Well, Italy has announced that it is willing to open its doors wide to poor little Alfie Evans. Alfie is a child in England whose PARENTS do not want to deny him life support. Alfie is not vegetative or brain dead, but has developed a life threatening neurological condition that requires him to be on life support. The Children’s Hospital in England that he is in is actively working against his parents wishes that he continue to receive life support. In fact, the hospital staff and the Government of England have agreed together that Alfie should die in accordance with the European Court of Human Rights. Yesterday the hospital turned off the life support machines over his parents pleas. However, Alfie has hung on, and in the words of his father, “gobsmacked” the hospital and doctors. That, translated into American english means that little Alfie has “punched them in the mouth.”
What makes this worse is that Italy has offered him and his parents asylum. A hospital supported by the Vatican there has made themselves available to continue Alfie’s care. But England would rather kill him than ship him off to Italy for further care. And these are the people (national governments) that we are, according to the Left, supposed to willingly give our right not to be killed. What is commonly called the right of self-defense. A right that is enshrined in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
When the framers wrote the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution there were two groups of people that they had in mind that people needed to be able to defend themselves against. They believed their citizens needed to be able to defend their life and property against criminals for sure. But they also believed that the citizens of the new nations needed to be able to defend their life and property against government intrusion too. Their knowledge of the history of England and the bloody civil wars of Europe, along with their current dilemma with of King George’s standing English army in their villages and towns, was enough to cement in their minds that governments were more dangerous than individuals. And I for one, do not understand why we have to learn this lesson again in the United States.
Stephen Paddock kill nearly sixty people in Las Vegas. Adam Lanza killed nearly thirty, mostly children, in Newtown. Nick Cruz killed more than fifty. Dylan Roof killed nine African-American parishioners in South Carolina. And the list could go on and on. For sure, there has been a change going back to 1967 with the birth of the modern mass shooter in Charles Whitman’s rampage on the campus of the University of Texas that killed sixteen people. There is a problem, it is just not a firearms problem. It is a moral and spiritual problem that transcends firearms. Recently the murder rate of London topped that of New York City. Firearms have been outlawed in London for years. Now they are banning knives. In Toronto yesterday a man rented a delivery van and mowed down twenty five people, killing ten. The problem with the Alfie Evans case is the same problem that haunted us with Charles Whitman, and the same problem that haunts us now with Nick Cruz. Across our land, and indeed across Western Civilization there is now a callous, evil, and nihilistic disregard for human life. The governments and universities of the Western World are rife with these people. Just because abortion is state sanctioned doesn’t mean that it is not mass violence. But if there is no God, nothing beyond this life, no meaning whatsoever to any thing, and all is random, then why not snuff out the mobil clumps of cells as well as the in-utero ones. If someone has Down’s Syndrome what do we do? Execute them, it’s better that way. Neurologically damaged babies? They worthless drains on society, useless eaters. Whose next? The aged? The infirm? Whose next? The Ideological opponents that disagree with this ideology of death we are all witnessing.
When mass shooters kill, we get deaths in the tens. When government kills we get deaths in the millions. The twentieth century was a century of mechanized death at the hands of ruthless Marxist dictators who systematically disarmed their populations so that they could not resist their will. David Hogg and Emma Gonzales are following the same ideology that the doctors of Alder Hay Children’s Hospital in England are following, as well as Margret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood followed. They all think they know what is best for everyone else. They all think that they are best equipped to make decisions regarding who should live and who should die. When Margret Sanger convinced the elites of this nation that incapacitated people, blacks, and other poor populations should die in the womb, she did it using public safety and quality of life as arguments. When the doctors at Alder Hay tell us Alfie should die, it is because of quality of life arguments. When Hogg and Gonzales (historically ignorant children that I doubt could tell me about anything that happened before the year they were born) make their arguments about gun control, they make public safety and quality of life arguments.
The Left in America has become a Marxist cult of death. First, they shout you down on college campuses and mock the death of a former first lady. Next, they make it impossible for those with whom they disagree to do business (like they are doing to the NRA and firearms makers now). Then they disarm you completely. After that, they do what they always do, to ensure public safety and quality of life issues, they kill you.
Legendary foreign correspondent Robert Fisk gave an informed account from the ground on the Syrian (likely non) gas attack. You can read his account via the UK Independent here. It is a good thorough read, written by a man familiar with Syria, it’s people, and it’s leaders.
