What are some of contributing factors for the decline of the United States? An Observation from the Center

 

America, as you know, is no longer a “Republic” although it still likes to pretend it is (much like Rome did under the early Caesars). While purely speculative, as all such predictive analysis are, our decline is not one or two things, but a series of events external and internal, all connected directly or indirectly, which, in the moments of our daily existence, barely warrants our notice. Some appear benign, hardly noticeable, while others glare back at us like Fredrick Nietzsche's abyss. 

First is the assumption that the world wants to be America, or at least like America. America is first and foremost a capitalistic pseudo-democracy. We tend to export “American” ideals and values along with our Levi's, Fords, soybeans and television shows whether they're wanted or not. We try to imprint our society on everyone, especially through consumerism to created a world of "mini me's".  

We create mostly unrealistic dreams, from what to eat, what to wear "what's in and what's passe'" (an artificial construct to sell clothes), TV shows to watch, what we should drive to look sexy or "cool", or what we should look like (especially applies to young girls and women), and even what we should think and what should be considered "important".  Doesn't it make you wonder where we would be without them to think for us?

The corporate media, after all, manufactures the narrative (remember, only five corporations control 96+% of media in all its forms). They tell what's important and not just as they tell us how we're to think or feel. But even that is all about selling "eye time". The higher the viewership the higher the price they can sell a particular commercial slot or print space for.

Another way we sell American ideals is by removing governments we don’t like because they negatively impact our (that is, Wall Street's) financial interest.  This is typically euphemistically referred to as "regime change".  It doesn't matter if the individual or party are chosen by the people, if it interferes with profits, it goes.

During the Cold War with Soviet Russia (1946 - 1991), the U.S. has been involved with the overthrow of roughly 12 governments (euphemistically referred to as "restoring democracy" or "supporting the will of the people"). We've also been directly involved in several hundred political assassinations such as Ngo Dinh Diem, the South Vietnamese President in 1963 or  President Salvadore Allende of Chile in 1973. During the same time span, we've been involved at varying capacities in some 23 proxy wars and 285 armed conflicts. According to one survey, the U.S. was responsible for 81% of the world's armed conflicts from 1945 to 2001

Overwhelmingly, each of these were either directly or indirectly the result of pressure by Wall Street since the individual leader or their government is a threat to their bottom line. In their place, we have typically installed a puppet government, but not just any ole puppet government popular with the people. No siree bob!  These are almost always far Right military juntas headed by such charming individuals like Generals Augusto Pinchot, Gregorio Conrado Alvarez, Alfredo Stroessner, and Jorge Rafael Videla.

Under "Operation Condor", which lasted from 1973 to 1983, we were active in the kidnapping, torturing, murder, or "disappearance" of some 60,000 individuals along with over 400,000 imprisoned. Many of them being Communist, democratic socialists, or simply vocal Left-leaning  activists. Some were union organizers, teachers, pastors, nuns, community leaders, and students.  Naturally, the government likes to say we acted in conjunction with our allies as sort of a soothing balm for our collective conscience.  Still, it kinda brings into question that notion of "leader of the free world" doesn't it?

As an aside, in researching this and similar articles over the decades, I've noted that we've never tried a to elect a non-partisan centrist or someone without strong financial ties to Wall Street. Rarely we elect someone without a military background  Given that we're no longer a democratic or constitutional Republic, having become a Oligarchy led corporatocracy years ago, if we were to have some sort of coup or civil war, what's in store for us? Based on our history, perhaps this is a hint. After all, we have so much experience at it.

Following wars, conflicts, or police actions, the next step is often what's called "nation building" (it should be more properly labeled "national building in our image"). This is where dozens (or more) government contractors engage in the lucrative business of, well, the literal business of physically rebuilding countries we had just bombed back to the Stone Age while the State Department helps restore their government to something acceptable to Wall Street.

Speaking of "nation building", Brown University announced the results on one of its projects concerning U.S. and its "War on Terror", that states over the last 20 years, Washington has spent $8 trillion dollars and came out empty handed with the Taliban still in charge and Al Qaeda still in business despite the loss of some leaders. Why isn't the American Taxpayer furious?

