Will the United States survive under a world government?

September 26, 2023

A one-world government has been the dream of many people across the globe for a long time. Some think of the United Nations as a world government, but it is not. It is, however, along with many others, favoring one.

This idea is called The Great Reset. This is not a new development. It has been around since at least 1992, and some say 1971 when the World Economic Forum, which was originally founded as the European Management Forum, came into existence.

And its critics say that if The Great Reset takes place, the American form of government of mostly free markets, personal freedoms and a somewhat-limited federal government with open elections will be replaced with a world body that does not support the conservative ideals of the United States, like private ownership of property, individual choice, and free enterprise. Its ballot box will provide only one choice. That system is commonly referred to as “communism.”

Supporters charge that criticisms are conspiracy theories that totally misrepresent the stated goals of The Great Reset. But those criticisms require a good, thoughtful look.

Two well-known people in the world have made public statements about a unique opportunity that recently presented itself.

In June 2020, “the Prince of Wales and the head of the annual Davos summit launched an initiative calling for the pandemic to be seen as a chance for what they called a Great Reset of the global economy,” the BBC network reported. In a video about this, the Prince of Wales — England’s former Prince Charles, and now King Charles — said the following: "We have an incredible opportunity to create entirely new sustainable industries. The time to act is now."

The BBC report then turned to the second well-known person. “The other founder of the initiative is Prof. Klaus Schwab, head of the World Economic Forum, which organizes an annual summit in a Swiss ski resort for some of the world's wealthiest and most powerful people.”

“He explained the idea behind the Great Reset in an article accompanying the launch: ‘The pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future.’”

Now, neither of those statements actually contain details which would scare people away from The Great Reset. For as with all ideas up for sale, it is portrayed in very positive terms. 

But let’s not forget the message of 2010 regarding “fundamentally transforming the United States of America,” a process that began with former President Barack Obama that is underway in the Biden administration, and has put the country in a seriously troubled condition.

In an article in Hillsdale College’s “Imprimis” publication — “What Is the Great Reset?” — author Michael Rectenwald, the Chief Academic Officer of the American Scholars organization, offers this description. “The Great Reset aims to usher in a bewildering economic amalgam — Schwab’s stakeholder capitalism — which I have called “corporate socialism” and Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben has called “communist capitalism.” 

“This is the ‘social justice’ aspect of the Great Reset,” Rectenwald wrote. “To comply with that, governments, banks, and asset managers use the Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) index to squeeze non-woke corporations and businesses out of the market. The ESG index is essentially a social credit score that is used to drive ownership and control of production away from the non-woke or non-compliant.” 

In short, it will be a system where people and businesses are forced into compliance with a narrow set of “social justice” ideals, without the freedom to explore other ideas. Hence the references by Rectenwald and Agamben to “socialism” and “communism.”

In 2020, Schwab and author Thierry Malleret published a book called COVID-19: The Great Reset. In it, “Schwab and Malleret pit ‘stakeholder capitalism’ against ‘neoliberalism,’ defining the latter as ‘a corpus of ideas and policies . . . favouring competition over solidarity, creative destruction over government intervention, and economic growth over social welfare,’” Rectenwald wrote. 

“In other words,” he explains, “‘neoliberalism’ refers to the free enterprise system. In opposing that system, stakeholder capitalism entails corporate cooperation with the state and vastly increased government intervention in the economy.”

Tom DeWeese, President of the American Policy Center describes our future this way: “The rule of law in our Republic, designed to insure individual rights from intrusive government, is being replaced by an undefined term called social justice, which demands that the concerns of interest groups supersede the inherent rights of the individual.”

“Further, the interests of the United States of America now tend to take a back seat to those of something called the ‘Global Commons.’ National identities and individual religions are being morphed into non-descript and indistinguishable arrangements called global religion. 

“The teaching of history has become an exercise in group-promotion and political correctness,” DeWeese wrote, “with little regard for truth. Science has been reduced to nothing more than a convenient tool to promote political agendas. Self-determination is being replaced with group-think.”

This plan wouldn’t have much effect on some nations, and may be an improvement for some. But for others — most especially the United States of America — The Great Reset as it is described would be a catastrophe.

