Gold9472
12-18-2006, 10:14 PM
Contra Imperium: Case Against Imperialism & Police State
http://www.sierratimes.com/06/12/18/Rose1.htm
(Gold9472: I found this to be fascinating.)
Tom Rose
12/18/2006
A deep division is occurring in America. It is dividing family members and friends into opposing ideological camps. The ideological split between previously gracious and forbearing individuals is caused by two aspects of growing statism :
First, America's military expansion overseas -- i.e., imperial hegemony; and
Second, the domestic growth of what is known as a security/police state -- i.e., the domestic program of government rulers to induce among the populace a ready acceptance of the idea of foreign imperialism through the generation of mass fear coupled with the forceful suppression of political dissent.
In one camp are those who claim the Bush Administration's pre-emptive invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq (and the proposed invasions of Lebanon, Syria, and Iran) are unconstitutional, unwise, unnecessary, and do nothing but inflame Islamic hatred of America. Some in this camp believe that President Bush does not possess true authority. They believe that the real power-brokers are the war-mongering Neoconservatives who, in turn, answer to the more shadowy rulers who seek to meld our American Republic into the international "New World Order." As you might have heard, recent surveys reveal that 36% of the American population now believe that the U.S. government had some hand in the "terrorist" attacks of 9/11 -- that it was an "inside job." According to this growing view, these attacks were allegedly contrived to justify the two-pronged policy of preemptive foreign war and the establishment of a domestic security/police state.
Included in the allegations of the first camp is that the present administration is being compromised by gross sexual immorality, as in the case of a homosexual pornographer who advertised himself as a male prostitute, and who had a pass to White House briefings and also had ready access to the private section of the White House. More recent is the exposure of pedophiles in Congress, like ex-Florida Congressmen Mark Foley, who quickly resigned when the fact of his illicit e-mails to young male congressional pages was made public. Such moral indiscretions demonstrate a clear weakness in political leadership during a time of war and national security.
The opposing camp argues, "No way!" They state that President Bush had an "experience" and is a "born again" Christian. They relate that Bush's political staff, during his first presidential campaign, told how Bush allegedly led a young teenager to Christ. Therefore, the President would not engage in any under-the-table maneuvers for political reasons. They argue that, instead of opposing President Bush's pre-emptive attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq, and his regime-change occupation of these countries, Americans should support him and the patriotic troops who are protecting America against "Islamic terrorism." And if future intelligence indicates that Iran is achieving nuclear capability, then Americans and her allies should uphold the President in his efforts "to protect our country" against this nuclear threat from radical Islamic leaders.
Perhaps the best way to shed light on this divisive subject is first to consider foreign imperialism and domestic statism in ancient history, and secondly, Great Britain, the greatest imperial nation of all times.
We will then consider these United States of America to see how our own country gradually became, though unrecognized by most Americans, a full-fledged imperial state overseas and a corresponding "Security/Police State" domestically.
Finally, we will evaluate the double-sided problem of foreign imperialism and domestic statism from a biblical perspective.
The issue of building empires, either domestic or foreign, is completely contrary to God's word. In man's first world empire-building attempt, the Tower of Babel, God confused the language and dispersed the people (Genesis 11:1-9). God's clear plan for civil government is for the establishment of small, democratic-republic civil units, not large, unitary dictator-type units (Exodus 18:13-26). To be biblical, America should abhor foreign possessions and international entanglements like the United Nations, NAFTA, etc.
Imperialism in Ancient History
A survey of ancient civilizations -- as cited by the Preacher in the book of Ecclesiastes -- shows "...there is no new thing under the sun" (1:9). Accordingly, it is not surprising to discover that civil rulers, from the earliest kingdoms to those of the present time, all wielded hegonomic power to expand their borders, by land or sea. Generally, the motive to attack other nations was to seize their wealth and to gain control of their natural resources, trade routes, or the seas.
Sometimes the motivation to make war on other nations was simply to eliminate them as competitors in trade. This was the case in Rome's long-continued attacks on Carthage during three Punic Wars (264-146 B.C.). "Carthago delenda est! " (" Carthage must be destroyed!") was the cry on Rome's senate floor by those who stood to benefit from war. A similar motivation was behind Britain's assaults against Germany leading to World War I because the "British Crown" feared competition from Germany's rapidly expanding industrial capability.
What we today call "special interests" were usually behind inciting a pro-war attitude among the public. It was so in early history, and it is so today. Even in early history, it was essential for empire builders to instill in the common people a willingness to sacrifice their lives and the lives of their children as "cannon fodder" to expand their country's imperialistic hegemony.
Here is a summary of key events of imperialistic hegemony in ancient history:
The Hyksos: Around 1720 B.C., the Hyksos, a Semitic people from Palestine, invaded the Delta area of Egypt and made all of Egypt tributary. The irresistible power of the Hyksos came from its temporary monopoly of two new weapons of war: the powerful composite-bow of wood and horn, and the much-feared horse-drawn chariot, which had sharp swords extending from the hubs of the wheels to slice up opposing foot soldiers. These awful war chariots generated great fear among the enemy.
