Friday, March 5, 2010
Robert Bruce Reckmeyer
March 5th 2010
My Plan for a Freedom President – How I would put the Constitution back in the Oval Office – Ron Paul
Since my 2008 campaign for the presidency I have often been asked, “How would a constitutionalist president go about dismantling the welfare-warfare state and restoring a constitutional republic?” This is a very important question, because without a clear road map and set of priorities, such a president runs the risk of having his pro-freedom agenda stymied by the various vested interests that benefit from big government.
Of course, just as the welfare-warfare state was not constructed in 100 days, it could not be dismantled in the first 100 days of any presidency. While our goal is to reduce the size of the state as quickly as possible, we should always make sure our immediate proposals minimize social disruption and human suffering. Thus, we should not seek to abolish the social safety net overnight because that would harm those who have grown dependent on government-provided welfare. Instead, we would want to give individuals who have come to rely on the state time to prepare for the day when responsibility for providing aide is returned to those organizations best able to administer compassionate and effective help – churches and private charities.
Now, this need for a transition period does not apply to all types of welfare. For example, I would have no problem defunding corporate welfare programs, such as the Export-Import Bank or the TARP bank bailouts, right away. I find it difficult to muster much sympathy for the CEO’s of Lockheed Martin and Goldman Sachs.
No matter what the president wants to do, most major changes in government programs would require legislation to be passed by Congress. Obviously, the election of a constitutionalist president would signal that our ideas had been accepted by a majority of the American public and would probably lead to the election of several pro-freedom congressmen and senators. Furthermore, some senators and representatives would become “born again” constitutionalists out of a sense of self-preservation. Yet there would still be a fair number of politicians who would try to obstruct our freedom agenda. Thus, even if a president wanted to eliminate every unconstitutional program in one fell swoop, he would be very unlikely to obtain the necessary support in Congress.
Yet a pro-freedom president and his legislative allies could make tremendous progress simply by changing the terms of the negotiations that go on in Washington regarding the size and scope of government. Today, negotiations over legislation tend to occur between those who want a 100 percent increase in federal spending and those who want a 50 percent increase. Their compromise is a 75 percent increase. With a president serious about following the Constitution, backed by a substantial block of sympathetic representatives in Congress, negotiations on outlays would be between those who want to keep funding the government programs and those who want to eliminate them outright – thus a compromise would be a 50 percent decrease in spending!
While a president who strictly adheres to the Constitution would need the consent of Congress for very large changes in the size of government, such as shutting down cabinet departments, he could use his constitutional authority as head of the executive branch and as commander in chief to take several significant steps toward liberty on his own. The area where the modern chief executive has greatest ability to act unilaterally is in foreign affairs. Unfortunately, Congress has abdicated its constitutional authority to declare wars, instead passing vague “authorization of force” bills that allow the president to send any number of troops to almost any part of the world. The legislature does not even effectively use its power of the purse to rein in the executive. Instead, Congress serves as little more than a rubber stamp for the president’s requests.
If the president has the power to order U.S. forces into combat on nothing more than his own say-so, then it stands to reason he can order troops home. Therefore, on the first day in office, a constitutionalist can begin the orderly withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq and Afghanistan. He can also begin withdrawing troops from other areas of the world. The United States has over 300,000 troops stationed in more than 146 countries. Most if not all of these deployments bear little or no relationship to preserving the safety of the American people. For example, over 20 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the U.S. still maintains troops in Germany.
Domestically, the president can use his authority to set policies and procedures for the federal bureaucracy to restore respect for the Constitution and individual liberty. For example, today manufacturers of dietary supplements are subject to prosecution by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or Federal Trade Commission (FTC) if they make even truthful statements about the health benefits of their products without going through the costly and time-consuming procedures required to gain government approval for their claims. A president can put an end to this simply by ordering the FDA and FTC not to pursue these types of cases unless they have clear evidence that the manufacturer’s clams are not true. Similarly, the president could order the bureaucracy to stop prosecuting consumers who wish to sell raw milk across state lines.
