Skip to comments.World Government? Norman Cousins & Surrender By Subterfuge!
Posted on 03/01/2012 8:24:06 AM PST by Ohioan
To any American, dedicated to the promise of the Founders to secure the "Blessings of Liberty" to their posterity, a surrender of what those brave men achieved on the battlefield can never be acceptable. But that is not the only fundamental flaw in the Cousins "argument." There is an implied premise, in the claim that we must have World Government to prevent the Nations of the world from savaging one another, that there is no effective alternative, or alternatively that a World Government would be more likely to prevent the horrors of modern war than would, for example, the traditional American view of treating others with respect & demanding respect back--the Washington/Jefferson policy; really only an application of the Golden Rule to international dealings; although we did vow to punish the "first insult."
We certainly cannot predict that there would ever be universal acceptance for such a foreign policy by all nations, even if America should return to it. We will always have to look to the adequacy of our Defenses. Yet could a World Government ever be an acceptable substitute? The profound differences between peoples; the needs of diverse peoples, with varied talents, ideals & pursuits, adjusting to quite different surroundings & dynamic changes, both natural & human; properly mandate the pursuit of greater local autonomy, not greater centralization. The great paradox is that those who believe that the nations of the earth cannot be trusted not to destroy one another, seem to believe that their peoples may somehow be merged to mutual benefit. Again, even where they delude themselves, what is being advocated is surrender; surrender, whether by subterfuge, panic or compulsion; but surrender, nonetheless.
(Excerpt) Read more at truthbasedlogic.com ...
Conservatives need to be very aware of the contribution that this movement, formerly led by Norman Cousins, then Editor of the Saturday Review, has made to the present corruption of American education. It has not been the only factor; but it has been a significant one.
The reason that there was no follow up involves other people now dead. But the article, linked here, employs the same basic argument that neutralized Cousins before some large audiences in 1961.
That is a reflection of what Norman Cousins preached to American educators, in traveling back & forth across America in the 1950s & 1960s, speaking to mass meetings of NEA affiliates, as well as college assembies. His recipe for accomplishing his goal of "surrender by subterfuge" (my term for it), was to shift education from teaching how peoples differed, to focusing on ways we were all alike. In short, but in functional substance, convincing the youth, that traditional America was not worth fighting for.
This, effective, "lets pretend" that we are all alike, was also a major contributor to the Teddy Kennedy sabotage of our immigration policy in 1965.
But for the Norman Cousins influence on American education, it is unlikely that Obama ever could have been elected. Certainly many of the spaced out looking youth at Obama rallies would have found a better use of their time.
Surrender by ‘subterfuge’—never!
I assume that your "handle" does not indicate a support for submerging us in some kind of World Government--such as Obama, for example, seems to be seeking with the threat to tax us for the UN.
That, after all, was precisely the changes that Cousins called for--albeit in a more round-about way, than I have just stated it.
Ha. Thanks for the reply. My nic is just because I like the word ‘subterfuge.’ Typing lousy on this phone. Sorry.
It was Norman Cousins' intent to reverse the conscious decision that led to the America we have known. From your previous comment, I think that you may agree with me on that.