If you don’t want anyone to know, don’t do it.
Chinese Proverb
Just like the rest of us, the Chinese have wisdom traditions they ignore. The Chinese do not want people to know they aspire to global dominance; but the more they take measures to achieve that end, the more people know it, and fear it.
The present climate characterized by secrecy, espionage, theft of intellectual property, cyber attacks, currency wars, and militarism, along with Chinese acquisition of gold and control of other resources globally, all serve to confirm Chinese ambitions.
In recent years, state-run semi-capitalism in China has prospered largely because their purposefully devalued yuan has paved the way for selling goods to Americans and Europeans at low prices. (It is estimated that Walmart imports from China each year about $30 billion in goods.) Concurrently, Americans have settled for lesser quality to take advantage of bargains. Cheap labor in China and the migration of American manufacturing to China have driven her remarkable rise economically.
Now that Americans and others are fed up with economic decline, it is said these countries are retaliating against China by devaluing their currencies. And further, it is said this currency war will likely be won by China, since China is the world’s largest gold producer. Also, China is running around buying gold and gold mines faster than a Bruce Lee roundhouse kick to the head.
Excerpt from a recent Reuters article: “There are indications that the early skirmishes of a currency war have begun. This is a dangerous business. If countries undercut their competitors’ prices by devaluing their currencies, the stability of the world economy is put at risk. A full-fledged currency war invites deflation, a ruinous downward spiral of prices that in turn invites a worldwide recession.”
And then there’s the matter of the Chinese holding and hording U.S. treasuries and dollars. It is said we owe the Chinese so much money, they essentially own us; and should they dump their dollars on the open market, hyper-inflation would destroy us. The more debt the Chinese allow Washington to incur, the more we hang ourselves, thanks to profligate spending by U.S. politicians and bureaucrats. We are hooked on the opium of debt and spending encouraged by Beijing. If they stop buying bonds to prop us up, we will have no more marbles on the checkerboard. Every time we raise the debt ceiling, lend an ear eastward and listen to Chinese cheers.
All this brings to mind the petro dollar.
In 1973, after we took our currency off the gold standard, to stave off the resulting collapse officials feared, Americans in government decided to do something pretty clever. Seeing Saudi Arabia as the largest source of the most valuable resource—oil—and noting the kingdom was basically defenseless, Americans made the Saudis an offer: we’ll protect you for all time, if you agree (and get the other Arab nations to agree) that only U.S. dollars will be accepted as payment for oil.
The deal was struck, and the petro dollar was born. This of course buttressed U.S. currency like crazy, relieving the threat of declining confidence after forsaking the gold standard.
But guess what happened on September 6, 2012?
According to Examiner.com, ”China announced its intention to bypass the dollar for global oil customers and began selling the commodity using their own currency. The most significant day in the history of the American dollar, since its inception, happened on Thursday, Sept. 6, 2012. On that day, something took place that is going to affect your life, your family, your dinner table more than you can possibly imagine.”
So you see, America is on the brink. We are being eclipsed and conquered thanks to an economic war we don’t even know about. With the collapse of the American dollar, the Chinese win.
On top of winning the currency war, the Chinese have been forming alliances and buying up and controlling resources worldwide. What good is preeminence if you can’t hold on to it right?
And what has the American government done to protect American security, liberty, and prosperity? Next to nothing. Instead, our government has continued the orgy of spending and the running up of debt that plays right into Chinese hands.
Wisdom we thoroughly ignore, not lost on the Chinese:
The rich rule over the poor, and the borrower is slave to the lender.
Proverbs 22:7
Allan Erickson enjoyed an 11-year career in radio, television and print journalism as a reporter, talk show host, and operations manager. He then turned to sales and marketing for a decade. Ten years ago he started his own training and recruitment company in the Pacific Northwest. Allan & wife Jodi have four children and live in California. He is also the author of “The Cross & the Constitution in the Age of Incoherence,” Tate Publishing, 2012.
Loading ...
Building On The Secular Case For Traditional Marriage
Is there a strong secular case to be made for the state’s exclusive recognition of traditional marriage? If so, any arguments for a deviation from this accepted, well-established standard should be equally as compelling.
Please consider this brief introductory summary in support of traditional marriage. The case made is purely a secular one. [Note: Featured quotes are that of Iowa Congressman Steve King, whose sentiments were recently featured in National Review Online].
First, there was never a need to officially or explicitly define marriage as an exclusive institution between man and woman. It was understood. As it stands, “To marry, two people must prove they are of opposite sex, not related, of age, and not married to anyone else.”