 In addition, over those 20 years, around 900,000 people have been killed. The U.S. Department of Defense confirmed that over those same 20 years, the American taxpayer has shelled out $145 billion dollars just to rebuild Afghanistan. I'm sure Al Qaeda and the Taliban are quite grateful, not to mention  thankful for the millions of dollars in state-of-the art military equipment we so graciously abandoned when we skedaddled out of Kabul.  

It's worth noting that despite spending billions on nation building since 1946, not a single country has opted to adopt our form of government. Not a single one. The dozens of countries we've helped rebuild like Humpty Dumpty tend to adopt the inclusive British proportional representative government.

Instead, they tend to choose the British “parliamentary” or proportional system where each party is basically guaranteed a seat, depending on the percentage of the vote they get, meaning everyone has a voice in government. This is in lieu of America's "winner take all" system where the voters on the losing side are unrepresented for the term of that office.

Another serious factor in our decline is our educational system. We’ve dumbed it down so as not to “offend” underachievers. We're ranked in the lower tier among industrial nation. How will we compete globally? We’ve accepted the idea of “equal outcomes over equal opportunities”. Everyone gets “participation trophies” just for showing up. Everyone isn't a “winner”.

We’ve developed the notion that certain individuals or groups are somehow "due" something by society simply because they exist. An extension of that is the mistaken presumption that we're “owed” something--- aka "reparations"--- because your ancestors experienced an injustice or other burden. Well, that may be reprehensible, but try naming one group on this planet who hasn't experienced injustice somewhere in their collective history (which speaks volumes about the state of humanity more than it does anything). 

Every race or ethnic group has at one time or another been the slave or the master. But it's all in the distant past. We can't change or undo what happened. They sacrificed for our future. Take from it the lessons they taught us  and move on. The only person ultimately responsible for your success or failure is you. Not the government, not your fellow citizens, and sure as hell not your ancestors.

America has lost its way. We no longer value life or show respect for others or their things. We covet what others have more than we value our own lives. That's how some people end up dead. We're told we're all victims. So now we've developed a victim mentality where others are responsible for our failures, but why not our successes? We're told it's okay to be "offended" if others won't play along with our "pronoun pity party". Guess what? You can "self-identify" as the "Cheshire Cat" if that's what you want, but that doesn't mean everyone has to play long Alice.

We no longer discuss opposing ideas in a civil manner. We don’t want to be presented with anything outside our “bubble”. We want nothing that would distort our view of the world. To do otherwise triggers a intellectual breakdown, requiring a "safe space" and "comfort blanket".

Our partisan politics is a reflection of that. Its’ developed a enemy-like “us vs. them” mentality where the “us” part doesn’t include the average voter. Rather than producing, society now based on consumption of everything without replacing it. Capitalist democracy requires that we  constantly expand and consume ever faster to survive. It’s appetite is insatiable. It’s fueled by greed for “more” of whatever is there.

When capitalist democracy can no longer expand, it begins to metastasize. It starts to consume itself. As it does so, it increasingly seeks to control and manipulate its environment. The economic class which feeds it is put under increasing pressure to provide more and more while it starves. That’s the stage we're now at by the way.

We've arrived at the point where there are no absolutes. Right from wrong is merely shades of gray. Much is often promised, especially by our so-called “leaders”, but no one actually expects those promises to be kept. We've discovered we can invade the coffers expecting them to always be filled but that's increasing not the case.

Facts are now seen as ambiguous. Truth is now a matter of perspective rather than accepted norms mutually agreed upon by society. They're conveniently assumed to be a lie to be discarded if we disagree with them. Perhaps worse is when no one is held accountable for the lie. Let's take a quick look at the nation and the lie we were loosely modeled on---Rome.

"Rome the Eternal", like countless nations before and after, fell because of an over extended and undersupplied military. It was no longer able to impose Roman values on the unruly barbarian tribes. Even its military became less “Roman” as more and more foreigners filled its ranks, who had no vested interest in the empire due to a decline in Rome's  birthrate.  

Originally, the title (and it was a “title”) of “Roman Citizen” carried great weight.  It was bestowed rarely and often with great fanfare. Eventually, it all but lost its mystique. Foreigner didn't settle in order to become a “Roman Citizen”. They came for the economic opportunities Rome could provide.  Eventually, didn’t they even bother to learn the lingua franca of the empire--- Latin---or follow its laws, traditions and adopt its values.  Sound familiar?

