User Answers

EMPIRE OR REPUBLIC: A CROSSROADS

I was forwarded this very interesting discussion with former California political science professor Chalmers Johnson my Mr. V.T., who has once again provided a very interesting article for contemplation:

Chalmers Johnson: \"Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic\"

Johnson's lessons of history are well worth pondering, but I want for purposes of this discussion to concentrate on the idea of "full spectrum dominance" as I have written about it previously on this site, and indeed it is an area of my current long-term research. In effect, what full spectrum dominance means is simply this: America must be the dominant power in a unipolar world revolving around...well...America. There are no equal partners in this world view, only (1) the USA, (2) fiefdoms of client states of the same, and (3) enemies or potential enemies.

The doctrine maintains that America must be the dominant power in...well...in everything. It must be the dominant power in computer viruses and hacking, the dominant power in space (which has a monopoly right on deploying weapons in space), the dominant power in finance (read. World Bank, World Trade Organization, Bank of International Settlements, IMF and all the other mechanisms of Anglo-American finance central bank capitalism), the dominant military power with a technological lead in all aspects of military science, it must be the dominant cultural power exporting the jungle-driven mind-numbing drivel of its musical and cultural forms, the dominant energy and resources power... in short, everything.

There is an inevitable tendency, of course, to any such imperialism, and it is revealed in the threefold structure enumerated in the second paragraph, for what it always does is to foster a splitting of the mental-social space: there is only "us", and "them", whether the "them" be the Chinese, Russians, Iranians, or any number of other contenders. Inevitably, Johnson points out the conclusion: the choice is either to be secure in our empire, or secure in our liberties, and I believe the lessons of history are there for any would-be empire-builders to contemplate: all empires eventually create coalitions whose strength inevitably is stronger then the Empire itself. All Empires eventually over-extend through their own hubris, and suffer invasion, or through a lack of sound public domestic policy, crumble into anarchy and dust, or some combination of both. Or, finally, people just get fed up, and revolt. I certainly love the great and good people of this country, but we face a choice, and we must have the courage to take it, the choice is between liberty, or empire. I vote for the former.

22 thoughts on “EMPIRE OR REPUBLIC: A CROSSROADS”

  1. A very interesting article indeed but there are a couple of things that i would dispute:
    1.”In the wake of the war against Nazism, which had just ended, it became, I think, obvious to the British that in order to retain their empire, they would have to become a tyranny, and they, therefore, I believe, properly chose, admirably chose to give up their empire.”
    I do not believe that this was the case at all and that the British chose between becoming a tyranny or remain a democracy. The invasion of the Japanese Imperial Army into Burma and Malaya smashed forever, in the eyes of the local inhabitants, the myth of the invincibility and the superiority of the White man and his rule. The Japanese fostered and brought to the fore the locals desire for independence, especially in India, Burma and Malaya. The British realized, even before the end of the war, that sustaining their rule in these colonies was no longer viable. They had no choice but to give up the empire or face bloody wars of independence like the French faced in Indochina. Pericles once said that “your empire is like a tyranny” and in some respects the British empire was certainly that long before WWII. The Raj certainly wasn’t a field of roses, the Indians were kept down, sometimes quite brutally, by their British overlords.
    2. “It’s the same kind of adjustment that should have been made in the 20th century to the rise of new sources of power in Germany, in Russia, in Japan. The failure by the sated English-speaking powers — above all, England and the United States — to adjust led to savage and essentially worthless wars.”
    Now if Professor Johnson is referring to the Germany of the 2nd Reich, then fair enough, but if he is referring to the 3rd Reich then that is simply not the case. Adjustment or appeasement was attempted by Britain and France ie the infamous events in Munich in 1938. They gave Hitler an inch and he came back for a mile. The 3rd Reich could only be stopped by war.
    In the case of Japan, if professor Johnson is referring to the fascist Japan of the 1930’s again he is way off the mark. No adjustment could be made to a regime that invaded China and Manchuria and slaughtered millions of the inhabitants just because they could and because they were not Japanese. Again the ruthless expansionism of Japan could only be stopped by war and not adjustment.
    Anyway a good day to all.

  2. Dr Farrell, you ended your fine examination of “full spectrum dominance” with the follwing statement, “…but we face a choice, and we must have the courage to take it, the choice is between liberty, or empire. I vote for the former.” Voting in this country, at this time, is not a sure bet. Consider that George W Bush lost the Presidential election twice and nevertheless served two terms, proving that he who controls the electronic ballot count wins.