A crucial policy that a president could enact to bring speedy improvements to government is ordering the bureaucracy to respect the 10th Amendment and refrain from undermining state laws. We have already seen a little renewed federalism with the current administration’s policy of not prosecuting marijuana users when their use of the drug is consistent with state medical-marijuana laws. A constitutionalist administration would also defer to state laws refusing compliance with the REAL ID act and denying federal authority over interstate gun transactions. None of these actions repeals a federal law; they all simply recognize a state’s primary authority, as protected by the 10th amendment, to set policy in these areas.
In fact, none of the measures I have discussed so far involves repealing any written law. They can be accomplished simply by a president exercising his legitimate authority to set priorities for the executive branch. And another important step he can take toward restoring the balance of powers the Founders intended is repealing unconstitutional executive orders issued by his predecessors.
Executive orders are a useful management tool for the president, who must exercise control over the enormous federal bureaucracy. However, in recent years executive orders have been used by presidents to create new federal laws without the consent of Congress. As President Clinton’s adviser Paul Begala infamously said, “stroke of the pen, law of the land, pretty cool.” No, it is not “pretty cool,” and a conscientious president could go a long way toward getting us back to the Constitution’s division of powers by ordering his counsel or attorney general to comb through recent executive orders so the president can annul those that exceed the authority of his office. If the President believed a particular Executive Order made a valid change in the law, then he should work with Congress to pass legislation making that change.
Only Congress can directly abolish government departments, but the president could use his managerial powers to shrink the federal bureaucracy by refusing to fill vacancies created by retirements or resignations. This would dramatically reduce the number of federal officials wasting our money and taking our liberties. One test to determine if a vacant job needs to be filled is the “essential employees test.” Whenever D.C. has a severe snowstorm, the federal government orders all “non-essential” federal personal to stay home. If someone is classified as non-essential for snow-day purposes, the country can probably survive if that position is not filled when the jobholder quits or retires. A constitutionalist president should make every day in D.C. like a snow day!
A president could also enhance the liberties and security of the American people by ordering federal agencies to stop snooping on citizens when there is no evidence that those who are being spied on have committed a crime. Instead, the president should order agencies to refocus on the legitimate responsibilities of the federal government, such as border security. He should also order the Transportation Security Administration to stop strip-searching grandmothers and putting toddlers on the no-fly list. The way to keep Americans safe is to focus on real threats and ensure that someone whose own father warns U.S. officials he’s a potential terrorist is not allowed to board a Christmas Eve flight to Detroit with a one-way ticket.
Perhaps the most efficient step a president could take to enhance travel security is to remove the federal roadblocks that have frustrated attempts to arm pilots. Congress created provisions to do just that in response to the attacks of September 11, 2001. However, the processes for getting a federal firearms license are extremely cumbersome, and as a result very few pilots have gotten their licenses. A constitutionalist in the Oval Office would want to revise those regulations to make it as easy as possible for pilots to get approval to carry firearms on their planes.
While the president can do a great deal on his own, to really restore the Constitution and cut back on the vast unconstitutional programs that have sunk roots in Washington over 60 years, he will have to work with Congress. The first step in enacting a pro-freedom legislative agenda is the submission of a budget that outlines the priorities of the administration. While it has no legal effect, the budget serves as a guideline for the congressional appropriations process. A constitutionalist president’s budget should do the following:
Reduce overall federal spending
Prioritize cuts in oversize expenditures, especially the military
Prioritize cuts in corporate welfare
Use 50 percent of the savings from cuts in overseas spending to shore up entitlement programs for those who are dependent on them and the other 50 percent to pay down the debt
Provide for reduction in federal bureaucracy and lay out a plan to return responsibility for education to the states
Begin transitioning entitlement programs from a system where all Americans are forced to participate into one where taxpayers can opt out of the programs and make their own provisions for retirement and medical care
If Congress failed to produce a budget that was balanced and moved the country in a pro-liberty direction, a constitutionalist president should veto the bill. Of course, vetoing the budget risks a government shutdown. But a serious constitutionalist cannot be deterred by cries of “it’s irresponsible to shut down the government!” Instead, he should simply say, “I offered a reasonable compromise, which was to gradually reduce spending, and Congress rejected it, instead choosing the extreme path of continuing to jeopardize America’s freedom and prosperity by refusing to tame the welfare-warfare state. I am the moderate; those who believe that America can afford this bloated government are the extremists.”