I have read many critiques of those of us, like Fisk, who do not believe Assad used chlorine gas upon the people of Douma. Most of the reasons given by critics show that they do not understand the region, and are either Russo-phobic (the Left) or have a blind trust in the American State Department (the Neo-con right). Conservatives on the right are a confusing bunch to me. I feel a close kinship to them in many ways. But there is no explaining their complete mistrust of the U.S. government on domestic policy and their blind trust of it in international affairs. If the U.S. government doesn’t do what is right by its own people, why would you assume that they would do what is right anywhere else in the world? But I digress.
For those of you that may not know, I want to explain something to you in very clear and irrefutable terms. We are backing radical Muslim jihadists in Syria. No, really, the “moderate rebels” in Douma that claimed that there was a gas attack there, are a part of a group that calls itself the “Jaish al-Islam” (Army of Islam).
No, we are not fighting ISIS in Syria, we’re helping them. When those same fighters cross an imaginary line in the sand and enter Iraq, we call them ISIS. U.S. weapons are often found among ISIS fighters in Iraq because they were carried from Syria to Iraq by these so-called moderate rebels. It is schizophrenic. But I am going to try to explain in brief below why we knowingly maintain this schizophrenia.
And, no we are not helping Christians there, we are ensuring their annihilation. Assad, as bad as he is, is himself a minority in his own country. He is an Alewite, and is aligned with the Shi’as in Syria, who are themselves a minority. Most of the Sunni majority there are non-violent and live in peace with the minority populations (Shi’a, Alewite, Christian, Yazidi, Kurds, etc). But among the Sunnis are Wahabists, like Osama Bin Laden was when he was alive. These are the radicals that kill, rape, and maim in the name of Islam. The so-called moderate rebels in Syria are Wahabists that are financially backed by Saudi Arabia. They are of the, “convert or die brand”, and we are aiding them in their crimes against minority populations in Syria, among whom our Christian brothers and sisters are a part.
What are we doing in Syria? Be skeptical here and do your own research. What we are doing is helping the Saudis (Sunni Islam) gain control in the Middle East against the Iranians (Shi’a Islam). The Saudis are aligned with us, and will only sell oil in U.S. dollars. This is called the petro-dollar system. Countries around the world must exchange their currencies for dollars before they can trade them for oil. And we can’t have oil countries like Iraq, Libya, Egypt, and Syria selling oil in something other than dollars. All of these nations were either Shi’a controlled or secular Sunni dominated until we arrived in 2003. They were friendly to Iran, which is the major Shi’a power in the Middle East, and consequently, Saudi Arabia’s primary rival for regional dominance. Why is it important to us that Saudi Arabia gain control in these nations so that the world will continue to have no choice but to trade commodities in U.S. dollars only?
Remember back in 2009-2012 when we printed 4.5 trillion dollars out of thin air in order to keep us from slipping into economic oblivion? Why didn’t this massive influx of fresh cash cause massive inflation and destroy the value of our currency? Because the world needs dollars to do business, and most of the new currency was soaked up by foreign banks who needed them to buy oil. But what would happen if the countries of the world began to trade their currencies directly (or gold, or another currency) for oil? All the dollars that are sitting piled in banks all over the world would no longer be needed there, and they would come crashing back to our shores. The U.S. dollar would plummet in value. We’d be stuck with 21 trillion dollars in debt, and a massively devalued currency to use to pay it off. The inflation that would occur would make 21 trillion feel like 40 trillion in an instant. We also could no longer be able to run deficits because we would not be able to print money to cover those deficits without immediately feeling the consequences, if the world stopped using the petro-dollar. Have you ever asked, “why, if we run a deficit, can government checks get cashed?” It is because we monetize that debt… we print it up and send it out by selling debt backed securities like bonds and treasuries. The interest on the debt in the scenario I describe would equal our GDP overnight. We’ve painted ourselves into a corner. We will do anything to keep the status quo as the reserve currency of the world because a change in the world monetary regime would cause a multi-decade depression, and usher in severe austerity in the U.S.. Here’s the kicker. Our whole Middle Eastern foreign policy is predicated on our need to maintain the world reserve currency status. That’s why we side with Saudi Arabia. That’s why in Yemen, people… children, are dying of Cholera because the Saudis, with our help, have bombed them into the stone age. Where is that in the news?