    With all due respect you forgot one other choice you mentioned in your analysis, “…people just get fed up, and revolt”. I am not an advocate of violence but I feel this is more likely the result considering how late in the game citizens are awaking to the reality of the state of our republic. I do hope I am wrong.

    1. Hi Romanmel,
      I don’t think that you are wrong there unfortunately. They certainly can rig elections as has been all but proven in the past especially with your fine examples. These Power Elites have become so used to wielding the reigns of power for centuries that they will not give them up so easily. I believe that we will indeed have to wait until “…people just get fed up, and revolt”. With the current docility of the majority out there that won’t happen soon. All we can do is spread the word, as the good doctor has done until everyone is awake. Its a long process but in the end it can be successful.

      1. haha i’m 33 and don’t hold out that much hope for my lifetime either, i think it will be that long

  3. Is it really about the Empire as an end in itself to achieve control over “others”, or rather about attaining control over the institutions running the Empire.

    It seems to me that the overarching thesis of your work (or at least what i walk away with) is that control over the institutions: military technology, intelligence/mercenary networks, research/patents and financial/central banking networks has been at the helm of all wars between the elite groups seeking full control over the means and institutions running the empires.

    For groups of inviduals who seem to trace their past to Sumerian/babylonian times, who are poised to deconstruct their DNA and trace their roots to old-testament biblical-type settings, and seem even more keen on conquering or breaking away into outer space; the thought of limiting or constraining themselves to a flag or nationality (USA, China, Russia etc…) seems self-defeating.

  4. In Canadian-French, we have a saying that roughly translate to “You can’t have the butter and the money for the butter”. America, like the English before them et al, have always wanted both. Hopefully the people of America will change this.

    1. I believe the equivalent for that expression in the english repertoire of expression is: “You cannot have the cake and eat the cake.”
      Basically same meaning…

  5. Are we to ignore Tom Bearden’s work on Russian military dominance? The scalar tech they possess is reportedly decades beyond the USA. As Tom might tell it, they have us on a leash.

    I think the hubris will be enough for our demise and that is the way they (Russia,China) are playing it.

    1. James,
      Did you ever consider the possibility that the whole idea of a cold war was staged managed right from the beginning? Do you know that it was based on the notion of game theory as designed by Johnny Von Neuman and John Nash and that Nash turned out to be a certifiable paranoid? Might I add that this paranoia festered and fed the notion that the soviets were planning to take over the world and would stop at nothing, including their own destruction to do so. The reports that were used to assess soviet capabilities were in fact made up by the men at the Rand Corp and various other think tanks who reached their conclusions based upon nothing more than their own wild, speculative guesses. And did you know too that the reports they were commissioned to write always came out just the way whatever service had commissioned them to do the studies wanted to hear?
      In short, the fear card was played on the american people just as it always has to transfer vast amounts of wealth and control into the hands of those who most profit from wars and the power they bestow on the growth and centralization of government power. We can see that this tactic of fear is continuing to be practiced on the american people and is working as a charm, just as ever. War and the threat of war is the health of the state.
      At bottom, the global gamesmanship is being played at a different level than anything we’re allowed to see or even to speak of without being considered conspiracy nuts. Most, if not all political leaders in this world are beholden in one way or another to these behind the scenes powers who have the alchemical means to create unlimited amounts of what passes for money out of thin air and paper and ink. Each of them has been given the offer of silver or lead and told the facts of life. Step out of line and they are easily dispensed with. Play the game and there’s wealth and a happy ride into the sunset once they’ve served their masters.
      The russians and chinese are far too realistic to start a war with the US. So, just think of this as a gigantic wrestlemania match in which everyone but the fans in the seats know before hand what the outcome is going to be. Sit back and enjoy the show and don’t be afraid of anything going on in the ring.

      1. “Johnny Von Neuman?”
        I think you mean John von Neumman
        [somehow that doesn’t look right to me either]
        of the Philadelphia Experiment fame/infamy ?

        Yes, a questionable character
        [aren’t we all?]
        but brilliant [aren’t they all?]

        Anyway, yes it was staged and in fact,
        Robert Ludlum tells us so in most of his Cold War
        ‘novels’ by incerting a third ‘unknown’ party/player.

        The USSR was funded by the very “Capitalism”
        Khrushchev supposedly hated so much, he would
        spit it out in Engish as if it was a 4 letter word starting
        right out of the gate with the 1917 revolution.
        I liked that man [Khrushchev] and from what I later read, I was quite right
        about him.
        He was never “crazy” as that is an old war/battle tactic
        to keep your enemy guessing and confused about your
        next move that could not be predicted if it was thought
        that you were CRAZY !