Unconstitutional government spending, after all, is doubly an evil: it not only means picking the taxpayer’s pocket, it also means subverting the system of limited and divided government that the Founders created. Just look at how federal spending has corrupted American education.
Eliminating federal involvement in K–12 education should be among a constitutionalist president’s top domestic priorities. The Constitution makes no provision for federal meddling in education. It is hard to think of a function less suited to a centralized, bureaucratic approach than education. The very idea that a group of legislators and bureaucrats in D.C. can design a curriculum capable of meeting the needs of every American schoolchild is ludicrous. The deteriorating performance of our schools as federal control over the classroom has grown shows the folly of giving Washington more power over American education. President Bush’s No Child Left Behind law claimed it would fix education by making public schools “accountable.” However, supporters of the law failed to realize that making schools more accountable to federal agencies, instead of to parents, was just perpetuating the problem.
In the years since No Child Left Behind was passed, I don’t think I have talked to any parent or teacher who is happy with the law. Therefore, a constitutionalist president looking for ways to improve the lives of children should demand that Congress cut the federal education bureaucracy as a down payment on eventually returning 100 percent of the education dollar to parents.
Traditionally, the battle to reduce the federal role in education has been the toughest one faced by limited-government advocates, as supporters of centralized education have managed to paint constitutionalists as “anti-education.” But who is really anti-education? Those who wish to continue to waste taxpayer money on failed national schemes, or those who want to restore control over education to the local level? When the debate is framed this way, I have no doubt the side of liberty will win. When you think about it, the argument that the federal government needs to control education is incredibly insulting to the American people, for it implies that the people are too stupid or uncaring to educate their children properly. Contrary to those who believe that only the federal government can ensure children’s education, I predict a renaissance in education when parents are put back in charge.
The classroom is not the only place the federal government does not belong. We also need to reverse the nationalization of local police. Federal grants have encouraged the militarization of law enforcement, which has led to great damage to civil liberties. Like education, law enforcement is inherently a local function, and ending programs such as the Byrne Grants is essential not just to reducing federal spending but also to restoring Americans’ rights.
Obviously, a president concerned with restoring constitutional government and fiscal responsibility would need to address the unstable entitlement situation, possibly the one area of government activity even more difficult to address than education. Yet it is simply unfair to continue to force young people to participate in a compulsory retirement program when they could do a much better job of preparing for their own retirements. What is more, the government cannot afford the long-term expenses of entitlements, even if we were to reduce all other unconstitutional foreign and domestic programs.
As I mentioned in the introduction to this article, it would be wrong simply to cut these programs and throw those who are dependent on them “into the streets.” After all, the current recipients of these programs have come to rely on them, and many are in a situation where they cannot provide for themselves without government assistance. The thought of people losing the ability to obtain necessities for them because they were misled into depending on a government safety net that has been yanked away from them should trouble all of us. However, the simple fact is that if the government does not stop spending money on welfare and warfare, America may soon face an economic crisis that could lead to people being thrown into the street.
Therefore, a transition away from the existing entitlement scheme is needed. This is why a constitutionalist president should propose devoting half of the savings from the cuts in wars and other foreign spending, corporate welfare, and unnecessary and unconstitutional bureaucracies to shoring up Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid and providing enough money to finance government’s obligations to those who are already stuck in the system and cannot make alternative provisions. This re-routing of spending would allow payroll taxes to be slashed. The eventual goal would be to move to a completely voluntary system where people only pay payroll taxes into Social Security and Medicare if they choose to participate in those programs. Americans who do not want to participate would be free not to do so, but they would forgo any claim to Social Security or Medicare benefits after retirement.
Some people raise concerns that talk of transitions is an excuse for indefinitely putting off the end of the welfare state. I understand those concerns, which is why a transition plan must lay out a clear timetable for paying down the debt, eliminating unconstitutional bureaucracies, and setting a firm date for when young people can at last opt out of the entitlement programs.
