Politics

by

Face of the Nation I

Introduction

We find ourselves in that four-year cycle where we are faced with an election once again. Although I delineate below the concerns that I believe the nation faces, and that therefore we should closely attend to what politicians specifically say about these concerns, I have come to believe that for whom we vote in elections will have little effect on these concerns that I delineate in this blog article. Neither political party has demonstrated that it cares nor even understands how major concerns we face in this nation are transforming this republic into a Statist authoritarian rule of political elites. There are few, if any, individuals running for office who claim as their passion to rid people’s lives of an ever encroaching State into every nook and cranny of individuals’ personal pursuits. What the nation faces is a constitutional crisis. Does any particular politician call for a constitutional cure that will restore the republic form of government under which we are supposed to live? I have categorized ten concerns that I believe the nation faces. I will discuss five of those ten concerns on this month’s blog article. The remaining five I will discuss for September’s blog entry.

The Economics of Inflation

The economic stability of the nation has been in the forefront of peoples’ thinking since the debacle of 2008 and the absurd quantitative easing that followed. Simultaneously and unfortunately people continue to look to the government for livelihood and security. Following the 2008 recession the governmental response to the pandemic of 2020 led to numerous business failings with drastic effects for the economy from which the country is yet to recover.

Inflation and Hyperinflation

The major threat to our economy simply put is government spending. The notion of a $34-trillion dollar debt doesn’t appear to concern either party as promises from government to provide health, wealth, and security continue to flow from D. C. The Federal Bank’s printing machine continues to print money so as to stimulate the economy. Keynesianism is on overdrive in the government’s response to insure the economy will flourish. And increased taxation becomes a threat to all forms of wealth and property while the middle class continues to carry the burden of the country’s woes. These monetary and fiscal policies continue to negatively hammer the value of the dollar for which people work. On top of that we are fed the nonsense by government officials that there is no inflation. One wonders if such bearers of economic news have ever gone to the grocery store, noticed the price of automobiles, or have sought lately to purchase a home.

History is replete with the lessons of the dangers of government spending, particularly that of the Weimar Republic in 1923. The printing machine mentality cannot continue without ushering the nation’s economy into a hyperinflation mode, which is the very sign of an economy on the verge of collapse. Presently, small businesses are treading deep water. The hurtles for small business startups are difficult due to expenses, taxes, and the shrinking value of the dollar. Unfortunately, corporations who are in bed and partnered with government have become what supposedly defines capitalism. Hence people call on a more powerful State to fix things. In an economy ensconced in hyperinflation, no politician wants to proffer the necessary solutions because the remedy would frighten people beyond fathoming. Four books that speak to the deadly concerns of hyperinflation are: The Fuhrer (Konrad Heiden); Waste Paper: The German Hyperinflation of 1923 (Simone Ricci); Germany 1923: Hyperinflation, Hitler’s Putsch, and Democracy in Crisis (Volker Ullrich); and When Money Dies: The Nightmare of Deficit Spending, Devaluation, and Hyperinflation in Weimar Germany (Adam Fergusson). The U.S. economy faces an unfathomable government debt and the devaluation of the dollar, and it is on the precipice of destructive hyperinflation. Listen for any discussion of this economic reality from would-be presidential candidates for the 2024 election. Then listen even closer for any stated remedies.

Foreign Policy

No doubt Israel’s conflict in the Gaza and the Ukraine war will be discussed in vague rhetorical terms among Democrat and Republican debate strategists. Although Hamas started this latest war with Israel via the butchery that Hamas is known for, it will be interesting to see if any politician addresses the reaction from Israel that has led to much more than is alluded to by the phrase collateral damage. Likewise, will any questions and/or discussion arise regarding the limit to which the U.S. should support Zelensky in the Ukraine under the rubric that he is a democrat? More importantly, will any presidential candidate touch on the historical position whereby the U.S. has sought not be entangled in foreign affairs? (This last notion may appear totally rhetorical, given this nation’s involvement in foreign conflicts since Korea to the present.) But do we, as a nation, have a principled foreign policy by which we seek to live?