Increasing federal control reduces our constitutional freedoms

September 19, 2023

Actions by those in positions of authority to push the boundaries of that authority took a huge step recently when New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham issued a public health order outlining efforts to combat gun violence in Albuquerque and Bernalillo County. 

“I’m going to continue pushing to make sure that all of us are using every resource available to put an end to this public health emergency with the urgency it deserves,” she said. “I will not accept the status quo. Enough is enough.”

A provision of that public health order temporarily suspended both the open and concealed carrying of firearms in Albuquerque and surrounding Bernalillo County by those who had been granted carry permits by the state government.

The violations would result in civil penalties, not criminal penalties, but the fines imposed could be up to $5,000 per violation.

This action attempted to suspend rights guaranteed to the people by the U.S. Constitution, and that action brought swift and harsh criticism from both sides of the political aisle, and resulted in law suits against the action.

In response, U.S. District Court Judge David Urias agreed with plaintiffs who pointed out the violation of constitutional rights. He granted a temporary restraining order to block the suspension of gun rights. The order will remain in place until an Oct. 3 court hearing.

The rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution cannot be suspended on the whim of a mere elected official, whether that official is the president, a governor, an attorney general or a mayor. Yet this woman believed she had that authority in order to combat a local problem, a problem that many of her constituents argue is really not that much of a problem.

Recently we have seen government mandates and restrictions on our freedoms during the Covid pandemic, and others ostensibly to save the planet from climate change due to too much CO2 in the atmosphere.

The actions taken during Covid, and currently to combat the climate change that many people believe in, may actually have been taken for the best of reasons. However, they also constitute restrictions on the personal freedoms that the United States is known for. And they frequently inconvenience people and raise prices on things they want and need.

We recently increased our level of energy independence, but it was wiped out almost as soon as President Joe Biden took office. That forced the purchasing of materials and fuels from other countries like China and Russia, raised fuel prices substantially, and put thousands out of work. 

And, by the way, American oil and natural gas are the cleanest in the world. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., noted recently that “If we replaced Russian natural gas in Europe [with American natural gas], for one year, just one year, that would lower 215 million tons of emissions because our natural gas is 41 percent cleaner than Russian natural gas.” Biden’s war on fossil fuels has negatively affected his goal of reducing CO2 emissions.

Biden’s efforts to kill fossil fuels now has him campaigning to do away with gas-burning stoves, furnaces, fireplace logs and grills; creating stricter specifications for common appliances like clothes washers and dryers, dishwashers, and others that will substantially increase the cost of those products.

There is the manic effort to decrease gas- and diesel-powered vehicles in favor of electric vehicles that cost much more, depend almost entirely upon China and other countries for the materials to build their batteries, and require fewer American employees to produce them than conventional vehicles. And then there is the needed enormous increase in our electric grid to be able to recharge these tens of thousands of EVs that Biden wants.

The Department of Justice not long ago involved itself in a local matter. When parents attended school board meetings to register their displeasure with some things that were going on in the school their children attended, the DOJ labeled them “domestic terrorists.” 

Even if the parents were behaving inappropriately, or even violently, it is not the job of the federal government to become involved in state or local matters. That is how our republic is designed.

This nation was formed by the several states that united for that purpose. They did not give up their right to control themselves in local matters by creating a federal government. The states still have a large degree of sovereignty that is protected by terms of the U.S. Constitution.

What we are seeing is an increasing effort by Democrats to empower the federal government to control virtually everything that goes on in our country. They are “fundamentally transforming” the country. 

That contradicts two of the primary goals of the Founders of the United States of America: a large degree of personal freedom, and a federal government limited in its power.

If this power-grab is allowed to continue, the once-great United States of America will some day in the future degenerate into just another Cuba or Venezuela, as the protections provided by the Constitution are gradually erased.  It will be a country whose citizens are at the mercy of autocrats who have complete control.

Democrats are working against principles of the United States

September 12, 2023

Big city Democrat mayors have brought attention to themselves through poor policy decisions. Folks like Chicago’s former Mayor Lori Lightfoot, D.C.’s Muriel Bowser, and New York City’s former Mayor Bill de Blasio, are among those who have distinguished themselves with dramatic failures.