A final area that should be front and center in a constitutionalist’s agenda is monetary policy. The Founders obviously did not intend for the president to have much influence over the nation’s money – in fact, they never intended any part of the federal government to operate monetary policy as it defined now. However, today a president could play an important role in restoring stability to monetary policy and the value of the dollar. To start, by fighting for serious reductions in spending, a constitutionalist administration would remove one of the major justifications for the Federal Reserve’s inflationary policies, the need to monetize government debt.
There are additional steps a pro-freedom president should pursue in his first term to restore sound monetary policy. He should ask Congress to pass two pieces of legislation I have introduced in the 110th Congress. The first is the Audit the Fed bill, which would allow the American people to learn just how the Federal Reserve has been conducting monetary policy. The other is the Free Competition in Currency Act, which repeals legal tender laws and all taxes on gold and silver. This would introduce competition in currency and put a check on the Federal Reserve by ensuring that people have alternatives to government-produced fiat money.
All of these measures will take a lot of work – a lot more than any one person, even the president of the United States, can accomplish by himself. In order to restore the country to the kind of government the Founders meant for us to have, a constitutionalist president would need the support of an active liberty movement. Freedom activists must be ready to pressure wavering legislators to stand up to the special interests and stay the course toward freedom. Thus, when the day comes when someone who shares our beliefs sits in the Oval Office, groups like Young Americans for Liberty and Campaign for Liberty will still have a vital role to play. No matter how many pro-freedom politicians we elect to office, the only way to guarantee constitutional government is through an educated and activist public devoted to the ideals of the liberty.
For that reason, the work of Young Americans for Liberty in introducing young people to the freedom philosophy and getting them involved in the freedom movement is vital to the future of our country. I thank all the members and supporters of YAL for their dedication to changing the political debate in this country, so that in the not-too-distant future we actually will have a president and a Congress debating the best ways to shrink the welfare-warfare state and restore the republic.
This essay originally appeared in Young American Revolution, the magazine of Young Americans for Liberty.
Source: Lew Rockwell
Robert Bruce Reckmeyer
America's Permanent War Agenda
March 5th 2010
We are the generation who have incarnated to change the system from death and destruction (ritual blood sacrifice) to the Brotherhood of Man. If this resonates with your higher self then now is the time to meditate on your role and do what you have come here to do. We must participate in this great work and set up a new civilization based on; love, compassion, empathy and inner peace.
I encourage all of humanity to rise up and demand that the killing stop. We must deconstruct the perpetual war agenda and take back our power so we might enjoy the free gift of life. Those who oppose freedom (for all of humanity) must be neutralized.
America's Permanent War Agenda
By Stephen Lendman
Post-9/11, Dick Cheney warned of wars that won't end in our lifetime. Former CIA Director James Woolsey said America "is engaged in World War IV, and it could continue for years....This fourth world war, I think, will last considerably longer than either World Wars I or II did for us." GHW Bush called it a "New World Order" in his September 11, 1990 address to a joint session of Congress as he prepared the public for Operation Desert Storm.
The Pentagon called it the "long war" in its 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), what past administrations waged every year without exception since the republic's birth, at home and abroad. Obama is just the latest of America's warrior presidents that included Washington, Madison, Jackson, Lincoln, T. Roosevelt, Wilson, F. Roosevelt, Truman, Johnson, Nixon, Reagan, GHW Bush, Clinton, and GW Bush preceding him.
This article covers WW II and its aftermath history of imperial wars for unchallengeable global dominance throughout a period when America had and still has no enemies. Then why fight them? Read on.
Wars Without End
America glorifies wars in the name of peace, what historian Charles Beard (1874 - 1948) called "perpetual war for perpetual peace" in describing the Roosevelt and Truman administrations' foreign policies - what concerned the Federation of American Scientists when it catalogued about 200 post-1945 conflicts in which America was, and still is, the aggressor.
Historian Gore Vidal used Beard's phrase in titling his 2002 book, "Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace" and saying:
"our rulers for more than half a century have made sure that we are never to be told the truth about anything that our government has done to other people, not to mention our own."