Having stated the above, our foreign policy appears to be a muddled mess, given our position on Russia, while the nation’s politicians play soulmates with China. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has been, and is, one of the most vicious collectivist regimes for over seven decades. Although there might be some nod to supporting Taiwan, is the U.S. truly supporting Taiwan with its friendliness toward mainland China and the CCP? June 4th, 2024 marked the thirty-fifth anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre. The elder Bush, rather than supporting those who were butchered by the tanks and guns of the CCP, sought friendly relations with China. Given that China is purchasing land in the U.S. in warp speed, what is our Foreign Policy toward the regime of the CCP? The annual Shangri-La Dialogue occurred on May 31, 2024. The CCP is straightforward in how it views its own position in the world, and how it sees other countries. In this latest round of dialogues, the CCP is adamant that Taiwan and the Philippines fall under what China calls the South China Sea control. The CCP offers stern warnings against Taiwan and the Philippines if they do not accept their position in the South China Sea. Likewise, they threatened the West (Europe and the U.S.) if it seeks to support either Taiwan or the Philippines [Balding, Epoch Times, June 6, 2024]. If Putin as an ex-KGB guy still represents the haunts of the Soviet regime, then the CCP is certainly not our friend. Presently, I think it has to be taken as a given that both Russia and the CCP have as their goal the collectivist control of the world. How might the U.S. build on a principled Foreign Policy that takes a strong stand against these two regimes?

Education

The homeschool movement has been in full force for several decades now. The pandemic which witnessed the closing of schools enhanced the desire of many parents to rethink public education and move toward homeschooling. The upsurge of woke ideology simultaneous with the decreased academic standards related to the three-r’s has also moved parents toward the desire for homeschooling, homeschool co-opts, and private education, thereby removing their children from government schools. Unfortunately, the teachers’ unions for public schooling are politically connected and entrenched in their ideology. Although a large number of parents desire to make moves toward homeschooling and private education, they are still forced to pay school taxes to support public education. The school voucher system has been touted as one remedy for the sad state of education in the U.S. although such a system leaves in place government control of schooling. Listen for what politicians say regarding the rights of parents to have their children exit the public education system to either homeschool them or place them in private schools. Then listen for any support for public education that compromises their position. Better yet, listen for any statement whatsoever from the politically elite on education.

Border Crisis

Since Biden and the Democrats have opened the flood gates to (and yes I’ll say it) illegal immigration, the number of immigrants crossing the southern border of the U. S. has grown exponentially. Although, libertarian in my perspective, I have come to question most libertarian stances on open borders, especially in a day when terrorists of one stripe or another can so easily gain access into the country. Moreover, our immigration policy that now extends the government dole to those entering the country lacks any common sense or basic morality when the taxpayer is on the hook for subsidizing immigrants. At the very least before we can consider a libertarian position on open borders, subsidizing of immigrants must come to an end. One wonders how many would consider the risk of sneaking across the border if there were no government subsidies waiting for them. A true libertarian society based on free market and private property values must not assess the border crisis today along mere ideological lines. The amount of taxpayer money going to illegal immigrants on top of the already wretched inflation that has hit people’s pocketbooks is asking too much for the public to support. Should we be glad that people want to emigrate to this country? By all means. But we need a solid economic policy that creates the kind of society they hope to find here. Barring that reality, we need to hear what politicians have to say about illegal immigration.

Internet Politicization

The Dot.com revolution promised people a free market where ideas could be generated and debated, providing alternative pathways to legacy media and the news offered there. Unfortunately, many who tread in the political elite class view liberty as a problem to be placed under their control. Candidates running for any political office should address the politicizing of the internet that has undermined the freedom that the Dot.com revolution promised. The internet needs to remain the freest and most wide open resource for individuals to generate and search for ideas that speak to all areas of life. The State, however, is extending its ever-growing tentacles to control what is written and stated on various websites. Youtube, Facebook, and others have negated content that doesn’t fit a particular political ideology. We witnessed this most blatantly in the censoring of website material that was critical of the government’s handling of the so-called pandemic. Not only was such information and perspectives censored, they, in turn, were labeled misinformation, and, if possible, criminalized. We also witnessed certain financial venues refuse to work with those websites that were designated as misinformation. Although I believe strongly in the right of owners of such venues as Facebook and YouTube to determine their content, they should not become an arm of the State’s desire to censor material that criticizes the State. Simply put, some individuals may post things online that are egregious in their content. A free market should determine their fate. Perspective candidates need to speak, to not how they want to see the internet operated, but to whether or not they want to let the internet continue to be the free market source of ideas and an alternative source to legacy media.

