While it may be true that the United States can never be defeated by an external foe, the neo-con Republicans have demonstrated how it can be conquered internally. These Republicans are truly radicals, not conservatives, who favor a unitary executive over checks and balances. The current administration's neo-cons seem to have failed in their attempts to subvert the United States Constitution and institute a 1000-year reign. Next time they may succeed.
How To Overthrow The Republic
Neo-cons have demonstrated the several areas that must be controlled in order to take over our Constitutional government. Among these are:
1. Subvert the news media. It is clear that the major media outlets, and their journalists and editors, have been compromised in various ways. Not only have they become self-editing, but also the administration is adept at playing the news cycles. News organizations focused on the bottom line have closed overseas bureaus, cut experienced staff, depleted research resources, and pandered to the gossip mongers. Without a truly adversarial Fourth Estate, this administration has led us into war, politicized public agencies, committed any number of felonies, and thumbed their noses at the other branches of government.
2. Stack the courts with anti-Constitutional judges. This is not an issue of left or right or conservative or progressive. This is an issue of upholding and defending the Constitution, as it was intended by the Founding Fathers. Republican appointees who put party above the Constitution allow the Republic to fail.
3. Distract the public. This may be contingent on #1. The mainstream media fill their airwaves and pages with non-news trivia. These modern bread and circus pageants distract the population from understanding and pursuing their own best interests.
4. Cripple the military. The Iraq adventure has accomplished two key things. It has severely stretched our professional military and it has depleted our national guard resources, both in manpower and material. It has also allowed the creation of a large private army that is loyal to its corporations ahead of its country. The Romans had their Praetorian Guards. We have Blackwater.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Dave Nalle
Actually, I didn't hear it here first, this neocon conspiracy crap has been floating around the web for years. And just like your article, it's a pack of paranoid fantasy hogwash.
There are ALL SORTS of political cliques who want to gain power for themselves and run the country there way. The neocons are no different and not any worse than other similar groups within the GOP or the Democrats, groups who if they got into power would try to consolidate that power in obvious ways.
Our system of government makes that consolidation of power extremely difficult, beyond some of the relative superficialities which you mention.
But the neocons as a threat is a joke, though you clearly fail to see it. The true neocons were always small in number, disorganized and have mostly been subverted to other causes and allegiances. The word has become a boogeyman for opinionated buffoons to throw around and try to apply to everyone they don't agree with. The term has become meaningless and the true neocons have moved on from that phase, left the club and found more productive ways to apply their efforts.
Dave
2 - Baronius
Point 2 is pretty bold, especially with no examples. Dr. Dreadful made a similar point around here recently, that both sides practice judicial activism. For the life of me, I don't know what that's supposed to mean.
Point 6 is just sour grapes. Different ideologies battle for party control all the time. Actually, the people who considered themselves neo-conservatives were advisors who never built up their own power base. So it's not really the neo-cons that you're complaining about.
In fact, you state in Point 6 that the Republicans (not the neo-cons) are gaining the reins of power. So this point really is sour grapes. The R's were slightly less politically impotent than usual for a few years, and you're upset about it.
3 - RJ
Moonbat alert!
The current administration's neo-cons seem to have failed in their attempts to subvert the United States Constitution and institute a 1000 year reign.
Jesus Christ. You violated Godwin's Law (arguably twice)> in your opening paragraph!
4 - RJ
"Without a truly adversarial Fourth Estate"
You can't be serious! The MSM has been overtly anti-Bush since Baghdad fell, over four years ago. The only thing they have supported him on since then is amnesty for 10-20 million illegal immigrants.
5 - RJ
"Districts have been gerrymandered to insure [sic] reelection of the incumbent."
Yeah, that's a novel trick... [rolls eyes]
6 - RJ
"When future historians attempt to pinpoint exactly when the United States ceased being a constitutional democracy, they could do no better than to choose 2007."
Uh huh. Why 2007? Why not 2002? Why not 2004? Why not 1973, for that matter?
Your article is utterly worthless to people who aren't already communist conspiracy theorists.
No offense.
7 - STM
Geez, America seems a weird bloody place sometimes. Do people actually believe this kind of bullsh.t?
8 - MCH
"Moonbat alert!"
Yes, definitely. Those moonbats are far worse than the chickenhawks.
9 - Robert K. Blechman
I'm just delighted that you all cared enough about what I wrote to formulate a comment!
And yes, I know, insure, ensure, but when you get to my age you tend to think of the word "ensure" as referring to dinner.
10 - Dr Dreadful
Geez, America seems a weird bloody place sometimes. Do people actually believe this kind of bullsh.t?
Yup. Thank The X Files and a whole slew of other imitative sci-fi/conspiracy shows. Americans have always had a healthy distrust of those who govern them, but the astonishing perecentage of people polled who believe that the Bush admin. either actively plotted 9/11 themselves or sat back and let it happen is astonishing.
They're not that clever.
11 - Dr Dreadful
Districts have been gerrymandered to insure [sic] reelection of the incumbent.