In his 2002 book "Dreaming War," he compared GW Bush's imperial ambitions to WW II and the 1947 Truman Doctrine's pledge:
"To support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures."
It was to keep Greece and Turkey from going communist, but it applied globally and initiated America's National Security State strategy that included:
-- NATO in 1949 for offense, not defense;
-- NSC-68 against Soviet Russia in 1950 to "contain" what was called an enemy "unlike previous aspirants to hegemony....animated by a new fanatic faith, antithetical to our own (wishing to) impose its absolute authority over the rest of the world" at a time America was the only global superpower, the Soviet Union lay in ruins, threatened no one, and needed years to regain normality.
-- Truman's instigated June 25, 1950 war after the DPRK retaliated in force following months of ROK provocations, what Americans call the Korean War, South Koreans the 6-2-5 War (meaning June 25), and the North its "fatherland liberation war" that left it in ruins, the South occupied to this day, and it was only the mid-century beginning as succeeding administrations continued an agenda for what's now called "full spectrum dominance" for global US hegemony.
It worried historian Harry Elmer Barnes (1889 - 1968) in his 1953 collection of leading historical revisionists' essays titled, "Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace: A Critical Examination of the Foreign Policy of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and It's Aftermath" in which he wrote in the preface:
"If trends continue as they have during the last fifteen years, we shall soon reach this point of no return, and can only anticipate interminable wars, disguised as noble gestures for peace. Such an era could only culminate in a third world war which might well, as Arnold J. Toynbee has suggested, leave only the pygmies in remote jungles, or even the apes and ants, to carry on 'the cultural traditions' of mankind."
He cited how America's "needless" entry into two world wars converted its pre-1914 dream "into a nightmare of fear, regimentation, destruction, insecurity, inflation, and ultimate insolvency." He debunked the cause and merits of WW I, "the folly of our entering it, and the disastrous results that followed." He cited "popular fictions" about WW II, the injustices to Germany and Austria that caused it, the war Roosevelt wanted early in the 1930s as captured Polish documents and the censored Forrestal Diaries confirmed.
Before it began, he wanted US neutrality legislation ended, then after September 1939, he dropped any pretense by supporting Britain and France and opposing peace efforts after Poland's defeat. His June 1940 "dagger in the back" address was a de facto act of war by beginning vast amounts of weapons and munitions shipments to Britain after Dunkirk, followed by the September 1940 (peacetime) Selective Service Act, the first in US history, in preparation for what close advisor Harry Hopkins told Churchill in January 1941 that:
"The President is determined that we shall win the war together. Make no mistake about it," followed by Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Harold Stark telling his fleet commanders that "The question of our entry into the war now seems to be when, and not whether."
Only a pretext was needed, first by trying and failing to provoke Germany, then deciding Japan would be attacked, whether or not it struck US ships, territory, or forces in the Pacific. In a July 4 radio broadcast, Roosevelt said:
"solemnly (understand) that the United States will never survive as a happy and fertile oasis of liberty surrounded by a cruel desert of dictatorship." Then his July 25 Executive Order froze Japanese assets, stating it was:
"....To prevent the use of the financial facilities of the United States in trade between Japan and the United States in ways harmful to national defense and American interests, to prevent the liquidation in the United States of assets obtained by duress or conquest, and to curb subversive activities in the United States."
Britain followed suit the next day, and Roosevelt nationalized the Philippines' armed forces "as Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States" with dominion over its Asian colony.
As early as 1937, he planned a naval blockade, but dropped the idea after an adverse reaction. It resurfaced in 1938 because he knew strangling Japan economically assured war.
Throughout his administration, from 1933 through late 1941, he spurned Japanese peace overtures that would have protected all American interests in the Pacific. By November 25, the final die was cast. America chose war, and on that day, War Secretary Henry Stimson wrote in his diary that it depended only on how to maneuver Japan to attack with the lowest number of US casualties.
Tokyo had no other recourse, knowing it couldn't win, but hoping for a negotiated settlement to solidify whatever Asian control it could retain. It failed, lost the war, and remains an occupied US vassal state.
