In part 1, my focus was on the US populace’s polarization, and the United States is an economic-political union is made up of 50 Nation-States who through ratification of the US Constitution delegated aka granted some State powers to the Federal government.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
This is the Preamble of the United States Constitution.
-We the People of the United States is US citizens and residents.
-Summarizes the US Constitution Articles and Amendments.
-Emphasizes the secure Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity in reference to the ‘We the People’ for future generations of citizens and residents of the United States.
(Residents are people from foreign nations who resides in the United States).
The preamble made plain to States as Rhode Island who held out ratification of the US Constitution that issues in violation of the US Constitution as slavery would be dealt with.
I really love how politicians and particularly lawyers whose job is to promote through public relations have opted to promote their ambitions as ‘Progressive’ when their policy catalysts and past precedent arguments are digressive of unalienable rights of each individual.
How so? This relates to the polarized Sacred Law V Secular Law.
Sacred Laws are as the Founders argued in their extensive writings of unalienable rights being transcended, and specifying them by definition restricts them.
Lets highlight the Bill of Rights shall we:
Amendment I (1): Freedom of religion, speech, and the press; rights of assembly and petition
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment II (2): Right to bear arms
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.
Amendment III (3): Housing of soldiers
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Amendment IV (4): Search and arrest warrants
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment V (5): Rights in criminal cases
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.
Amendment VI (6): Rights to a fair trial
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed; which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defence.
Amendment VII (7): Rights in civil cases
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Amendment VIII (8): Bails, fines, and punishments
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Amendment IX (9): Rights retained by the people
The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X (10): Powers retained by the states and the people
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Secular Law means in PC terms laws of humanity. This means past precedent and Top-Down Rule, Decree. and/or majority vote aka Democracy.
In historical prospective, the tyranny of the few promotes issues the tyranny of the majority votes upon in which the few as Congress, Executive, and Judiciary then creates the policy structure catalysts and power-structure hierarchy and sets the past precedents to justify them.
The biggest flaw of the US Constitution is dominant political ideologies for example the two national party system that in effect omits or ignores Democrats and Republicans have a Top-Down and Bottom-Up political structure that Independent Parties lack.
Empires or otherwise blurring national defense with national interests largely require Secular Law. The reason is pretty simple; Empires require the populace to depend on it for security, and this requires guilty until proven innocent while pursuing expansionism.
Lets look at some examples:
We laid out the clear Constitutional violations of Trump’s financial and business interests on the day he became president (in the real sense, not the media event months later when “He finally became president” by bombing enough people) at ImpeachDonaldTrumpNow.org.
Globalization is in and of itself a violation of the US Constitution, and globalization makes the domestic and foreign emolument clauses under secular law null and void utilizing the Top-Down Interpretation of the Supremacy Clause.
Lets look at some globalization proponents’ pieces to examine this
“It’s a Flat World, after All” Thomas Friedman, The New York Times, 2005.
This has been building for a long time. Globalization 1.0 (1492-1800) shrank the world from a size large to a size medium, and the dynamic force in that era was countries globalizing their resources and imperial conquest. Globalization 2,0 (1800-2000) shrank the world from a size medium to a size small, and it was spearheaded by companies globalizing for markets and labor. Globalization 3.0 (which started in 2000) is shrinking the world from a size small to tiny…
Consider the eras, Friedman is referring to. The Dark Ages, War on an increasingly massive scale, slavery, indentured servitude, the Colonial Era, and both World Wars.
How did the world get flattened, and how did it happen so fast?
It was a result of 10 events and forces that came together during the 1990’s and converged right around the year 2000…
The first event was 11/9… November 9, 1989 [is] the day the Berlin Wall came down, which was critically important because it allowed us to think of the world as a single space.
The second event was 8/9. August 9, 1995 is the day Netscape went public, which did two things. First it brought the internet alive by giving us the browser to display images and data stored on [websites]. Second, Netscape stock offerings triggered the dot.com boom… This lead to six additional flatteners.
One was outsourcing… from accounting to software writing… second off-shoring I send my entire factory from Canton, Ohio to Canton, China. The third open-sourcing. Fourth was in-sourcing. I let a company a company like UPS come in and take over my logistics operations. The fifth was supply-chaining. This is Wal-Mart’s specialty (If Wal-Mart was a country, it would be China’s eighth largest trading partner). The last… informing is Google, Yahoo, and MSN Search…
The world got flat when all 10 of these flatteners converged around 2000…
Friedman then goes on to discuss the Developing World aka BRICS.
Lets look at another proponent.
“Globalization and Its Contents” Peter Marber, World Policy Journal 2004/2005.
… For many, the meaning of globalization has been shaped largely by media coverage of an angry opposition: from right-wing nationalists xenophobes and left-wing labor leaders who fear rampant economic competition from low wage countries to social activists who see a conspiracy on the part of multinational corporations to seek profits no matter what the cost to local cultures and economic equality to environmentalists who believe earth is being systematically by capitalism run amok. “Globalization” -as if it were a machine that could be turned off-has been presented as flawed and dangerous. But “Globalization” is a term that encompasses all cross border interactions, whether economic, political, or cultural…
… The possibility of these countries making meaningful socioeconomic progress and attaining Western standards of living appeared utterly unrealistic.