Not just a neocon sin by any means. California has been gerrymandered to such an extent that there's barely any point in having congressional elections any more.
12 - Zedd
Robert
Brilliant assessment. I however don't think that the results were intentional. I think that what we have is a convergence of attempts by a variety of entities who seek control of their specific interests. I do believe that they utilize the same methodology; fear myth making and fear mongering.
I disagree with the notion that historians will look at 2007. The ball started to roll much earlier.
13 - STM
And Robert, can I just comment on your last paragraph ...
In case you hadn't noticed, old boy ... America's already an empire. It's not that different to the old British Empire, of which I'm a (proud!) part.
The US has gone at it in a slightly different way, by putting up corporate HQs instead of Union Jacks and naval bases (Oh, wait ... )
Still, it's about power and profit, as are all empires. As one commentator said here recently, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks - well, mate, you be the judge. America's empire has nothing to with neocons. It's about global capitalism and fostering US interest, and not much has changed these past 60 or so years. Remember Vietnam?
I don't particularly agree with what Bush is doing either, but the sky won't be falling any time soon. You have rule of law and representative government. Repeat after me: rule of law and representative government.
It's why you haven't had anything even resembling a coup for over 200 years (apart from your great mistake in withdrawing yourself so hastily from that other empire, but, hey, that's another issue entirely). My tip: Settle down and do what we do here - make sure you put one foot in front of the other so that you find your way to the ballot box at the next federal election, and then tick the box(es) you want.
Too easy. Saves a whole lot of hand-wringing as well.
14 - Dr Dreadful
you haven't had anything even resembling a coup for over 200 years
Maybe not a coup as such, but the years 1861-1865 cannot be described as anything less than an insurrection.
And the South didn't even have the redeeming feature of wanting to put the Union Jack back in the corner of the flag.
15 - STM
Nah, that was a Civil War, Doc. Bit different. You can't count that because no-one actually tried to change the central government.
They just said: "We've had enough, we're taking our bat and ball and going home (bet you haven't heard that for a while)."
The United States of America never, even then, ceased to exist as a single political entity.
16 - STM
Doc said: "And the South didn't even have the redeeming feature of wanting to put the Union Jack back in the corner of the flag."
The silly bugger's might have won had they done so. Makes all the difference, y'know!
17 - STM
BTW, I discovered an American monarchist site. It's a gee-up, of course. However, there is a group in West Florida that is seriously agitating to return a part of West Florida to the Crown, whilst suggesting that the best way to do that would be to remain a part of the United States.
I notice that Her Maj, despite the group's entreaties, has been remarkably silent on the issue. Funny about that! I think she realises they lost fair and square.
However, to me such a makes perfect sense! Imagine the wonderful flag opportunity there, DD
18 - Dr Dreadful
there is a group in West Florida that is seriously agitating to return a part of West Florida to the Crown
Florida, eh? Do you think Clavos is a closet member? You know he's all on board with your Union Jack campaign...
19 - STM
I am contributing surreptitiously by giving him a titfer with a Crown on it. From acorns ...
20 - Baronius
I realize this isn't a "flags of the UK" board, but I've got to reply to comment #14. The Confederate battle flag was a St. Andrew's cross, the diagonal cross also found on the Union Jack. So there was a Confederate connection to the British flag.
21 - RJ
Just a "meta" sort of question...
Why is it that a state or territory can voluntarily join in a federation or union, but it cannot also voluntarily leave said state/union, unless it is capable of successfully fending off the central government's military and prevent its ports from being blockaded and its cities from being burned to the ground?
22 - Robert K. Blechman
One could argue that citizens of a Union, or states of a Union derive benefits from being part of that Union. Citizens compensate the Union through their taxes and through various types of personal services. How does a state compensate the Union, especially if it chooses to withdraw from that Union after benefitting from the prior relationship? Having been a former member of that Union, would the state continue to derive benefits without quid pro quo? Would the withdrawal of that state be detrimental to a minority that resides in that state? Would the withdrawal of that state create an issue of security or safety for the citizens of that Union?
I'm sure that others could come up with other hypotheticals on this issue
23 - STM
Baronius wrote: "The Confederate battle flag was a St. Andrew's cross, the diagonal cross also found on the Union Jack".
Despite what Doc D says, I always suspected them rebs had some truly redeeming qualities ...
One day I must post everyone a picture of my correctional flag of the United States, which I had made up specially for Independence Day and which my American mate flies next to his Stars and Stripes at our July 4 barbecues (we make him do it on pain of death).
It has a Union Jack in the corner instead of those silly stars, and I must say, you guys really missed out as it does look quite spectacular.
Not as good as the Hawaiian state flag (my favourite US state flag :), but pretty damn good.
24 - Clavos
This is my favorite US flag:
US Navy Jack
It was the original US Navy Jack (flag on the bow of the ship, flown on the jackstaff), and by order of the Secretary of The Navy, is again being flown on US Navy ships.
25 - STM
Hmm ... Top-looking flag, but there's something missing ... can't put my finger on it, but there is.