After de Blasio’s horrible tenure as New York City’s mayor, many people thought that nearly anyone would be an improvement. And so, when the news that the person elected to succeed him was a former police captain with 20 years of service, many were encouraged. The possibility of another Rudy Giuliani was shining brightly.

Alas, Eric Adams has not lived up to those positive expectations. 

He has struggled with the difficult task of dealing with 110,000 illegal aliens in his city, and he has been openly critical of this nation-wide problem.

He has correctly said that this crisis may well destroy New York City. But he criticized Texas Gov. Greg Abbott for sending some of the millions of illegals coming into Texas to other places, like New York City, calling him a “madman.”

Adams, you may remember, proudly supported the sanctuary city/state concept. Yes, he would welcome a few illegal “migrants,” while Texas and other border states have had to contend with millions of them. And now that he’s faced with a tiny fraction of what Texas has to deal with, he is outraged.

He went so far as to criticize former President Donald Trump for starting this influx. Trump, however, was the guy who was building a border wall to slow or stop the invasion of illegals, and started the “Remain in Mexico” idea, which kept asylum seekers in Mexico until their hearing date. These things Joe Biden cancelled when he became President.

Trump pushed for dramatic changes to the immigration system, but he faced opposition from Congress and the courts. The rush began after Trump left office, and Adams darned well knows that.

Why will Adams not correctly identify the real cause of this dangerous nationwide crisis? Could it be because he supported Joe Biden for President, and continues to support him?

And, why is it illegal for Texas to protect itself and its citizens from this invasion of millions of illegals by using buoys in the Rio Grande River to discourage illegal crossings? This is the responsibility of the federal government, but it refuses to secure the border, against the intent and instruction of the U.S. Constitution, and then sues the state for trying to do the federal government’s job and protect itself.

On another topic, Democrats in California’s State Assembly recently passed a bill that would require judges in child custody cases to consider whether a parent has affirmed a child’s “gender transition” by making “gender affirmation” an equal part of a child’s “health, safety, and welfare” under state law.

The bill, AB 957, passed the Assembly by a vote of 57-16 along party lines, and the state Senate also passed the bill along party lines by a 30-9 vote. And Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom is expected to sign the bill into law. 

The bill was written by a Suisan City Democrat Assembly member, Lori Wilson, whose child identifies as transgender, and was co-sponsored by State Sen. Scott Wiener of San Francisco.

Parents could actually lose custody of their children if they refuse to participate in a child’s transgender efforts. Under the bill’s mandates, they will have failed to provide for the “health, safety, and welfare” of their child.

Somehow, in the minds of California Democrats, adults who are parents could run afoul of this bill if it becomes law for disagreeing with their elementary school, middle school, or high school child on whether they are mature enough to understand what is going on, and in opposing the child’s decision on what to do about it. 

And in their effort to protect their child from making a life-altering and potentially dangerous decision, they will be considered guilty of failing to provide for the child’s health, safety, and welfare. Do we have logic anymore?

Parents are responsible for their children’s lives, from the beginning until they go out on their own. Not the government, not the school system, not classroom teachers. Encouraging children to transition, and teachers, administrators and school boards hiding it from their parents, should be a felony.

Efforts by the left to replace parents and rule over the development and indoctrination of the youngest generation is un-American. But of course, the ultimate goal of the left is “to fundamentally transform the United States of America,” as then-presidential candidate Barack Obama said several years ago.

Fearing another term as president for Donald Trump, Democrats are trying to get everyone to believe that Trump is as evil as Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Hussein, Castro or Vlad the Impaler. 

Interestingly, to prevent Trump from running in 2024 the Democrats are employing the same tactics to put him in jail or otherwise keep him off the ballot as those tyrants they compare him to employed against their citizenry.

And isn’t it interesting that the crimes that Trump is accused of committing happened years ago, but no action was taken until the campaign began for the 2024 election?

Biden’s weak approach to China aggression must end

September 5, 2023

We hear and read many things about China and its aggression against America. Who can forget the recent spy balloon incident? But they are also buying up farm land near military bases; sending students to our universities to work their way into ground-breaking research projects; and stealing intellectual property from companies in America. 

