For twenty years, Ronald Glenn has worked in real estate and law throughout the northeast. Now working in Philadelphia, our paths cross from time to time and I am always blown away by his keen political insight, by his knowledge and interpretation of American history, and by his ability to elevate my own thought process. On occasion, a particular point he makes looks as though it will fly right over my head, but Ron always has a way of making it work. He makes me think, and for that reason among others, I am delighted to have him on board as one of the new staff writers here at America’s Right.
By Ronald Glenn
When a presidential term ends, it is customary to give the send-off by analyzing the failures and successes of the departing leader. In this case, that honor belongs to George W. Bush. He faced the same single, overwhelming difficulty that every president has faced since the end of World War II, but Mr. Bush ended up with an outcome even worse than his predecessors may have imagined.
Since World War II, the democratic republics of the West have tried to run their countries by balancing two opposing political entities: once fascism had been defeated in Germany and Japan, and Communism became the West’s greatest enemy, the West chose to rule out of benevolence, based on a fear of Lenin’s “revolutionary moment.”
In simple terms, the revolutionary moment occurs when a society reaches such a pathetic state that the population will revolt against the government in power. Therefore, if the population is happy, the rulers stay in power.
This is where the two opposing entities came into play. The government had lots of wonderful things it wanted to do for everyone. It wanted to build schools, build roads, build hospitals, provide legal services, pick up the bill for education, take care of the elderly, and so on. This is the benevolent entity. In order to do all of those wonderfully idyllic things, the government needs lots of cash, so as simultaneous facilitator and result, the non-benevolent side–rampant capitalism–is required to raise the money.
Capitalists at the end of the 20th century actually portrayed themselves as Ninjas or Samurai, a type of elite warrior class who rose above the ordinary to in turn preserve the lives of the ordinary. The business world convinced us it should live by no one else’s rules but its own, and, if the government interfered or intervened, it was biting the hand that fed it.
I can remember as a child watching Lyndon Johnson’s State of the Union address in 1966 and hearing Johnson announce how much money he wanted for the Vietnam War. This was the “butter and guns” economy, we were told. That phrase should be rewritten; it is actually the capitalist/welfare and defense economy. Consider, for example, the following analogy: The American business community is a store owner. One morning the owner finds the front window of his store has been broken. He calls a window repairer to fix it. Assuming the owner pays out of his own pocket, this represents spending money on defense. Yes, the owner is giving a boost to the economy by paying for a window and the labor to install it, but the money should have been spent elsewhere. The government spends trillions fixing broken windows. Sometimes those windows need to be fixed, but from an economic point of view, constantly doing so can become a destructive burden.
Defense, as a result, is now portrayed as part of the American government’s benevolent policies toward its citizens and the rest of the world. The welfare part of the analogy is the government agent who visits the store to collect a “fair” portion of the owner’s profits to pay for the nation’s welfare. Some for schools, some for roads, some for food stamps, some to keep the store owner’s mother in a nursing home.
Is there anything wrong with this? It appears to be standard politics, until a new element enters into the analogy — the Federal Reserve.
The store owner wants to expand? “No need to wait,” the federal government says. “Borrow the money at a reasonable cost (interest), and you can expand right away. If you ever need any more money, don’t hesitate to stop back.” The government is all for it, after all, considering that they gave the Federal Reserve–a private bank owned by private shareholders–the right to print American legal tender without limit since it is only paper and ink anyway.
This happened because the American federal government does not have a fiscal policy. They cannot contract the economy in a way that is meaningful because they always spend more. Instead, the government chooses to run the economy by monetary policy, which simply means they want to control the economy through the money supply, which means they’re forced to run it through debt. Borrowing, in this environment, is the means to wealth.
George W. Bush was the leader of the Republican Party which, for years, preached that the benevolent side of the government would destroy the capitalist side of the country. It was allowed, through public policy, to eliminate the power of unions, suppress wages through cheap labor, and dismantle massive sectors of the industrial base. But when the time came for the business community to face the errors of its ways, Bush put the capitalists on the government dole.
Instead of dismantling the welfare state, Bush merged the capitalist entity with the welfare state. Soon, an American citizen like you and me might have a government house insurance card, car insurance card, medical insurance card, and a government bank account.
Such a merger reeks of fascism or corporatism. As the 44th president of the United States, Barack Obama will be asked to mediate this mess while the conservatives try to figure out what to do to recapture the American vote. On this, the arguments I have heard miss the point. They revolve around the attempt to re-establish “old values.” In the face of a possible hyperinflation catastrophe looming for 2009 and 2010, the debate should be whether or not this merger was done on purpose.
Bush abandoned the Evangelical side of the Republican Party because they were too nationalistic. Stock brokers and bankers are people without a country. They are tired of a separate national currency, tired of national labor laws, tired of separate American constitutional law, tired of nations as a whole.
Merging the world banks and insurance companies with the governments of the world would allow for a merger of unprecedented proportion, as well as allowing the government to use foreign troops all over the globe to enforce the new rule of world law. This new “conservatism” has no old American values. It is based on old-world, European elite takeover. It was the bankers who ran the world during the Renaissance. What better way to take over the world than tell to everyone it is being done to save them?
It is no coincidence that so much old-time Evangelical preaching is now centered on the end of the world. Metaphorically, their world may have ended the day the Federal Reserve asked for the right to start paying foreign debt. Whatever was sacred about the sovereignty of the United States had been sold for thirty pieces of silver. Inflation cannot happen with gold and silver money, as our Founding Fathers certainly knew.
Paper currency is worth nothing intrinsically; it exists because the bankers say it should, but inflation of the currency increasingly takes away even its fiat value. So the Federal Reserve prints more, and soon the value will be next to nothing.
A free people does not need private banks to tell it what to do. What they tell us is for their benefit, not ours. Down with the Federal Reserve! To keep the freedom of the people is to own real money and have the real national interest at heart: the people. Our forefathers knew what they wanted this country to be, they knew it because they saw and left countries which were not. So they penned our founding documents, incorporating ideas and policies and guidelines intended to perpetuate America as they intended. Power, as the Constitution affirms and reinforces, should rest with the people.
Ronald Glenn has worked in real estate and law for more than twenty years. He now works in Philadelphia, and lives outside the city with his wife. Ron has been writing for America’s Right since January 2009.