Saddam Hussein, a Baathist secular dictator started selling oil in currencies other than dollars. He now sleeps with the fishes. Iraq is in shambles. In Libya, Gaddafi did the same thing, moved to non-dollar oil sales. He’s dead and Libya is a mess with no one really in control. The whole Arab Spring that we instigated and supported in 2012 was merely either the toppling of Shi’a controlled countries or the strengthening of Sunni (Saudi) control in countries across the Middle East. In Egypt we saw the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood, that were, like the Jaish al-Islam in Syria, Saudi (Sunni) controlled, and Wahabist to the core. Coptic Christians were, and still are, being slaughtered by them and their ilk. This is all linked to reserve currency and oil sales. No other reason can be given that would make the United States fight ISIS in Iraq and fund ISIS in Syria. Because the day we are not the reserve currency the party is over. We could not, at that point, continue to live our debt fueled free spending lifestyle. Like it or not, our profligate spending has spilled over into profligate warfare. This is how domestic policy influences foreign policy.
U.S. Christians should begin to systematically eliminate their debts and invest in precious metals, land, and other physical assets. The party is going to end. Our reserve currency status is going to cease, my guess, within the next decade. There is a lot going on around the world, especially in the East, meant to extricate eastern countries from being under our financial thumb. And America has been foolish enough to spend more than it has brought in for decades, placing itself in a precarious position that will eventually over come it. I would, if I were you, begin to personally build networks of Christian friends that are committed to helping one another in the future. Erecting things like homeschool networks, using orthodox Christian businesses where you can, and gaining real world skills like gardening, animal husbandry, carpentry, and small motor repair. And more than anything, building small intimate communities of disciples (churches) that truly care for one another and maintain the faith once delivered to the saints. Finally, we should be rebuilding the types of churches that created networks of care for the legitimate poor (widows, orphans, and refugees) as the Church in Judea and the Greek speaking churches established by the Apostle Paul did, when they enrolled widows (Acts 6; 1 Tim 5) and created the office of deacon (1 Tim 3) to carry out that care. There is a time coming in the U.S. where the church will be needed as a house of prayer and a house of care for the legitimate poor.
Perhaps I’m wrong and none of what I said will come to pass in your lifetime. I hope so. But Christians should act on my prescriptions regardless. We should not be indebted to and entangled in the World’s system. We are a separate Kingdom with a whole different moral code, and a completely different set of ethics. We certainly should not be encouraging blood shed in foreign lands to prop up our currency that will come at the expense of our brothers and sisters in Christ. There are worse things than poverty.
The prudent sees danger and hides himself, but the simple go on and suffer for it.
~ Proverbs 22:3 ~
In our recent rush to prove to the world that we are still running the show, the U.S. launched over one hundred cruise missiles on to three basically empty military establishments in Syria. Supposedly Bashar Al Assad used chemical weapons against the last hold outs of a failed western inspired coup. Though no real evidence has been produced to show the Syrian government used chemical weapons, nor did Bashar Al Assad have any real motive to use them. After all, he has for all intents and purposes won the civil war there, and just last week President Trump let us all know in a tweet (which is still strange to me) that we were pulling our military out of the country. As the bombs reigned down upon Syria Friday night, Neo-conservative Christians in America threw out many reasons for the military action. One in particular really bugs me, and it goes like this, “We have a responsibility to protect ancient Christian civilizations in the Middle East, therefore, Bashar Al Assad has to go.”
Before 2003 when America re-entered Iraq to spread freedom, Christian communities generally enjoyed peace with their Muslim neighbors in places like Syria and Iraq. Secular Shia governments, while not being “friendly” to Christians, nevertheless allowed Christians to live in peace. This was obviously not a perfect scenario for Christians. Of course they have under went injustice and persecution at the hands of many of their majority Muslim neighbors. I’m not trying to paint the situation to be like it is here in America. But Syria and Iraq are not America, so using ourselves as a measuring stick of such things is foolish. But what I want to discuss is, “what changed after 2003?”
Around 2003, with our arrival in Iraq, the American government started using a phrase with its citizens. The Bush administration would say often “that we were fighting them over there, so we won’t have to fight them over here.” Now I dispute that we would have ever really have had to fight them over here. Normal law enforcement practices and vigilance by citizens would protect the homeland. I’m not saying we would not have had “lone wolf” attacks. We obviously have had them, and we would have had them, even without the Iraq War. But the real truth in the statement is found in the first part, “that we were fighting them over there.” It was policy for us to use Iraq as a magnet to draw in Islamist fighters from all over the region. In trying to defeat Al Qaeda, we created a monster, ISIS. ISIS are Sunni radicals of the worst sort. They make up the bulk of the enemy forces we fought in Iraq, and in a strange twist, they also make up the bulk of the forces that we support in Syria. Moderate Rebels in Syria are ISIS fighters in Iraq. That’s the truth, weird as it sounds. What does all this have to do with the decimation of ancient Christian communities in the Middle East? Everything.
