I don't think that I am alone on this one.
I am quite sure that you are not. But should we be happy or sad about that?
I'll keep my ideology - you are correct in stating that the government is out of control and yes, it is the majority of "the people" who are to blame for allowing this through their continued apathy.
As Brecht suggested, obviously the solution, if the people are to blame, is to dissolve the people and elect a new one.
However, all that is needed is an untainted venue to let the people begin to reign in their representation.
What if the problem is the representative system itself? (i.e. "representative democracy" also known as "liberal democracy")
I made an analysis of that for the European context:
http://halva.proboards.com/index.cg...alkforever&thread=124&page=1#565(read the third posting, on the "Assembly of Free Citizens". There is a longer text from the link from the third posting, but that is an older formulation.
The smoke and mirrors of what we consider to be our two party systems under a supposed democracy are beginning to fail.
But all of the alternative proposals I hear are for establishment of new parties. What if the desideratum is not a new party but a new polity??
People are starting to see that their "choices" all work towards the same ends set out by the behind the scene internationalists that are steering states to hand over sovereignty.
In other countries people tend to think that the problem is the domination of their politics by the United States.
But I agree that a non-imperialist form of American nationalism would be compatible with the completion of the European integration project. And that nationalism could express itself through the political forms I describe in the "Free Citizens' Assembly" text.
And on Russia:
"Gentlemen, comrades, do not be concerned about all you hear about Glasnost and Perestroika and democracy in the coming years. They are primarily for outward consumption. There will be no significant internal changes in the Soviet Union, other than for cosmetic purposes. Our purpose is to disarm the Americans and let them fall asleep.”
-Mikhail Gorbachev, speech to the Soviet Politburo, November 1987
Well, if that quote is genuine, he had to say that, didn't he, to get the support of the Politburo. But he was wrong. That may have been his purpose, but he did not achieve it.
And the result of YOUR interpretation of the situation is that you did not act to get rid of the Soviet nuclear arsenal at the time that would have been possible, with Yeltsin. Here in Greece a handful of us tried to act, but there were too few of us.
And the new system that Putin introduced (in collaboration with the Americans) was based on retention of all the worst aspects of both Communism and capitalism.
Of course that might have seemed better to Russians than the total chaos and disintegration of the Yeltsin period.
It is not "the people pushing for a North American Union"
It is the politicians, NGO's, CFO, Dept. of Foreign Affairs that are pushing Agenda 21 which includes the formation of the North American Union.
The horse is alive and kicking!
The only problem that needs to be solved is waking the majority.
"Waking people up" to me seems more like a matter of education than of politics. Politics starts with taking people as they are.
