citizens send them to ALLAH, via Smith and Wesson, and the US remains the good ole US...or is that to positive for them?
The history of civilization would tell us there isn't enough data on which to base that kind of statement.
I believe he's being hyperbolic in order to make a point. And I do tend to be leery of opinion pieces signing America's death certificate, yes.
Starring Claire Wolfe, Boston T. Party, and friends?
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.