">
Posted on 07/27/2007 9:47:39 AM PDT by hubbubhubbub
Remember President Carter’s 1979 Malaise Speech? Americans were losing faith in the country’s future, he said. They were closing the door on America's past. President Carter wanted to turn things around. He warned that rising materialism would not “fill the emptiness of lives which have no confidence or purpose.” He said it was a crisis of American spirit. In response to this crisis, Carter wanted the authority to ration gasoline, form an “energy mobilization board,” create a bureaucracy to guarantee that we would “never use more foreign oil than we did in 1977,” set oil import quotas and develop solar power. “These efforts will cost money,” Carter explained, “a lot of money….”
The country rejected President Carter’s call, and subsequently enjoyed three decades of prosperity. Carter’s policy was rejected because the American people didn’t want a lower standard of living. They didn’t want to forfeit their economic freedom. The American people cling to material happiness with a ferocious animal cunning. They do not believe in giving up, or giving over to obstacles. They want a good life. Their materialism is fundamental, and so is their comfort. They will reject any politician who tells them bad news. They will reject any policy based on pessimism. This is the lesson of the 1970s, taught by the great teacher of the 1980s – Ronald Reagan.
What we are seeing today is reminiscent of the 1970s. First, there is dollar inflation, understated by government statistics. Then there is the stagnation in the U.S. economy. An old depressing pattern has appeared again. We see an American president discredited and the presidency weakened; an unpopular overseas military commitment; rising oil prices; increasing government regulation and higher taxes. We know what happened at the end of the 1970s. American weakness and malaise led to aggressive Communist moves in Africa, Latin America and Asia (Angola, Nicaragua and Afghanistan). Then came the humiliation of the Iran Hostage Crisis.
The trauma of the 1970s ended with the appearance of Ronald Reagan in the White House. Weathering a severe recession with steady optimism, Reagan shepherded the United States toward a period of sustained prosperity and apparent victory in the Cold War. As we look ahead to next year’s presidential race, however, we don’t see anyone resembling Ronald Reagan. The likely winner will be a Democrat and the Democrat philosophy isn’t the philosophy of Reagan. The Republican Party has been wounded by President Bush’s failed Iraq adventure. In recent days the polls show the three leading Democratic candidates beating the top Republican candidates. Furthermore, an economic downturn is expected by the end of the year and the party in the White House generally gets the blame. So instead of getting a Ronald Reagan, the country would be getting something else – though nobody is sure what that would mean.
The Republican candidates haven’t found their footing. They haven’t found the right things to say. Attempting to mimic Reagan won’t work, because the public mood has shifted and the Democratic candidates can also mimic Reagan. Underneath the surface, the country has been changing. It is more self-absorbed and more cynical. It seems that community interest has been gradually surrendering to fanatical interest groups and their politically neurotic adherents. The United States is no longer a healthy republic.
Perhaps I am alone in thinking that a monster has been growing inside America. It is the monster of political passion, misguided ideology and moral confusion. It is a monster born of a consumption culture whose intellectual and moral standards have been falling. There is every reason to believe that the political criminals of the future will pose as do-gooders. Their urge, however, will be to reduce the people to subjection while pillaging the economy. The clever demagogue knows how to divide and conquer. He creates and exploits the dividing line between rich and poor, black and white, immigrant and native. Listen carefully. Notice whether a presidential candidate appeals to goodness and justice or resentment and envy.
It is not a good thing when resentment and envy gain the upper hand in political discourse. Those who seek prosperity at other’s expense easily imagine that wealth is a matter of theft. Through the repetition of this theme, people may gradual come to accept an evil idea. If this idea hardens into a universal belief, the political arena can degenerate into gangsterism. The political cynicism of our time, in which all political leaders are rated as criminals, logically leads to the assumption that crime pays. Once this generalization gains common acceptance, everything is transformed and the United States becomes an Asiatic country.
I will end with a quote from Gustav Le Bon: “Our epoch … can be understood only by grasping the role played by the mysticism of the people and their leaders.” He further stated: “One cannot govern a people with true ideas but only with beliefs accepted as truths.”
© 2007 Jeffrey R. Nyquist
If your scenario plays out, and with the spoiler Ron Paul as a third party candidate ala Ross Perot it is very likely. What you are likely to see is insubordination to executive branch orders to massively pull out of the WOT, and a milspec Coup d’état directed by these fine men who have dedicated their lives to this preserving this Republic.