As a result of our using Iraq as a magnet for Sunni radicals so we could “fight them over there”, those same Sunni radicals, who are much less apt to live peacefully with infidels than their moderate Shia neighbors, slaughtered Christians, burned their villages, and took their daughters as sexual slaves. So when I hear a U.S. Christian say that we had to bomb Assad to save “ancient Christian civilizations”, I know that the only source of information they have about that region and our actions there, come from sound bytes and news crawlers that scroll across the bottom of their television screens. Bashar Al Assad is a bad guy, but the
Sunni radicals moderate rebels that he is fighting against are way worse for Christians in that region. The cruise missiles we sent last night will only serve to help our enemies in that region, and will only hurt the few Christians that are left there. They will produce the exact opposite effect that many well meaning yet ignorant (mostly evangelical) Christians in America desire for their brothers and sisters there. Assad doesn’t love Christians, but the Sunni radicals he is fighting against will exterminate them if they gain power. And that is the reason that many of us are so skeptical that Assad was behind the chemical weapons attack there. For Sunni radicals, the end justifies the means. Sixty sunni hold outs murdered martyred for Allah will all inherit paradise. If their deaths can be used to further the cause of creating an Islamic State in the Levant…. well that is a bridge that those people will cross without hesitation. For Assad however, it was the only thing that would all but guarantee that Europe and America would re-engage on the ground there. So I ask, who really had the motivation to use chemical weapons in Syria? It was not Assad. But who really benefits if Assad gets pinned with a chemical weapons treaty violation? One thing is for sure, not ancient Christian civilizations in Syria.
With all the talk recently about the Trump Trade War and tariffs, I thought I’d explain my personal position. I’m gonna take some flack on this one from other libertarians. While I do not agree with President Trump’s tariff proposals, I am not opposed to the idea of tariffs as a form of tax. I understand it will be passed on to the consumer. But if I have to choose a tax, I like “low” tariff, even over a sales tax.
Why am I not a free trader even though I am a libertarian? Free trade is on one hand great, and on the other hand a myth. NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) is thousands of pages long detailing trade restrictions in each and every sector. Calling it free trade is a misnomer. The U.S. does not practice free trade. Fair trade is mythical too….. as the term usually means it is advantageous to the poorer country. It is not “fair and equal.” Fair trade is nothing but a form of charity. A bad form.
It is better to allow funds/goods to flow based on supply and demand. Then allow citizens of each nation to direct their own charitable giving the way they see fit, instead of silently fleecing them in unbalanced trade deals. Who pays the balance? The American worker/taxpayer/consumer, that’s who! In job losses, wage stagnation, wage decreases, and tax subsidies levied against their paychecks and businesses. Fair Trade is allowing our government to choose other governments to be charitable too. Which is a bad idea. Let me explain.
Let’s say the U.S. decided to make a “fair trade agreement” with Venezuela. How much of the benefit would go to the people of Venezuela verses the government of Venezuela? The people would barely notice at all, as government bureaucrats would either waste or embezzle those funds long before they reached those in need. This is exactly what happened in New Orleans (after hurricane Katrina), Haiti, and in Puerto Rico too. Governments are inefficient and full of corruption, especially in poor countries. Corruption is one of the chief reasons poor nations are poor nations. I know there are oppressed peoples, but who are their oppressors? Usually their own government. And their government is the last group of people that our government needs to be giving money too.
US. Trade agents should negotiate based on America’s needs first, getting the best deal possible for their citizenry. Their first obligation is to the citizens of their own nation, whom they represent. When their own citizens are prosperous, then those good and generous free citizens decide how to direct their own charitable giving to the actual benefit of the poor of the world. This is why left/right statist proposals never work as intended, because government solves very few if any actual problems, and is in fact the source of many of our woes. And if they are not the source of our woes, often government action exacerbates them rather than helps.
This will be unpopular, but I think the proper response is a very low tariff that is equal for all nations friend or foe. Paid on all goods without exception as a market entrance fee. We should then eliminate the income tax on citizens. Free Trade is not the answer because we cannot find reciprocal partners. In theory it is the best way, but in reality it won’t work because it is utopian in nature. No one else in the world is really for free trade and all the “free trade” agreements are actually highly restrictive trade.