Conclusion

The nation is bitterly divided today along political ideologies that have no apparent resolution to coexist in a society that allows the free exchange of ideas, all of which should be protected by Constitutional rights that are basic such as the freedom of speech, the freedom to worship, the freedom of assembly, and the freedom to disagree openly. Presently, we face a Constitutional crisis. This nation needs to decide what the Constitution truly represents. The five concerns above should be principally addressed by perspective candidates. Come September, I will discuss an additional five concerns, beginning with our Constitutional crisis.

[Reference: Balding, C. (2024). How China Views the World. [In The Epoch Times, June 6, 2024. Online edition.]

John V. Jones, Jr., Ph.D./June 14th, 2024

ANALYSIS OF POWER

by

The Enemy of Liberty

For they do not speak peace/But they devise deceitful words against those who are quiet in the land (Psalm 35:20).

Introduction

We are in the midst of ideological warfare that could have far-reaching effects for a republican form of government. Note how the mainstream media has become a mouthpiece for the left and its progressive ideology. Pay close attention to those businesses which progressive ideologues have sought to ruin because they dared adhere to their Christian beliefs. The attacks on 1st and 2nd amendment rights never cease. Progressivism is an ideology that holds that a centralized powerful State will bring about a utopia on earth through bureaucratic regulation that threatens what we have typically experienced as liberty. Couched in rhetoric touting democracy, progressivism is a collectivist ideology that views individual liberty as the problem, a problem to be cured by an all-powerful State. Hence comes the movements of Critical Theory, Social Justice, and egalitarianism.

The Rhetoric of Progressivism

The Orwellian speak from the progressive left under the guise of such words as democracy, equality, and peaceful coexistence, is nothing more than rhetoric that they use to push their ideology. First an absolute democracy not checked by a republican form of government becomes rule by the majority. Note the move to eradicate the electoral college and the desire to shift all legal matters away from the states and localized decision making to the centralized government. This was specifically played out in Biden’s move to dictate to the state of Texas its decision on how it should guard and protect its own border. Second, equality of opportunity is not the aim of the egalitarianism of the progressive left. Egalitarianism shares nothing in common with equality of opportunity. Equality of results is the goal of progressive ideology. Individuals by the power of the State will be made equal, whether it be in pay, hiring practices, or educational outcomes. The aim of progressive ideology is to empower the centralized State to force equality of results. Meritocracy is targeted as racist and the result of class privilege. Given this stance, we see the onslaught of Critical Theory and Social Justice ideologies, particularly seizing the academy in all departments. Thus, peaceful coexistence is the last thing that progressives truly desire. Although much of the ideology undergirding progressivism emerges from postmodernism and its claim that all is a relative and a social construct, the true driving force of progressivism is the mantra, everything is political. Given that presupposition progressives will drive home their ideology via political power. Again, we can see this reality in the attacks on free speech and the weaponizing of the legal system to punish businesses that do not adhere to progressive ideology.