"Iraq adventure"?
It sounds like this intellectual has had his mind poisoned by his association with other intellectuals. He describes the Rats pretty well, though. Bottom line, by adhering to and using this characterization of operations in Iraq, he is aiding and unknowingly siding with the people he purportedly disagrees with.
I remember very well Carter’s malaise speech in 1979. I also remember very well how clueless Carter was, first to the real national mood, and to the possible reason for any malaise, if there was, indeed, any at all.
Consider that voters were considering the likelihood that Carter, as an incumbent president, might very well be reelected the following year. That would give even the most sanguine of populations a national sense of malaise. His cluelessness was, of course, to the idea that it was he who had the capacito to induce any malaise. His cluelessness, in addition, extended to the solution for the malaise, which voters exercised the following November.
Simple: No Carter, no malaise.
Well, there's your dose of Reaganesque optimism right there.
Shut up, and get a good Republican in the White House!
If taxes are theft, some wealth could be also.
“The Republican candidates haven’t found their footing. They haven’t found the right things to say. “
Wrong. You just haven’t been listening.
DUNCAN HUNTER ‘08
I agree with you.
The, ahem, writer cites reasons that President Bush can be blamed and even blames you and me. But I didn’t see where he blamed the media.
I think there is an old Roman Soldier’s saying about such an event...
I picked up on that phrase too. How disingenuous to call the fight in Iraq an "adventure". You can say it has been mismanaged, ill-planned, whatever. But to insinuate that it was done for fun... well, you can't create a larger hyperbole or make a greater ass out of yourself.
Carter: “He warned that rising materialism would not “fill the emptiness of lives which have no confidence or purpose.””
Nyquist: “It is a monster born of a consumption culture whose intellectual and moral standards have been falling. “
Just saying...
I thought the malaise started with Jimmah! Reagan was the cure.
That’s where I stopped reading. I can’t take anyone who refers to the war in Iraq as “Bush’s failed Iraq adventure” seriously.
Exactly.
Jimmy Carter may have been the stupidest man to ever be president!
If there is any kind of third party spoiler, it will not be Ron Paul. He gets a lot of attention, but believe me will get few votes.
Kerry leads Bush in new poll
The poll, released Monday, found that among likely voters, Kerry was the choice of 52 percent and Bush 44
October 2, 2000 - Gore Leads Bush 50-36 Among Likely Voters
Among registered voters, Gore leads Bush 49 - 35 percent, with 1 percent for Buchanan and 6 percent for Nader.
seems like I've heard that before
If some women are prostitutes, maybe some marriages are legalized prostitution.
Your logic dissolves under the weight of the word “some”. It makes your statement at once irrefutable and meaningless.
Yes, they rejected it because he tried his policies and they failed miserably.
In the end, if the war tide changes and the perception becomes one of the troops becoming disengaged, the tide for the election will turn as well. At this time, however, with RAT hearings abounding, the economy poised to settle down, and a non-stop spin cycle of bad news from the MSM, I am not very hopeful of a GOP presidential success in ‘08.
This means my little sissy 18 years old granddaughters will go off to walk the streets in the hellholes . Like our troops already there ,they will not be allowed to shoot unless shot at , will have to fill our report every time they fire their rifles.
The enemy will be supplied better protection than our troops, like they they are now . We have our troops in Hummers , we have the enemy we trained in MRAPS . Hummers are the biggest killers and maimers of our troops from IEDs . NOT ONE PERSON HAS BEEN KILLED IN THE MARAP ! The only troops who ride in MRAPS are the explosive teams , they have 8 if I remember right . The Iraqi's we train have 43 .
Our commanders have been begging for these MRAPS for 4 years now . Some of the commanders vote against them . Masefield and Bush also are against it .
Get informed to better protect our troops . Why do we supply the iraqis with MRAPS and not our troops ?
MRAPS are heavy protected vehicles . They are safer than Hummers . They have bottom and sides that are very hard to penetrate because of v shape design and heavy meal . Use search engines, I’m not good at descriptions .
I saw that, too.
Perfect!
">
Who will thereupon cease to be fine men, having dishonored themselves in violating their oaths and overturning the Constitution they've sworn to defend.
“Perhaps I am alone in thinking that a monster has been growing inside America.”
No but unfortunately we are the minority.