This proposal would make government pro-trade, less apt to go to war, much leaner as it would shrink government in size, pro-business in general, and allow citizens to keep all of their hard earned money, flushing the domestic economy with actual cash rather than just lowering the amount government takes. It would make Trade just…. not free or fair, or protected.
P.S. it is also close to the original way we did business in the world. You know, when we were a producing nation instead of a consuming nation. When we had the largest savings rather than the largest debt.
I read an article this morning over at themaven.net about how colleges in America are starting to die. Everyone seems to understand that there is something wrong, but few talk about what actually went wrong. Why are there 2.4 million or 12% fewer students on college campuses than in 2011. Like many other problems in the U.S., the answer is government do-goodery.
It was decided after World War II that everyone should get a college education. But the truth is that some people are not college material. Some prefer to get on the job training and work their way up the ladder. Some desire to work with their hands and the thought of occupying a cubicle somewhere is enough to invoke thoughts of suicide. Some, to be frank, have lower I.Q.’s, and intellectual work doesn’t appeal to them. People are different, with different strengths and weaknesses, desires, and dreams. But government do-gooders project their dreams and desires on everyone else in the country and make policies that appeal to themselves. They and their friends all went to college, and enjoyed it, so everyone else should too. They hatched a plan. Harmless enough they believed at first, and still do. Nothing done out of good intentions could possibly have had a negative effect on the American education system. After all, good intentions (do-goodery) and feelings are all one needs. Like Peter Pan and the lost boys in Neverland, people just need good feelings that are inspired by happy thoughts to fly. Right?
What did these government do-gooders do that has played such a heavy-handed role in ruining college education? Low interest student loans for all that’s what. Evangelical Libertarian, you’re crazy, how could that possibly have ruined college education? I am glad you asked. These do-gooders are Marxists that did not pay attention in high school economics class. You know, because capitalism is a tool of oppression, man. The bourgeois oppress the proletariat and keep them down, uh, you know. We should all, like, have equal outcomes not equal opportunity because that’s fair. Therefore, they never learned what causes prices to rise. Do you, dear reader, know what causes prices to rise? Demand. Prices are a function of supply and demand. Beanie Babies are worthless now. But when everyone wanted them, the price was high. This is a universal law, as sure as gravity or the speed of light. What did low interest rate college loans for all do? Massively increased demand for college education, thus massively increasing the price of college education in the process as well. But not only that, with their doctrine of college for all they demanded high school guidance counselors guide everyone into a college track. Sending students that either didn’t really want to go, or who could not complete the course work, to college campuses. What did this do? Why of course it created higher drop out rates. How did these do-gooders remedy that? By lowering the standard of work to be done at the college level so that it would be easier for students who could not or would not have graduated college in the past to make it to the podium. Thus with one fell swoop they destroyed both college affordability and quality.
After a generation of this, what has happened? People are starting to do cost benefit analysis, another of those dreaded, yet unavoidable economic terms. Undergraduate work has become so expensive, and the quality of the education so low, that in many cases, it no longer offers a competitive advantage to go through the trouble of getting a college degree. Couple that with the constant Marxist poison dripping from those bastions into the skulls of our children, and no wonder students and parents alike are starting to look for other options. Homeschooling has taken the country by storm with more and more people choosing to opt out of the modern education monopoly every year. Once it was shown that one could be well educated outside of government schools, it was bound to spread to the next level. Low cost college extension programs for self starting students have begun to flourish. The internet has created a platform whereby the best and brightest teachers can make their own way outside of the brick and mortar establishments that held them captive for so long. Labor has become more and more specialized over this same period of time too, especially in the realm of computer programming, and an elective in women’s studies is not needed to accomplish becoming an adept programmer. Coding schools are popping up all over the country, advertising six month courses, and almost guaranteeing job placement at above median income, no college needed. No wonder colleges are dying.
Who should we blame for the death of traditional colleges? Who should we blame for the lowering of academic standards? Who should we blame for the massive student loan bubble that is coming due? Who should we blame for millennials having their standard of living lowered because they have been made to bear the outrageous inflation costs of a substandard education? Government do-gooders.
Remember to FOLLOW us on FACEBOOK, LIKE the blog, COMMENT, and SHARE it with others to get a conversation going. You can SUBSCRIBE to the blog too and get Christian-based, liberty-oriented, and occasionally snarky content sent directly to your inbox.
If you enjoy the article please remember to FOLLOW us on FACEBOOK, LIKE the blog, COMMENT, and SHARE it with others to get a conversation going. You can SUBSCRIBE to the blog too and get Christian-based, liberty-oriented, and occasionally snarky content sent directly to your inbox.