Internally, Rome had always been corrupt, but it was the degree of corruptness which changed. It became a cancer and spread everywhere. Citizens were distracted  with “bread and circuses”, that is, games and monthly bread rations, all paid for by the working class---the Plebeians or "Plebs"--- until it eventually collapsed from over taxation.

Taxes and goods from client states also dried up. They developed their own trade alliances and bypassed the Roman “middlemen”. They even lost their fear of Roman might. Why? Not because it was no longer formable, but because Rome could no longer financially sustain a war. Again, sound familiar?

Eventually, there arose an outsider, Julius Caesar, who pledge that “in order to save the Republic I must destroy the Republic”, which was a true enough observation. The Republic could no longer reform itself out of it situation. The dependent classes lacked the means and will. It couldn’t appease all the special interests groups which controlled it. Rome must be founded again.

However, Caesar failed and paid with his life. What followed was a series of internal civil wars, When they were over, Rome had order. It also had a dictatorship. Can we be that far aways from our own Caesar? That’s a question many Americans are asking themselves. We are now a defacto neo-fascist corporatocracy; a surveillance state with all the tools for a full blown police state already in place. All that’s missing is a crisis—-real or manufactured.

We likely won’t have a military junta (although the military is the only institution which has kept a positive approval rating), but rather someone like a board president or chairman. And why not? After all, Wall Street runs the show. Why shouldn’t they step center stage and claim the crown?

 

 If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps beat the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you!

 

United States involvement in regimechange in Latin America

Operation Condor

Parliamentary system

US initiated 81% of global armedconflicts from 1945 to 2001   

Cold War Coups and Proxy Wars

Costs of the 20-year war onterror: $8 trillion dollars and 900,000 deaths

DoD: What We Need To Learn:Lessons From Twenty Years of Afghanistan Reconstruction

  

The Pronoun Wars: The Coming of a New Generational Conflict?

How should you react when you're introduced to someone, such as a potential job candidate, as "Zie", "They", "Hir" or similar salutary title? Are you taken back or perhaps try to suppress an amused smile or smirk? 

What about when you're at a social gathering and refer to someone as a male or female and you're informed that your "gender assumption" is disrespectful. They go on to say that there are 72 genders, not two. You should first inquire to how they identify before assuming they're male or female. How do you react?

In today's labor market, employers are going to find more and more examples like these walking through their doors. Federal and state labor laws have clearly defined your limitations. In today's "politically correct" social environment, you risk the possibility of a lawsuit or social censure ("cancelled")  if you don't handle the situation correctly.

There have been several instances where companies have risked serious damage to their customer base by being labeled "chauvinistic" or "patronizing" over something as innocuous as holding the door or pulling out a chair for a female.  Repairing one's public image can also be highly expense, often involving the services of a specialty PR team equipped with lawyers and social media experts, and a long term endeavor. But in the short term, protests and online campaigns to discredit you or your company can take a significant toll on your bottom line.  

Some groups chalk up the issue of gender identity, along with the so-called "body art" as nothing more than generational rebellion, something which has been going on since the beginning of time. Therefore it will pass and there's no need to really need to take it too seriously. In the 1950's social rebellion often nothing more than "bobby socks", 'ducktales", and customized fast cars.  By the 1960's, it was "make love not war" and "flower power" and "sex, drugs, and rock n roll" in the 1970's.

The message of the rebellion was often transmitted through magazines, newspapers, social interaction, and, of course, word of mouth contact (which typically involved a change of vocabulary to set them apart from the previous generation and create a new sense of identity). Movies and especially music helped with the transformation. Both were essentially, for instance, with the growth of the anti-Vietnam War movement.

It's never changed and likely will never change, and yet employers found ways to adapt, but this seems to be different because of the extreme nature of the "rebellion". Previously, it was mostly just music, cloths, long hair and beards, and a pseudo-primitivism in the form of communes. As they matured, many decided to "clean up" and conform rather than "tune in, turn on, and drop out" of society. Albeit late to adapt, much of their lifestyle went mainstream thanks to the marketing industry looking to cash in.  

Today, technology has evolved to the point where the message can bypass societal buffers or gatekeepers such as newspaper or magazine editors, radio program directors, or music executives. Smart phones, the internet, and so forth can almost instantaneously send images around the world. They can call together protests or "rushes" in minutes. No more need for leaflets and waiting days.      