It was during this pro-Semitic rule of the Hyksos in Egypt that Jacob and his family migrated to Egypt during Joseph's reign as administrator. After some time, the Egyptians were able to expel the Hyksos because they had adopted the new weapons that were introduced by the Hyksos invaders.
The Hittites: About 1450 B.C., the Hittites established themselves in eastern Asia Minor. They had developed an iron metallurgy which gave them improved weapons. Their horse-drawn chariots (inherited from the Hyksos) and iron-tipped spears and swords provided a strong military advantage and enabled them to expand their borders and conquer the people of central Asia Minor. The Hittite Empire included Syria, which had been lost to them by Egypt. Once again, superior military technology and the fear it generated among the enemy was the key to imperial expansion.
The Kingdom of Solomon
Shortly after 1200 B.C., an invasion of Indo-European peoples destroyed the Hittite empire. The chief importance of the Hittites was the culture they passed on to the Greeks (who settled along the Aegean coast of Asia Minor), and the knowledge of iron metallurgy which later gave the Philistines military dominance over the Israelites during the time of King Saul (1095-1055 B.C.).
Liberation of the area of Palestine from the hegemony of competing empires then allowed the Old Testament Israelites to grow and expand under the reigns of Kings Saul, David, and Solomon.
Solomon established an oriental-type, military-based empire similar to others in the Mideast. He maintained a formidable military force of 40,000 stalls of horses for chariots and 12,000 horsemen (I Kings 4:20-28). His harem numbered 700 wives and 300 concubines. Burdensome expenditures and impressed labor were used to erect a grandiose temple and house for himself (I Kings 6 & 7).
Under Solomon's rule, the democratic republic of the Hebrews was turned into an autocratic empire ("like other nations") which grew fat on wealth and tribute wrested from foreign nations. This was a typical growth-of-empire process that would be followed by other empires in the future. Gold and riches flowed into Solomon's empire, but the internal cost to ordinary citizens was heavy taxation and the loss of individual freedom.
Eventually, burdensome taxes motivated the Hebrew people to rebel during the reign of Solomon's son Reheboam (I Kings 12:16). This was a biblical/historical instance of the principle of governmental interposition through which God raises up an intermediate magistrate to rally the people against rulers who have turned tyrannical.
End Part I
http://www.sierratimes.com/06/12/18/Rose1.htm
(Gold9472: I found this to be fascinating.)
Tom Rose
12/18/2006
A deep division is occurring in America. It is dividing family members and friends into opposing ideological camps. The ideological split between previously gracious and forbearing individuals is caused by two aspects of growing statism :
First, America's military expansion overseas -- i.e., imperial hegemony; and
Second, the domestic growth of what is known as a security/police state -- i.e., the domestic program of government rulers to induce among the populace a ready acceptance of the idea of foreign imperialism through the generation of mass fear coupled with the forceful suppression of political dissent.
In one camp are those who claim the Bush Administration's pre-emptive invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq (and the proposed invasions of Lebanon, Syria, and Iran) are unconstitutional, unwise, unnecessary, and do nothing but inflame Islamic hatred of America. Some in this camp believe that President Bush does not possess true authority. They believe that the real power-brokers are the war-mongering Neoconservatives who, in turn, answer to the more shadowy rulers who seek to meld our American Republic into the international "New World Order." As you might have heard, recent surveys reveal that 36% of the American population now believe that the U.S. government had some hand in the "terrorist" attacks of 9/11 -- that it was an "inside job." According to this growing view, these attacks were allegedly contrived to justify the two-pronged policy of preemptive foreign war and the establishment of a domestic security/police state.
Included in the allegations of the first camp is that the present administration is being compromised by gross sexual immorality, as in the case of a homosexual pornographer who advertised himself as a male prostitute, and who had a pass to White House briefings and also had ready access to the private section of the White House. More recent is the exposure of pedophiles in Congress, like ex-Florida Congressmen Mark Foley, who quickly resigned when the fact of his illicit e-mails to young male congressional pages was made public. Such moral indiscretions demonstrate a clear weakness in political leadership during a time of war and national security.
The opposing camp argues, "No way!" They state that President Bush had an "experience" and is a "born again" Christian. They relate that Bush's political staff, during his first presidential campaign, told how Bush allegedly led a young teenager to Christ. Therefore, the President would not engage in any under-the-table maneuvers for political reasons. They argue that, instead of opposing President Bush's pre-emptive attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq, and his regime-change occupation of these countries, Americans should support him and the patriotic troops who are protecting America against "Islamic terrorism." And if future intelligence indicates that Iran is achieving nuclear capability, then Americans and her allies should uphold the President in his efforts "to protect our country" against this nuclear threat from radical Islamic leaders.