Ideological Warfare

Joseph T. Salerno, in his pamphlet, The Progressive Road to Socialism, hammers home that given the ideological presuppositions of progressivism, there can be no peaceful coexistence with the political goals of progressives. The conclusion of everything is political is that political power makes right. Salerno points to the work of Murray Rothbard as a blueprint for how those of us who stand against progressive ideologies should wage ideological warfare. First, we have to recognize that throughout the 20th century, progressives, the academy, and corporatism (corporate cronies tied to big government and the academy) have teamed up to apologize for progressive political aims. The payoff for both the academy and corporations has been subsidies from the State at the taxpayers’ expense. Such politicizing of all avenues of life is not something with which those who stand against progressive policies should seek to coexist, especially if coexistence as defined by progressives means that those who are critical of leftist policies are deemed racist and privileged, basically a move to silence any critical dialogue of progressive policies. Again, note the attacks on free speech. Second, given the political power wielded by progressives, Salerno points out that Rothbard counsels that those on the right must wage a warfare based on ideology that shatters the disguised rhetoric of progressivism, showing that progressive policies will lead to the destruction of a republican form of government, the economic prosperity it brought about, and the end of any sense of meaning of liberty. Salerno, quotes Rothbard: We are engaged in the deepest sense . . . in a “religious war” and not just a cultural one, religious because left-liberalism/social democracy is a passionately held worldview . . . held on faith: the view that the inevitable goal of history is a perfect world, an egalitarian socialist world. . .It is a religious worldview toward which there must be no quarter; it must be oppose and combated with every fiber of our being (p. 18). Salerno, as a libertarian, throws down the gauntlet. He states, There is no middle ground. You are either a progressive or a reactionary. You either join, or acquiesce in, the forced march into socialism or you join the reaction (p.19). Salerno points out that those on the right must recapture the meaning of reactionary, not letting it be labeled as a derogatory notion. This is the game the left plays. Again, note any critique these days of leftist policies is met with the opprobriums racist and privileged.

Conclusion

For the second time in three months I have opened this monthly blog article with an epigraph taken from Psalm 35:20. The question for those of us who are born-again Christians is how we go about the ideological warfare that Rothbard calls for when we are also commanded by Scripture to love and pray for our enemies. First, as a Christian, I hold that we should do as Scripture calls for, love and pray for our enemies. Note however, that in such a commandment, there is no denial that our enemies are just that, an enemy. The progressives do not speak peace (everything is political). Instead they devise deceitful words against those who are quiet in the land. As one who is opposed to an all-powerful and centralized State, I simply want to be left alone by the State, to live quietly in the land. However, there comes a time when it no longer suffices to remain quiet, but to engage the ideological warfare that has engulfed us. As believers in Christ, we must engage that warfare in a way that doesn’t turn us into the likeness our enemy.

Reference: Salerno, J. T. (2023). The Progressive Road to Socialism. Auburn, AL: Mises Institute.

[Joseph T. Salerno received his doctorate in economics from Rutgers University. He serves on the Board of Directors of the Mises Institute where he is also academic vice president and professor emeritus.]

John V. Jones, Jr., Ph.D./ April 14th, 2024

ANALYSIS/Politics

by

Mis-State of the Union

Introduction

We live in a day in which everything has become politicized from health care to sexuality. The rhetorical prayer of postmodernism – everything is political – borrowed from their god, Karl Marx, for now is winning the day. Six days ago the presiding President of the U.S. declared his state of the union. This blog proffers my personal critique and response to the President’s address. I will disclose from the outset that politically I hold mostly to a libertarian viewpoint. As a Christian, I hold strongly to a Judeo-Christian ethic. The purpose of this blog is not to exalt the RNC, which I think has done nothing to counter the politicization of our culture. As a libertarian I believe that people can live a life in which very little is political. We cannot carve out a life for ourselves, however, apart from values and beliefs that form the foundation of how we live in the world. Today people in the U.S. are becoming more and more to believe that the State provides a life for them.

My response to the State of the Union Address is formed among three categories: 1) foreign policy; 2) economics; 3) political rhetoric. 

Foreign Policy

It is entertaining to listen to how Biden connects Putin’s threat to the world with the disproved charge that Trump won the election against Hilary Clinton because of Russian interference. And then he analogizes Putin’s world threat to the January 6th insurrection. To hear Biden’s claims, Putin is the most dangerous Stalinist in the history of totalitarianism. By the way, FDR, whom Biden praises, saw Stalin as an ally. Many in the military at the time saw exactly what Russia was about during those days. Is Russia about spreading totalitarianism today? Perhaps Putin may see himself as a world conqueror. 