There’s much more.
As the economist John Maynard Keynes wrote in 1931 in Essays in Persuasion “From the earliest times of we have record-back say to two thousand years before Christ- down to the beginning of the eighteenth century, there was no very great change in the standard of life of the average man living in civilized centers of earth. Ups and downs certainly. Visitation of the plague, famine, and war. Golden Intervals. But no progressive violent change. This slow rate of progress was due to two reasons-to the remarkable absence of technical improvements and failure of capital to accumulate”… (qtd)
… one can see the virtuous cycle that connects human progress, technology, and globalization.
Marbar goes on to discuss topics in the same manner as America2050.org’s research paper surrounding economic transitions.
Potholes on the Road to Globalization:
The great gains and momentum of the last 25 years should not be seen as sufficient or reversible. There are still formidable impediments to continued progress, the four most serious being protectionism, armed conflict, environmental stress, and demographic imbalances.
… Protectionism in the form of tariffs, rigid labor laws, immigration laws, capital controls, and regressive tax structures also should be resisted. Wealthy countries should not cling to old industries like apparel or agriculture; it is far more profitable economically and socially to look forward and outward to focus on growing high skilled industries-like aviation, pharmaceuticals, and entertainment-to embrace new markets.
… Environmental Stress. There is no getting around the fact that the success of globalization is underscored by dramatic increase in consumption… Increased environmental awareness among wealthier populations may lead to domestic policies that will raise costs to businesses and consumers, which in turn could curb economic expansion…
This last section I am compelled to add tidbits.
Preparing for the Best, Not the Worst:
First, if human capital is a key component of improved living standards… There will be a wider base of workers and consumers to contribute to the virtuous cycle of prosperity.
Marber is referring to spending complied in GDP. That would be that old school measurement aspect estimating deficit to debt spending with the US Dollar as the world’s reserve currency status is over 80% of GDP. Marbers next two points double down on promoting GDP as if GDP today actually measures anything resembling ‘prosperity’ and ends discussing how ’emotion and confusion tainted the globalization debate.
Lets try another proponent. “Can Extreme Poverty Be Eliminated?” Jefferey Sachs Scientific American 2005.
For the first time in history, global economic prosperity, brought on by continuing scientific and techological progress and self-reinforcing accumulation of wealth, has placed the world within reach of eliminating extreme poverty altogether…
Market Forces and Free Trade are not enough… Yet, the end of such as poverty is feasible if a concerted global effort is undertaken as the nations of the world promised when they adopted the Millennium Development Goals at the United Nations Millennium Summit… In my recent book, The End of Poverty, I argue that a large scale and targeted public investment effort could eliminate this problem by 2025…
Beyond Business as Usual:
… A new kind of development economics needs to emerge, one that is grounded in science-a “clinical economics” akin to modern medicine.
The Poverty Trap:
Urbanization, in turn, spurred growth, not only by providing a home for industry and innovation but also prompting greater investment in a healthy and skilled labor force…
… As the UN General-Secretary Kofi Annan wrote earlier this year “There will be no development without security and no security without development”.
But it’s not just speech that’s being stifled around the nation.
“The rise of a surveillance state has raised questions about the legality of how law enforcement agencies acquire new technologies and inform the public of their use,” the Center for Investigative Reporting wrote in May 2014.
Post-9/11, individual privacy rights have routinely been placed secondary to national security. Pat-downs at the nation’s airports have crossed the line into accosting. Data collection and data storage have become mysterious workings of inner-government — ones that thrust even a questioning citizen among the ranks of the suspicious. Public schools have more and more frequently found it perfectly acceptable to enter parental domain to control what students eat, what children read and how they ought to think.
Government bodies that are supposed to serve the people — like the Internal Revenue Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Motor Vehicles, to name just a few — far too frequently subjugate, regulate and violate them.
The welfare of the collective is replacing the rights of the individual.
Under Secular Law, the US Constitution grants privileges that it can revoke, and thus the Top-Down Interpretation of the Supremacy Clause is required. Rules for thee but not for me is also not possible similarly to might makes right and ends justify the means.
Back to Swanson’s piece at washingtonsblog
I mean even crimes committed by Obama and Bush and others before them. I’m not expecting consistency. While I supported impeachment for Bush and Obama as well as Trump, one cannot expect all Democrats to have gone that far in supporting the rule of law when Obama was drone master — although they may now ask Republicans to reach that higher standard of integrity. I understand that partisanship is strong poison.
Swanson’s problem as it is with McCain who should know better Responsibility to Protect is the international standard that does not violate the US Constitution and therefore is valid. This means until Syrian rebels form an alternative established government to counter Assad’s regime who presently is the sole established government is mandated to receive aid if aid is granted. Swanson’s next issue is the US Dollar’s world’s reserve currency status is how deficit to debt spending estimated to account for over 80% of GDP rather than over 93% of GDP and the historical point of no return remaining pillars are the Eurozone and Saudi Arabian chaired OPEC.
Ultimately, Bismarkianism even re-imaged to Progressives remains pro-Secular Law.