        But there was real purpose to the so-called Cold War.
        Weapons development and technology that skyrockets
        in time of war that always has a peaceful side simply
        because that is the way of science.
        Most of all, the Ruling Elite Controllers and Manipulators
        wanted to know how best to control the people.

        They ended this experiment by pulling the ‘plug’ on the USSR
        when they found that—
        “It is easier to control a people that THINK they are free
        than one that KNOWS it is NOT !”

        That is my own quote. Feel free to use it.
        No credit necessary.

        1. Tom Bearden, BTW, gives all the science credit to
          the USSR because he wants to go on writing about it
          while alive and kicking.
          He cuts it awfully close, though.
          Early on they gave him one of their creations,
          mycoplasma infection.

          The science was very carefully kept even, but different
          in specifics only to have whichever side ‘won’
          have the benefit of both in its diversity.

          1. On topic:
            Joseph we are way beyond a crossroads !

            It’s a done deal.
            BUT
            we are also about to fall off the Empire pinacle
            before we can even have time to ‘enjoy'(?) the view.

        2. HAL,

          I call him “Johnny” because that’s what Sam Cohen called him. In fact, Sam said that Johnny was the most brilliant man he’d ever met, which is saying something. Another little known fact is that he had a deathbed conversion to Catholicism.
          You’re quite right about the soviets being funded by the western central banks, as well as having all their technology transfered to them as well as Tony Sutton proved in his three volumn study on the subject. He also documented that the nazis also recieved funding by those same international bankers, which continued throughout the war as well.
          It seems that you’ve got a very good understanding of how the game is played. Now, I recommend the Daily Bell to suppliment what you already know and to perhaps help clarify and connect a few of the dots that are still floating around for you.
          Great quote. You should get all the credit it for it.
          By the way, you’re right. It’s von Neumann. Sorry.

          1. You can see “dots” all around me?

            Hhmm, maybe I’m not connected too well…
            🙂

            Thanks for your clarification.
            I knew there was 2 Ms or 2 Ns, or something,
            in his name.

            In case you’re interested, the latter movie trilogy of
            “the Philadelphia Experiment” was closer to the truth
            than the older one with Kirk (?) Douglas.

            It made good Sci(Fi) since they figured no one would
            believe it, but since pulled it because too many people
            knew it was closer to the truer version of events.

          2. You know, it’s like the old saying,
            “Once you know how….”

            The only reason you don’t fall through the floor
            or go through walls, is because the outer electrons all
            have a negative charge and therefore repel each
            other.
            For purposes of ease we will call the aether/foam
            (whatever) space, although there is no such thing.

            So…….take away, however temporarily, the electron
            charge with certain EM fields and you wind up in or part
            of a bulkhead.
            Easy as pie.
            Maybe easier. I never could make a good crust from scratch !

      2. Oh I have considered the “cold war” as such. All wars are for a purpose aren’t they? Even the war on cancer, diabetes, aids, ad infinitum. It’s about control ultimately. Control is the alpha and omega of all human pursuits.

        Self determinism is another world for it. So many point at greed but I say it’s beyond that.

        And yet the insatiable thirst to turn technology into weaponry is very real. It surely is manefest in reality and not just fiction. Of this I am convinced!

        Nuke proliferation is a joke in the cold war paradigm. It wasn’t reality as you say!

        As far as Bearden, I have no reason not to believe him other than the fact that he was a govt employee and that itself undermines his credibility with me. But as I read him, something rings true for me. So I forego that predjudice for now.

        If you can give me link to the Rand Corp info, I’d like to see that.

        There is much for me to consider still!

        Thanks for your reply

  6. Jungle-driven mind-numbing drivel? Well, yes, there is that! But there is also excellence in surprising places.
    For there to be excellence, there will be mediocrity and down-right crap. But we as individuals will not always know at first which is what, which is humbling indeed. Let freedom flourish!

  7. Robert Barricklow

    Bill Clinton’s quip to Robert Rubin/The Nation-States are so quaint, fits the Full-Spectrum Dominance picture, if one looks at what entity is pulling those ‘dominate’ strings. The same kind of quip aired about building 7/We pulled it. The same coincidence that implied the ‘implosion of the economy’ was triggered on 9/11/2008.

  8. very good article and im very glad you shared it with us Dr Farrell… let’s hope for this ‘renaissance of citizenry’ soon

Comments are closed.