Tattoos were once the domain of bikers, sailors, construction workers and the seeders aspect of society. Proper society avoided not just tattoos, but even those with tattoos! Today we commonly see not just tattoos on biceps and forearms, but nearly full body tattoos which encompasses hands, legs, feet, neck, the face, plus the ever popular and nearly ubiquitous "tramp stamp"!   

Body piercings aren't just two or three earrings, but giant ear inserts which look more like the hose washers than a piece of jewelry.  Eyebrows, nostrils, lips, and even tongues! A few even go to extremes by trying to change their entire appearance into something akin to a mythical creature.

But unlike simply getting a haircut and a change of clothes, some of these "personal statement" ornamentations aren't going away. Nevertheless, time is not going to be kind to many of these individuals as the body graphics fade and warp thanks to ageing and gravity.  Meanwhile, how are  your client and customer base going to react  to these representatives of your company, be it a cashier, a salesperson, a onsite tech advisor, or a manager?    

Babyboomers (1946-1964) were once most largest customer base out there. They were the ones with the deepest pockets, ran the most businesses or held the most senior positions in companies. They also had the most disposable cash of any generation before or since. However, with the youngest Boomer now age 59, many are quickly closing in on retirement. While Boomers were once the most vocal and rebellious of generations (think Woodstock), the majority have mellowed and become fairly conservative.

According to the latest Gallup poll on the topic, about 44% of Boomers are socially conservative. Another 27% are moderate, while just 17% remain liberal. Older generations, such "the Greatest Generation" (1901-1927) and the "Silent Generation" (1928-1945) remain a economic factor in the marketplace despite their declining numbers.

Perhaps it was the influence of the Great Depression, WWII, or the Korean War, that's the reason  the Greatest Generation and the Silent Generation children are just as socially conservative as ever. 48% identify as conservative while 26% are social moderates. 15% of them still see themselves as liberal (I suspect this the "Dobie Gillis" or Beatnik portion of the Silents).

Currently, the largest demographic are the Millennials (1981-1996), but they aren't the latest. After the Millennials is Generation Z (1997-2012) and the Alpha Generation (2013-2025). Together, these three generations represent not just a future down the road, but the immediate near term. Millennials are already well into the labor market and entering the medical and legal professions.

Many have already started to  run for political office. Alexandra Ocasio - Cortez (D-NY) is perhaps the best known of her Millennial cohort. This is also the generation most responsible for the change in attitude toward socialism,  gender identity, body art, and even race.

While mixed racial relations having been occurring since time immoral, there seems to a growing trend in the U.S.  among these three generations. Mixed races were uncommon in 1940's and 1950's (and in some states, downright illegal), they still happened (the most common was white/European and Native American or Hispanic). Same goes for the '60's, '70's and even into the 1980's, which accounted for just 5% of births,  but then things began to change. As of 2015, 14% of all children born were mixed race. Now, nearly half---48%---of Gen Z is of mixed race.  

The Alpha Generation is still pretty young right now, with the oldest being about 10 years old. In addition, polling has suggested that the majority of mixed race individuals tend to vote Democrats because of perceived bigotry among conservatives and Republicans. Remember too that these three generations are among the largest registered Independent. Ideologically, they're split between their support of democratic socialism and libertarianism.

As an aside, when individuals with Latino and some other race  are factored in, they are projected to be the dominated race by 2050 with their population tripling. Latinos are currently the largest minority in North America, just behind white/Europeans. Blacks, once the largest minority, are currently the second largest minority and expect to fall even further behind. By 2050, they will be only slightly ahead of Asians, although in certain areas, especially on the West Coast, Asians will be the largest. 

These three generations---the Greatest Generation, the Silent Generation, and the Boomers--- are also the least likely to tolerate the gender related changes mentioned at the beginning of this article. So, it appears that we've reached a crossroad, or perhaps impasse among the six generations. The question, therefore, is whether we can cross this divide together or will it fundamentally divide us as we make this generational transition.

Although historically, the first two are the ones most associated with race inequality, they've done remarkably well in adapting, especially given that their great grandparents with the Civil War generation while their great grandchildren are likely to be of mixed race.  They also have had well over half a century of unprecedented social change to get use to.