On January 28, the Chinese balloon began floating over the United States, starting over Alaska and after crossing the country until it was shot down over the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of South Carolina on February 4. That path took the balloon over several military bases. The route the balloon followed received attention from NBC News. 

“It was a troubling claim made by a key member of Congress with access to top secret information,” the NBC report said. “If you plotted the trajectory of the Chinese spy balloon, it’d mirror where the nation's most sensitive and powerful weapons are stored.”

“If you ask somebody to draw an X at every place where our sensitive missile defense sites, our nuclear weapons infrastructure, our nuclear weapon sites are, you would put them all along this path,” said Rep. Mike Turner, the Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

The Chinese explanation was, of course, not an admission of guilt: It was a civilian (mainly meteorological) airship that had been blown off course, they said.

A Pew Research poll shows that Americans view China as our greatest threat. When asked which nation posed the greatest threat, 50 percent named China, 17 percent named Russia, and 2 percent named North Korea.

Last year, CBS News reported that “A new report by Boston-based cybersecurity firm, Cybereason, has unearthed a malicious campaign — dubbed Operation CuckooBees — exfiltrating hundreds of gigabytes of intellectual property and sensitive data, including blueprints, diagrams, formulas, and manufacturing-related proprietary data from multiple intrusions, spanning technology and manufacturing companies in North America, Europe, and Asia.

 “’We're talking about Blueprint diagrams of fighter jets, helicopters, and missiles,’ Cybereason CEO Lior Div told CBS News. “In pharmaceuticals, ‘we saw them stealing IP of drugs around diabetes, obesity, depression.’ The campaign has not yet been stopped.”

“Alarms went off in Washington when the Fufeng Group, a Chinese agricultural company, bought 300 acres of land and set up a milling plant last spring in Grand Forks, N.D,” the Wall Street Journal reported last September.

The plant is less than a half-hour drive from an important U.S. Air Force base. U.S. Senator John Hoeven, R-N.D., said that Grand Forks Air Force Base hosts a space mission that “will form the backbone of U.S. military communications across the globe.”

“The deal shouldn’t have taken the federal government by surprise. U.S. Department of Agriculture data show that Chinese ownership of U.S. farmland leapt more than 20-fold in a decade, from $81 million in 2010 to $1.8 billion in 2020,” the Journal report said. 

“Beijing hasn’t outlined a strategy, but large-scale state backing for these investments indicates there is one. In 2013 the government-owned Bank of China loaned $4 billion to Hong Kong-headquartered WH Group, the world’s largest pork producer, to buy Virginia’s Smithfield Foods. WH now controls much of the U.S. pork supply and revenue because of the deal.”

American Military News added to this development that before the Fufeng Group purchased the Grand Fork property, “another Chinese firm had begun efforts to buy up around 140,000 acres of land located about 70 miles from Laughlin Air Force Base. That Chinese Firm, Guanghui Energy Co. Ltd, wanted to build a massive wind farm known as the Blue Hills Wind Project.” Laughlin AFB is located in Del Rio, Texas.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has made the following statement about China’s relationship with the U.S. “The Chinese government is employing tactics that seek to influence lawmakers and public opinion to achieve policies that are more favorable to China.

“At the same time, the Chinese government is seeking to become the world’s greatest superpower through predatory lending and business practices, systematic theft of intellectual property, and brazen cyber intrusions. 

“China’s efforts target businesses, academic institutions, researchers, lawmakers, and the general public and will require a whole-of-society response. The government and the private sector must commit to working together to better understand and counter the threat.”

“U.S. and allied policymakers are facing the most important foreign-policy challenge of the 21st century,” Foreign Policy magazine reported last October. “China’s power is peaking; so is the political position of Chinese President Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) domestic strength. In the long term, China’s likely decline after this peak is a good thing. But right now, it creates a decade of danger from a system that increasingly realizes it only has a short time to fulfill some of its most critical, long-held goals.”

The tactics implemented by the CCP against American interests are not new, and are continuing. As they continue and increase, China gets stronger while the U.S. becomes more vulnerable.

China’s post-Covid economic rebound is fizzling. The U.S. must cease activities that support its economy, reclaim Chinese land and other subversive purchases, and strongly oppose the CCP’s aggressions. The Biden administration’s weak approach to the China threat must end.