“It is the monster of political passion, misguided ideology and moral confusion. It is a monster born of a consumption culture whose intellectual and moral standards have been falling.”
Falling is not a stong enough word. Been decimated by bucket loads of cash and power obtained by hurting the little guy is more like it.
“There is every reason to believe that the political criminals of the future will pose as do-gooders. Their urge, however, will be to reduce the people to subjection while pillaging the economy.”
Ummm, this is the present day reality and pillaging the economy has had the unfortunate effect of making our enemies much stronger and they don’t envision us as global policemen in their country or backyards.
You got any more of that smoke? Looks like some good sh*t...
Excuse me; it’s you who isn’t thinking “correctly”. We have a chain of command in our armed forces. No junior officer has the legal authority to seize political power. If you want to advocate for violent overthrow of the government and installation of a fascist dictatorship, have the integrity not to pretend it’s all okey-doke with the Constitution. Then at least we’ll know where the real enemies are.
All uniformed personnel — including officers — are junior to the Secretary of Defense and the President.
Reagan gave amnesty to over a million illegals .Helped to finish off Miami , Texas and California ,now we have little Cuba and Little Mexico’s inside our ‘unguarded ‘borders .The great intellectual Exodus of all three states started with that woof in sheep’s clothing .
On the charts thats so. Political power comes from the barrel of a gun. That’s the other aspect of this.
Weren’t Nyquist articles banned?
Well, that explains it.
I voted for the lessor of two evils my last time. Lessor of evil is still evil. I voted for Bush and Reagan twice .
Sounds more like you’re the one inventing scenarios.
Don’t attribute the author’s words to me. I’ve been listening to Ron Paul every week.
RON PAUL!!
If we’re still in the same military situation in the Fall ‘08, it will forever be remembered as Bush’s failed Iraq adventure.
No, but you should be.
Why? Because I know Sen Stevens personally?
The islamist VP takes over... and refuses to sign appropriations to fund the WOT..
Prez Husien Abomination as CinC orders the all troops in Iraq, Afganistan to unconditionally surrender to a Pan Arab delegation and turn over all their equipment and weaponry to the arab delegation. He conspires with middle east leaders to turn over the US to islamic rule. The pentagon refuses said presidential order and the mil-spec revolt is on.
There is nothing in heaven or earth to prevent this eventuality. There is a 50-50 chance of this happening.
Based on what?
Your insane rantings sound like Alex Jones on crack. Back to the tool shed with you.
Nothing in place now mitigates against this from unfolding. It is foolish to believe otherwise. Your turn.
There were some stories in the 1970s that President Nixon cultivated friendships with Marine generals and was considering using them to protect the White House and overturn the impeachment proceedings. Supposedly, Secretary of State Kissinger and Secretary of Defense Schlesinger contacted commanders of the Airborne Divisions of the Army that they would fight on the side of Congress in case the Marines made any move to seize Congress. It was also reported that Schlesinger informed the top military commanders to ignore any orders directly from the White House in the weeks before Nixon's resignation. I do not know if any of these stories were true, or fabricated by leftist journalists to make Nixon look worse than he actually was.
Given the long history of military subordination, plus the fact that top commanders serve at the pleasure of the White House and the membership of numerous flag rank officers in Establishment clubs like the Council on Foreign Relations, if any coup attempt were to occur, it would have to come from the ranks of junior officers. Most successful coups or military accession to power came from the ranks of top officers: Cromwell, Napoleon, Franco, and Pinochet, for example. My guess would be that it would take more than the United States bailing out of Iraq and Afghanistan with our tail between our legs a la Vietnam to generate a coup. I could see only two possible scenarios: if Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, after being elected President, turn out not to be the de facto third administration of Bill Clinton, but an American version of Chavez in Venezuela or Allende in Chile, or if the United States suffered a major terrorist attack on the scale of 9-11 or worse and the response was tepid or nonexistent, a replay of Jimmy Carter's reaction to the Iranian hostage crisis.
In such circumstances, a military takeover would have widespread support among conservative whites. Such a takeover would probably trigger a civil war. Many minority soldiers would desert the military, as Southerners did in 1861. They might then form the core of a leftist resistance, along with ethnic gangs and liberal whites, not all of whom are wimps or metrosexuals. It could get very ugly quickly. The Civil War of the 1860s killed 600,000 men via single shot rifles, muzzle loading cannon, swords and bayonets. Consider what carnage would take place with modern weapons.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.