While the Greatest Generation and the Silents laid the foundation, the Boomers were largely at the forefront in bringing those changes about. Everything from the Civil Rights Movement to the anti-war movement, the women's rights ("women's liberation"), gay rights, and other social movements such as the largely Hispanic led United Farm Worker marches, the environmental movement, Labor activism, the Grey Panther protests, and the Native American "Red Power" movement, did much to bring about not just fundamental social change in this country, but forced us to come to terms with our past and present.  

These movements led to a greater sense of tolerance and cooperation among diverse groups which otherwise would have had little to do with each other. it showed that we could work together to bring about real change. It forced a lethargic Congress to act.  But just how far should change go? Is there a limit to tolerance? As suggested in the beginning, how do you respond to someone insisting there are 72 genders or that they need to be personally address as "em" or some other nearly unintelligible word? 

The use of the term "offended" is often bandied about by Millennials, Gen Z and the Alphas. It seems like anything they disagree with, from a word, an item, an expression to political speech, is labeled as "offensive", requiring an immediate retreat to a "safe space", often free from whites, straights and especially while males,  who all are caustically categorized as "the oppressor class" with the same degree of distain that the Nazis had for the Jews in the 1930's, before the boxcars, the camps, and the ovens. Talk about being "cancelled". Even a glance can be labeled as a "micro-aggression".

Individuals attending Christian oriented schools now demand Christian symbolism be removed as being "offensive" as they cruise through school of a scholarship provided by the same school. They've even employed "Diversity Officers" to enforce compliance. I have to wonder if "papers" will soon be required from all of us.

Today, anyone who self-identifies as a female is supposed to be granted unfettered access to a biological woman's locker room or restroom. They are permitted to play in women's sports, despite inherent and unalterable biological differences. Is that fair (or safe) for natural women? Do we need to make provisions for those who self-identify as trees or cats?  How far are we to go in validating the fantasies of others? Aren't we doing more harm by reaffirming these delusions?

Their "revolutionary" predecessors of the '60's and 70's promoted free speech and expression. The current generations seek to silence those they disagree with "by any means necessary". They block traffic, loot, arson, shoplift enmasse, vandalize, loot, rudely interrupt people  attempting to peaceful dine out or blocking access to restrooms, and then claim their acts are peaceful. They claim to oppose fascism while adopting fascist behavior. They decry "cultural appropriation" instead of understanding it as cultural appreciation while committing the same imaginary crime. 

These same groups speak of diversity while rejecting it (hint: diversity is not ordering a taco at Taco Bell). They freely accuse others of prejudice while not seeing it in themselves. Racism isn't a one way street. It goes both ways. A few claim to demand "justice" for an injustice not done to them and which has long since been paid with interest. The real reason for their failures can usually found in the mirror.

One can be proud of their ancestry and culture while respecting, or even admiring the same of others. Their youthful eyes are yet willfully blind to the brutal truth that all Mankind is equally guilty of the same crimes. The only salvation of our species is our universal acceptance and forgiveness of our collective past transgressions. Such is inheritance of the noble ape.  

Today's would be revolutionaries lack the focus of Chavez's UFW or dedication of Drs. King and Abernathy's "Freedom Marches" which made their point without breaking a single pane of glass (though the same can't be said of their opponents). They certainly lack the bravery of the "Freedom Riders" who didn't commit one act of arson or vandalism although they endured it. The greatest acts of defiance were sitting in a bus seat and lunch counter or boycotting public transportation without impeding anyone else. They know tactics but lack organization. They have passion but not the compassion.

Of these wannabe anarchists, self-imposed outcasts, and social media rebels, I don't doubt they're totally committed to the shock value of their actions, be it outrageously dyed hair, body piercings that look like they were done by an "Iron Lady", being inked from head to toe while accusing others of crimes that belong to the past, opposing fascism with fascism, or self-identifying as a cat, have somehow missed the point.

They've failed to understand that there's nothing new under the sun, nor does the child inherit the sins of the parent. Change comes slowly, and only through planning and dedication. It happens by bringing people together, not driving them apart.  But perhaps it's merely the pride and arrogance of youth which they've mistaken for wisdom as has every generation before them and all those yet to come. 

If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps beat the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you!

 

The Surge of Young Americans from Minority - White Mixed Families & Its Significance for the Future

 Earth Day 1970 was than a protest. It built a movement

United Farm Workers History