While excoriating Russia, Biden then shows his anti-Israel colors by being soft on Hamas. Yes, he had to speak to the October 7th debauchery executed by Hamas. What else could he do? But sending money to “Gaza” is sending money to Israel’s enemies. Calling on Israel to a cease-fire with Hamas is anything but a rational foreign policy. If Putin epitomizes the evil from whom America can’t ever back down, then what is Hamas and the threat of Iran? There comes a point when the people of Gaza and Palestine must say to Hamas – no longer – no longer can you hide in innocent people’s homes, hospitals, and schools. I know that such a stance will take more courage than I can fathom. But courage is what is required to stand against such an evil as Hamas. Hamas’ evil is not limited to the gross debauchery they have perpetrated since their existence. It is also evident in their willingness to hide among civilians, placing them in extreme danger in the midst of reprisals for which Hamas’ evil deeds call forth. Israel is an ally. As such their foreign policy should not be dictated by America’s government. We may disagree at how Israel has gone about its response to Hamas; nonetheless, Israel is a sovereign country and is an ally. 

Next Biden seeks to tell everyone that China is really not rising in power and should not be considered that much of a fear factor. Tell that to the Taiwanese. Speak that nonsense to those who live in Hong Kong. If Putin is a threat to world peace, then to neglect China as such a threat, is totally irrational. In this nation we face the fact that China is buying up land and other forms of real estate throughout the country. Biden may want to claim that he and his cronies have brought to life the computer chip industry in America, but globally and economically that doesn’t make sense. China is a threat to the world as much, if not greater, than Russia. We will have to keep a close eye on Taiwan to see what happens. If China invades Taiwan, we’ll have to experience what our foreign policy is really made of. I would rather any support go to the Taiwanese than to Gaza, Iran, and Saudi Arabia. 

Failed Economic Policies

According to Biden’s speech he has made everyone better off from the poor to the wealthy. Addressing the decrease in deficit spending in the face of a $34-trillion dollar debt is like trying to irrigate a desert with a cup of water. The next government budget may very well see a fifth of its spending go simply to paying off the interest on the debt. And listening to Biden’s address doesn’t give anyone any comfort that government spending is on the chopping block. (By the way, this is as true of the RNC as it is the DNC.) Government spending is rather an oxymoron. It is actually the tax payers who are on the hook for the fiscal policies that lead to irrational spending by politicians. According to Biden, he is going to fix all problems from healthcare to education to corporate profits by the old game of tax-it-and-spend-it. Not one word did he utter regarding the government debt, what it does to the value of the dollar, and how it undermines peoples trust in economic policies. Not one word did he utter regarding the debauchery known as the Federal Reserve. End the Fed has been a shout for those who hold an understanding of economics contrary to Nobel Prize winners like Paul Krugman. The mindset that has taken hold of Washington’s fiscal and monetary policies can simply be translated as – spend our way toward utopia. 

As Biden spoke out of one corner of his mouth regarding deficit spending, out of the other side he played the old rhetorical tune of class envy, calling on the wealthy to pay their fair share. No doubt the tax burden in on the middle class. But this fact is due to both Democrat and Republican policies that uphold a so-called progressive income tax. The real question is who determined what is fair for everyone to pay in taxes. Such rhetoric is nothing more than the State being too much a part of our lives. When politicians set the tax code, then they and their IRA crony bureaucrats dictate to others what their fair share should be. There are many other pledges that Biden made that speak to what will be the continued failed economic policies put forth by Washington. Teachers will get raises, children will be forced to go into public education at earlier ages, unions will be subsidized to make America strong again. And then finally, an insult to all insults, inflation is going down. Tell that nonsense to people who are trying to buy a home, pay for an automobile, and to even those going to the grocery store. Of course all of these rises in prices will be fixed by more government spending and subsidizing of corporate cronies while the government debt continues to reach higher levels.