The “War on Terrorism” is one of the worst things to ever happen to this country. The long term effects and changes to our culture and government that were brought in on the back of the 9/11 attacks were atrocious. The Patriot Act, the most pernicious and un-American piece of legislation that has ever been written, changed every important institution that we hold dear. Such as,
- Banking and finance- Your bank now reports to the government how much money you have and how you use it. You cannot store cash or precious metals/jewels in safe deposit boxes, which of course was their original purpose. If you make a large withdrawal you are reported, by the bank, to the Department of Homeland Security as a possible terrorist. Financial privacy is a thing of the past.
- Airport Security- The TSA randomly checks old ladies and targets attractive women for body scans, while routinely failing weapons checks run by outside auditing agencies. Contrary to popular belief, the TSA has also never thwarted a single terrorist attack.
- Border Crossings- It turned the U.S. Border into a Gestapo. Borders are scary places full of self-important and harsh people. The U.S. is now little more than an open air prison. You may retort that you can leave whenever you want, and that’s true, for now. But wait till there is a time when you think that you might need to leave in order to be safe. Then you will find travel outside the U.S. impossible, and transferring your financial assets to another jurisdiction even more so, thanks to FATCA.
- Privacy- A few weeks ago the Amash Amendment (which would have ended blanket collection of American phone records) was quashed by our fearless leaders in Washington, who now believe the 4th Amendment means nothing. Warrantless searches and seizures are now so common that if you question them you are viewed as unpatriotic. FISA Courts were extended for another six years recently too, despite what we are currently watching unfold concerning the FBI’s abuse of the system in collusion with the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
- Foreign Wars- Trillions of dollars were spent bombing Iraq and Afghanistan. Trillions more are spent in Black Budget Operations run by the CIA and other alphabet soup organizations in places like Syria, Yemen, and Iran. Our enemies are arbitrarily chosen based on who will play ball with us. Russia is our enemy, but China is our friend. Russia builds churches while China blows them up. Iran is our enemy, yet Saudi Arabia is our friend. Iran, a Shia State, has many Christians within it, and Shia Muslims generally aren’t radicalized. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia, a Sunni State, has very few Christians within it, and is the practical source of all Wahabi radicals. Al Qaeda and ISIS are Sunni Wahabists, and it has been proven that Saudi Arabia supports them with cash and intelligence. We learned recently that some of the 9/11 hijackers were on the Saudi government payroll. Nine of the eleven hijackers were Saudi Arabian, as well as the mastermind himself, Osama Bin Laden. Our foreign policy is schizophrenic in every way, and the “War on Terrorism” is part of why that is the case.
It is impossible to describe to people who never experienced America as she was before 9/11, all that has changed. The government’s power, audacity, and corruptness has grown exponentially. It has even changed the local police’s attitude towards citizens. We are now viewed by local authorities as possible threats….. guilty until proven innocent. This is the very opposite of the founding principle. Local police are SWAT’ed out with left over military gear from foreign wars. And the ranks of the local police are filled with vets returning from foreign theaters who first learned to police the streets of Baghdad and Kabul. Many are suffering with PTSD. My point is not to disparage local police officers, most of them are wonderful people and can be trusted. My only point is to demonstrate that sixteen years of unending war against ghost-like enemies has changed us, and made us a more fearful people. In my opinion The Patriot Act was a mistake. We should have looked our enemy in the eye, defeated them, and changed nothing about our way of life and the nature of our government. But instead, those in government capitalized on a moment of fear to pass an atrocious and culture changing piece of legislation. In this writer’s opinion, we sold our native birthright of liberty for a cold pot of safety porridge. We are now an emotionally weaker and less robust people than we once were, and the War on Terrorism, which appealed to our basest fears, bears some responsibility for that development.
Stop and consider all of the jokes currently being told about Millennial behavior. It should not escape our notice that they were becoming personally aware just as the Patriot Act was passed. Their parents set an example for them that safety was to be preferred before liberty, in fact before everything. We mock them for being weak-hearted, but who made them so? Who wrapped them in bubble wrap, told them they were special, and helicoptered around in their life solving all their problems? Who protected them from the truth about the real world? No wonder they need safe spaces and think speech they disagree with should be outlawed. We made the whole country a safe space and allowed our speech to be monitored first. Why wouldn’t we expect the macro-aggressions against liberty that we accepted, to go on to become micro-aggressions on college campuses? We cried safety, safety, and all we are hearing now is our own echo.