It is vital that we fully understand the historical precedent behind government’s recognition of such a uniquely designed and specifically defined category/status/classification (i.e. marital). Ultimately, there must be a widespread societal benefit, based on ‘credible and relevant empirical evidence,’ to justify governmental support and/or recognition (which is specifically what Chief Justice John Roberts has requested as the matter comes before the Supreme Court).
Demands for specials exceptions based on personal perceptions of entitlement should not be the primary driver of public policy. It’s these personal demands that have enabled the legalized slaughter better known as abortion. Where is the equality in such barbarism? If advocates of same sex marriages truly seek ‘equality,’ they may want to make the rights of defenseless infants part of their social/political platform and agendas. Regardless, the established reality remains: “There is no requirement for proof of enduring love, comingling of finances, or even intent to cohabitate. To ask the government to certify any of those things would offend all Americans who jealously guard their individual autonomy.”
There’s a reason why the government has never permitted relatives to marry, nor upheld the legality of polygamy. However, baseless propaganda efforts are tactically deeming those who remain exclusively committed to traditional marriage “phobes.” Their efforts are breeding an atmosphere by which even the most reasoned restrictions will not go unchallenged.
Before we enable calculated slander to shape public opinion and force the hand of government, we must carefully examine the health statistics, in particular the high incidences of STDs among the gay community (as verified by the CDC). We are living in a day where government is being forced to comply to the special interests of fringe minority groups at the expense of a time-honored, clinically proven gold standard.
Traditional marriage is the naturally and scientifically verifiable familial foundation (defined gender roles: woman/wife/mother-man/husband/father). On what grounds is THIS essential biological/foundational model overridden? Ultimately, ”government has a compelling interest in a legal record of procreation (this is further indicated by the doctrine of presumed paternity), and in creating a lasting environment where children will thrive. The fact that one must obtain a court order to divorce and the existence of tax-based incentives for marriage are other effects of the government’s interest in marriage.”
What is the justification for dismissing these realities? And why would polygamy and incestuous marriages remain exempt under this new model?
These are questions that must be definitively answered before this is taken any further.
Marriage cannot be redefined without recklessly dismissing the essential natural realities that have shaped our culture for centuries. Sound decision-makers must apply reasoned analysis to reaffirm that “Marriage is the stable platform from which families are launched.” Just as important is the clarity achieved with the realization that “Government surely has a compelling interest in ensuring the stability of that platform…”
A stable and successful nuclear family dynamic has always been the central barometer indicative of a thriving America. That dynamic is in danger of being methodically and irresponsibly dismantled.
But lets not stop here. We need to follow the demands for same sex marriage to its ‘illogical’ conclusion.
It seems we are headed down a disturbing path in which ‘equal’ = ‘same’. It’s as if we are being pressured to relinquish any adherence to or acceptance of defined gender roles altogether. Gender distinctions are becoming obsolete as the roles become more and more interchangeable.
We are beginning to be confronted with a variety of unforseen and pecuiliar scenarios. Calls for equality are coming from multitple directions and threaten to shake our foundations. Actually, our foundations are being tested to see if they are sound as the opposition seeks cracks or weaknesses they can exploit.
We are swiftly entering a realm where the question will be asked: Should there be any limits or restrictions in any area of life based on gender? As the quest for full equality advances, will we be forced to dismiss the idea of gender roles altogether? And if a genderless society becomes the ‘new normal,’ will all boundaries and distinctions be removed? Will gender-based expectations become a mere reminder of a ‘repressive’ social standard held in former days?
As gender-based barriers and restrictions evaporate, we will be ‘free’ to raise our sons to play with dolls and wear dresses, while a man who perceives himself a female will be able to freely take part in all aspects of female-oriented activities – and vice versa.
In a ‘genderless’ society, the marriage institution must remain open and available to all forms of alternative arrangement. Once a nontraditional precedent is set, we may no longer logically place any restrictions on a marriage arrangement, since to do so would be discrimination. No longer will there be a reasonable way for a line to be drawn.
The recognition of same sex marriage ultimately sets a precedent in which gender roles and human desires are relative and accessible, based on a form of equality that removes naturally defining qualifications as needed. A greater ‘good’ is being promoted in the name of ‘sameness’ via state-sanctioned opportunities that neutralize defining characteristics for the sake of fairness.
Are we sure we want to go down this road?
* I dedicate ‘Building on the Secular Case’ to Mr. Bill O’Reilly, on behalf of “Bible Thumpers” everywhere.
Photo credit: loungerie (Creative Commons)