Everything is Political

Biden mentioned all the necessary politically-correct items from abortion to transgenderism. And then there is the border situation, which he has really tried to fix while instead trying to dictate to Texas that the state cannot string barbed wired along the Rio Grande. Literally millions of illegal immigrants have crossed the border, wreaking havoc on communities. Even schools in New York have been shut down, sending the students home while the educational facilities were used to house illegal immigrants. The border situation is a disaster. It’s remedy should be left up the each and every state that has to deal with the effects of illegal immigration. Immigration policies also effect economic policies. Those who enter the U.S. illegally are subsidized with healthcare, housing, and education. Interestingly enough, it is the very unions that Biden touts that look with scorn at immigration policies because of the jobs and inflated wage losses due to illegal immigration. I happen to believe that it is a wonderful reality that people want to move here, work, and establishing a life for themselves. But as in all countries, Mexico included, there are legal and legitimate ways to obtain that goal. Tax payers should not be subsidizing those who cross the border illegally.

Biden’s political rhetoric, which is true of Washing D.C. as a whole, was replete throughout his address. If we were to believe him, he will put forth policies that will solve all of our problems, of course at the tax payers’ expense. With every line, he had to take a jab at Trump (and I’m no Trump supporter). Of course it’s an election year. What this State of the Union puts forth is like most addresses over the last few decades, if not longer. People are to look to the beltway in D.C. for a life. Never mind the the pandemic and the policies that followed from it crushed the economy. Never mind that politicians are spending the economy into oblivion. Never mind that our foreign policy for the last decades since WWII have taken of the goal of a Pax Americana. And never mind that NATO is an organization that is at best a silent enemy of what America supposedly stands. NATO stands because of the American military and loss of American lives in foreign conflicts that we should not have engaged, from Vietnam to Iraq to Afghanistan.

Conclusion

The political rhetoric continues. Look to the politically elite for a life. They know better how we should live. The populace surely cannot carve out a life for themselves worth living. People are called to depend on the government. That is the taxpayer.

John V. Jones, Jr., Ph.D/March 14th, 2024

ANALYSIS OF POWER/Politics  

by

The Political Class and the Rest of Us

For they do not speak peace/But they devise deceitful words for those who are quiet in the land. (Psalm 35:20)

Introduction

I have a trick question for you: what has the political class done for you lately? It’s a trick question on several levels. First and unfortunately, many people believe that politicians do extraordinarily benevolent things for them. Second, government and its peons can do nothing for any of us unless they first take something from someone else. The only thing that politicians can truly do for “the rest of us” is find more efficient ways to extricate themselves from our lives. Ho-hum. That will never happen, and all this question and answer exercise is simply to preface that, whether we like or not, we’re in an election year where candidates will promise people all they can get away with in an election year, only to renege on the promises once in office. However, don’t blame the politicians. Making promises is how they stay in “power.” The citizens are to blame because of their view of government. Government, especially on the national level, exists to give us a life – so people have come to believe in an ever evolving mind-numbing way. There are three things on which we can focus if we really want a nation that no longer looks to the federal government for some kind of life. First , we need a refocus on the legitimate relationship between the federal level of government and the state and local levels of government. Centralization of power has gone much further than simply being an overreach to being a tyrannical threat to state and local powers. One example of this overreach is being played out in the border crisis in Texas. However, too much centralization of power is the core problem of all that will be discussed in this blog article. Second, we need to properly understand economics and, in the words of Murray Rothbard, what government has done with our money. Third, we need to take a hard look at our foreign policy, not defining every conflict in which the U.S. engages the military in patriotic colors and rhetoric about spreading democracy around the world.