Perhaps the best way to shed light on this divisive subject is first to consider foreign imperialism and domestic statism in ancient history, and secondly, Great Britain, the greatest imperial nation of all times.
We will then consider these United States of America to see how our own country gradually became, though unrecognized by most Americans, a full-fledged imperial state overseas and a corresponding "Security/Police State" domestically.
Finally, we will evaluate the double-sided problem of foreign imperialism and domestic statism from a biblical perspective.
The issue of building empires, either domestic or foreign, is completely contrary to God's word. In man's first world empire-building attempt, the Tower of Babel, God confused the language and dispersed the people (Genesis 11:1-9). God's clear plan for civil government is for the establishment of small, democratic-republic civil units, not large, unitary dictator-type units (Exodus 18:13-26). To be biblical, America should abhor foreign possessions and international entanglements like the United Nations, NAFTA, etc.
Imperialism in Ancient History
A survey of ancient civilizations -- as cited by the Preacher in the book of Ecclesiastes -- shows "...there is no new thing under the sun" (1:9). Accordingly, it is not surprising to discover that civil rulers, from the earliest kingdoms to those of the present time, all wielded hegonomic power to expand their borders, by land or sea. Generally, the motive to attack other nations was to seize their wealth and to gain control of their natural resources, trade routes, or the seas.
Sometimes the motivation to make war on other nations was simply to eliminate them as competitors in trade. This was the case in Rome's long-continued attacks on Carthage during three Punic Wars (264-146 B.C.). "Carthago delenda est! " (" Carthage must be destroyed!") was the cry on Rome's senate floor by those who stood to benefit from war. A similar motivation was behind Britain's assaults against Germany leading to World War I because the "British Crown" feared competition from Germany's rapidly expanding industrial capability.
What we today call "special interests" were usually behind inciting a pro-war attitude among the public. It was so in early history, and it is so today. Even in early history, it was essential for empire builders to instill in the common people a willingness to sacrifice their lives and the lives of their children as "cannon fodder" to expand their country's imperialistic hegemony.
Here is a summary of key events of imperialistic hegemony in ancient history:
The Hyksos: Around 1720 B.C., the Hyksos, a Semitic people from Palestine, invaded the Delta area of Egypt and made all of Egypt tributary. The irresistible power of the Hyksos came from its temporary monopoly of two new weapons of war: the powerful composite-bow of wood and horn, and the much-feared horse-drawn chariot, which had sharp swords extending from the hubs of the wheels to slice up opposing foot soldiers. These awful war chariots generated great fear among the enemy.
It was during this pro-Semitic rule of the Hyksos in Egypt that Jacob and his family migrated to Egypt during Joseph's reign as administrator. After some time, the Egyptians were able to expel the Hyksos because they had adopted the new weapons that were introduced by the Hyksos invaders.
The Hittites: About 1450 B.C., the Hittites established themselves in eastern Asia Minor. They had developed an iron metallurgy which gave them improved weapons. Their horse-drawn chariots (inherited from the Hyksos) and iron-tipped spears and swords provided a strong military advantage and enabled them to expand their borders and conquer the people of central Asia Minor. The Hittite Empire included Syria, which had been lost to them by Egypt. Once again, superior military technology and the fear it generated among the enemy was the key to imperial expansion.
The Kingdom of Solomon
Shortly after 1200 B.C., an invasion of Indo-European peoples destroyed the Hittite empire. The chief importance of the Hittites was the culture they passed on to the Greeks (who settled along the Aegean coast of Asia Minor), and the knowledge of iron metallurgy which later gave the Philistines military dominance over the Israelites during the time of King Saul (1095-1055 B.C.).
Liberation of the area of Palestine from the hegemony of competing empires then allowed the Old Testament Israelites to grow and expand under the reigns of Kings Saul, David, and Solomon.
Solomon established an oriental-type, military-based empire similar to others in the Mideast. He maintained a formidable military force of 40,000 stalls of horses for chariots and 12,000 horsemen (I Kings 4:20-28). His harem numbered 700 wives and 300 concubines. Burdensome expenditures and impressed labor were used to erect a grandiose temple and house for himself (I Kings 6 & 7).
Under Solomon's rule, the democratic republic of the Hebrews was turned into an autocratic empire ("like other nations") which grew fat on wealth and tribute wrested from foreign nations. This was a typical growth-of-empire process that would be followed by other empires in the future. Gold and riches flowed into Solomon's empire, but the internal cost to ordinary citizens was heavy taxation and the loss of individual freedom.
Eventually, burdensome taxes motivated the Hebrew people to rebel during the reign of Solomon's son Reheboam (I Kings 12:16). This was a biblical/historical instance of the principle of governmental interposition through which God raises up an intermediate magistrate to rally the people against rulers who have turned tyrannical.
End Part I