Why the USA fell ... initial cause ?
jos boersema
the fall of the American empire.
(...)
> The engine of America's greatness is not just its liberties
> 11:01 -> 11:03
>
> but the people's willingness to fight to keep them.
> Hundreds of other nations have had much larger populations
> and greater resources, but have never produced one-tenth
> of the wealth, science and art that the United States has.
(I guess fantasies of national superiority are the same in any country.)
> Why?
> In America, you had an amazing situation because you had,
> you had the Founding Fathers who figured out that
> they could deconstruct the Monarchy in such a way...
> and then reproduce it with the three
> primary branches of government,
> in a way that would create checks and balances
> and separation of powers.
> So you could have room, therefore, for individuals
> to work within the context of a cooperative,
> which is a democratic system of government,
> but it would still have enough room for individuals
> to rise up and become profitable
> and self-sustaining and rich
> in the... in the pursuit of happiness,
> without becoming dictatorial.
> But unfortunately, over the years,
> since all of those separation of powers
> have been cut away and all of the...
> the beautiful design by the Founding Fathers
> has been co-opted by one corporate entity,
> one communist corporate entity,
> you don't have that anymore.
> So what we have... We're back
> to where we were before the revolution.
> You have one monolithic state.
v v
> For the first hundred years or so of the United States,
> after the 1700s when we freed ourselves from British rule,
> no corporation was permitted...
> was given a charter in the United States,
> unless it served the public good.
> It had to prove that.
> And then its charter only lasted for 10 years
> or sometimes as long as the project to build a bridge
> or a canal or something lasted.
> But it... it had to be up for review
> and it could only get chartered if it was...
> if it was shown that it was serving the public interest.
> That changed, primarily because John D. Rockefeller
> kind of bribed Delaware and New Jersey, to begin with,
> into accepting a different system where he said,
^ ^
That is very interesting isn't it. It is practically ... well not
practically it is socialism. Economic activity in the common interest.
I don't know how widespread that was, but the fact that it happened
is something of note for sure.
I suppose one could call a bank a corporation, who acts in its own
interest, which is a huge and devastating overwhelming danger on
a nation (unless that nation consists of angels, which they never do).
How amuzing: if the USA had kept to that rule, that corporations would
have to prove public interest, then their banks would be common
interest. Which amounts to public finance, which would save that country
from the dangers of for profit finance.
What Americans might fear as 'socialized investment credit,' it is
their own heritage, and the best of it !
Then maybe we can see that bribe as the point where the disease is
let in (which I think is very doubtful considdering all the attrocities
the Americans have done before and after, such as wiping out Indians,
breaking treaties, genocide, and slavery, but it was probably an
important breaking point.) There was "a bribe" !
This means that the Government was either corrupt or didn't know what
it was doing, how dangerous a move for the long term it was. On another
note you could say a problem was that Rockefeller was active in
organizing, but other people where not that active, leaving room for
Rockefelled to do it.
If the problem is reduced to one of corrupt Government, then that
typically can be solved by having more democratic influence of the
people over the government, because the public pays a price for
corruption hence it does not like corruption. If the people had
more power over Government by whatever means (knowledge being a
great one in that), they might have been able to resist the bribe
and overturn that decision.
> "Listen. If I pay you lots of money in terms of taxes, etc.,
> I want to be licensed to not have to serve the public good.
> I want to be able to get around the law."
> And, state after state after state changed at that point.
> In the United States, our Constitution and Bill of Rights
> recognizes that individuals have innate freedoms
> that can never be taken away by any government.
> For the first time in history,
> the people were unbound to reach for their full potential,
> producing and out-competing every other nation on earth.
> The rights of free speech, self-defense,
> private property, due process of law and many others,
> ignited a revolution in human development
> that threaten the despotic rule of
> monarchs and tyrants worldwide.
> But, the corrupt elites had studied history.
> They knew that great civilizations could only fall from within.
> They know from previous experience and history
> that civilizations come and go, and dwindle.
> They know the reasons why they come and go.
> Isn't the only hope for the planet
> that the industrialized civilizations collapse?
> Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?
> --Maurice Strong, founder of the U.N. Environment Programme,
> from his Opening Speech, Rio Earth Summit, 1992.
> Maurice Strong is the man who said that
> they would never allow another country
> to rise up as powerful as America.
> It will never be allowed to happen again.
> And he said,
> "The best thing we can do is to tear down all the factories,
> all the top commerce of the United States,
> and level it and give it back to Nature."
> That... so that was the advice from this character,
> who has tremendous power at the United Nations,
> and was picked up and groomed by Rockefeller himself.
> Over the past decade,
> since the Kennedy assassination, approximately,
> you've had an ongoing oligarchical transformation
> of virtually every country in the world.
> And in the United States, it's taken the form of
> an oligarchical counterrevolution against
> the reforms of the 1930s with the Wall Street interest
> asserting itself as more and more dominant.
> 15:20 -> 15:22
(...)
http://dotsub.com/view/e7d724d9-cafb-4052-b1cc-e9df8955f212/viewTranscript/eng
--