Centralization of Power

The present conflict between Biden and Abbot regarding the border crisis is simply a symptom that speaks to a more pernicious issue of the loss of states’ rights in the usurpation that accompanies the centralization of power that has been accumulated in Washington D. C. The crisis of illegal immigration is another reality that the Federal Government would have people believe doesn’t exist. Illegal immigration is not merely about people crossing the border. Who can blame individuals for wanting better lives for themselves. Presently, however that “better life” is promised to illegal immigrants in terms of entitlements at the expense of the taxpayer. Free schooling, healthcare, and welfare benefits are held up like a carrot to entice people to cross the border illegally. There is also evidence that non-citizens are being allowed to vote in elections. To desire to be a citizen in this country is a good thing, and there are proper channels for doing so. The border crisis is real, but it’s simply one piece of evidence for the politicalization of everything, particularly at the expense of states rights while the federal level of government seeks to bully states into relaxing or eradicating their stance on illegal immigration. Centralization of power at the federal level of government risks more than laws regarding immigrants. We have watched over the years federal powers intrude on states rights in areas from education to now free speech and second amendment rights. One place this power struggle is being played out now happens to be at Texas’ southern border.

Understanding Economics

Wrap your mind, if you can, around the figure $34.2 trillion. This is our the present debt owed by our government on the day I’m writing this article. We are fast approaching where one-fifth (20%) of federal expenditures will go specifically to pay the interest on this debt. For a people that looks to government to take care of their needs, the simple fact that the government has no money is unfathomable. There are two basic truths about politicians. One, they want to keep promising people anything they can spew from their mouths; two, they don’t want to raise taxes. Not doing the former and doing the latter will prevent them from getting elected. If the promises that politicians make are not paid for via taxes, then the Federal Reserve simply prints the money. (Others outside the government are imprisoned for counterfeiting money). The more printed money the government infuses into the economy, the less valuable the dollar becomes. Hence, people’s purchasing power of the money they work for is destroyed. Looking at both government and our society as a whole, we have become an indebted people. We tend to define wealth by things people possess without seeing the indebtedness in which they swim. Regardless of what Paul Krugman in the New York Times spouts, the devaluing of our currency along with inflation are realities. These realties tend to hit hardest those who are on fixed incomes, such as retirees. One short paragraph will not suffice to help us understand economics. This is a topic to which I want to return time and again in the future. The basic principle to remember for now in this election year is that politicians love to make promises with other peoples’ money in mind.

Foreign Policy

In this years’ election drama, foreign policy will be a hot topic with so many points around the world embroiled in military conflict, with Russia/Ukraine, China/Taiwan, and Israel/Palestine being three of the most visible points of contention that could lead to further world conflict and war. Our foreign policy over several decades since W.W.II has been one disaster after another. We continue to embroil ourselves in the name of “American interests” in various countries around the world, spreading our use of troops to an ever-thinning layer and making poor decisions as to why we entered a conflict in the first place, and then making even poorer decisions about how to exit such conflicts. Foreign policy and the Pentagon is another example of other peoples’ money. The budget for the Pentagon contributes heavily to the U.S. debt. Although I am for a strong military and the proper role of the military in defending this country, we need to really search out why and if we need our military stationed all around the globe in a Pax Americana fashion. We are presently looking at some potential heavy conflicts that could really draw on our ability to defend this country, ranging from China to Iran to Russia. This is not a time to speak of spreading democracy around the world via the Pentagon,

Conclusion

Although in the Psalm from which the epitaph for this article is drawn the psalmist, David, is writing a prayer to God for rescue from enemies, I believe we must recognize when a government crosses the line to becoming an enemy of the people. Crises regarding the centralization of federal power hit home in the areas of fiscal/monetary policy, immigration policy, and foreign policy. While people can expect these three areas to be the foci in this election year, do not expect much discussion around the decentralization of power, not as long as the basic premise to which people hold is that the government (the State) exists somehow to take care of our needs, security, and peace of mind. Those of us who believe in a radial decentralization of power long for a government that does its minimal job of guarding our basic rights, which, by the way, do not come from the hand of the government. Otherwise we want to go about our business and be “quiet in the land.” What we will hear from political wannabes are many deceitful words about why they should live in every nook and cranny of our lives. One of the pathways to peace entails ridding ourselves of the State that presently controls our lives too much. The other and more important pathway is spiritual, praying that God awakens this nation unto Him. Government, the State, is not, never has been, and never will be a way to true peace and prosperity.

John V. Jones, Jr., Ph.D./February 14th, 2024

GENERAL ESSAY/ANALYSIS OF POWER/POLITICS