In the late 1930s, Roosevelt encouraged a Japanese attack by stationing the Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor against the advice of two key admirals, James Richardson, Pacific Fleet commander and Harold Stark, Chief of Naval Operations until March 1942.
Selling arms to Japan's enemies and an embargo assured war, and US cable documentation confirmed it was coming. Breaking the Japanese code let Britain and Washington track its fleet from the Kurile Islands to its North Pacific refueling point en route to Pearl Harbor on or about December 7.
At a December 5 cabinet meeting, Navy Secretary Frank Knox said: "Well, you know Mr. President, we know where the Japanese fleet is?"
"Yes, I know," responded Roosevelt, saying "Well, you tell them what it is Frank," who explained where it was, where it was heading until Roosevelt interrupted adding that perfect information wasn't available in spite of navy reports confirming it in Pacific waters heading toward Hawaii. On December 6, officials awaited the attack until it came the next morning at 7:55AM Hawaii time.
It was a day of infamy and deceit, with Pearl Harbor's commander, Admiral HE Kimmel, denied crucial intelligence to let it proceed unimpeded, arouse public anger, and give FDR his war - one decoded Japanese messages showed they didn't want but Roosevelt gave them no choice.
Like other presidents, he lied the country into war against the wishes of 80% of the public, at a cost of millions of lives in both theaters, and a policy henceforth of perpetual wars for perpetual peace to achieve unchallengeable US dominance. In the modern era, FDR's foreign policy began it, leaving a bankrupted moral and political legacy active to this day.
Consider also what revisionist historians say about Lincoln - that he provoked the Fort Sumpter (in Charleston, SC harbor) attack and began the Civil War for economic reasons, not to end slavery.
Consider also that ordinary people and soldiers don't want war, just their leaders and commanders - to wit, Christmas 1914 during WW I when German and British troops stopped fighting, didn't know why they were doing it, then defied orders by fraternizing with each other for two weeks despite risking being court-martialed. Unable to stop them, their officers joined them in a celebratory pause that didn't stop another three years of carnage, millions of lost lives, and post-war policies that assured WW II.
The lesson is clear. All wars are immoral, unnecessary, and only happen when one side provokes the other for reasons unrelated to national security threats.
In his seminal book, "A Century of War," Gabriel Kolko called the 20th century:
"the bloodiest in all history. More than 170 million people were killed," 70% of whom in WW II were civilians, "mainly (from) the bombing of cities by Great Britain and America." There was nothing good about "the good war" nor any others.
In Kolko's later book "Another Century of War," he stressed how America contributes to much of the world's disorder through its interventions and as the world's largest arms producer and exporter. Post-WW II, the US became a global menace, today claiming "terrorism" as the main threat - a bogus fiction to justify militarism, perpetual wars heading the nation for moral, political and economic bankruptcy. According to Kolko:
"The way America's leaders are running the nation's foreign policy is not creating peace or security at home or stability abroad. The reverse is the case: its interventions have been counterproductive."
In his newest book, "The World in Crisis," Kolko believes that America's decline "began after the Korean War, was continued in relation to Cuba, and was greatly accelerated in Vietnam - but (GW Bush did) much to exacerbate it further." He also thinks:
-- US power is declining everywhere;
-- "the world is no longer dependent on its economic might" because other nations like China and India are growing and may some day equal or surpass America;
-- after the Soviet Union's collapse, "the absence of identifiable foes has been a disaster, leaving the US aimless - (so) it picks and chooses enemies: rag-tag Afghan tribesmen, Iraqis or all sorts, perhaps China, perhaps Russia....South American caudillos," whatever bogus ones can be invented for imperial wars, but the justification is wearing thin, and the burgeoning cost unsustainable.
The result is that America's "century of domination is now ending."
America's Permanent War Economy
It's how Seymour Melman (1917 - 2004) characterized it in his books and frequents writings on America's military-industrial complex. One of his last articles was titled "In the Grip of a Permanent War Economy (CounterPunch, March 15, 2003) in which he said:
"at the start of the twenty-first century, every major aspect of American life is being shaped by our Permanent War Economy." He then examined the horrific toll:
-- a de-industrialized nation, the result of decades of shifting production abroad leaving unions and communities "decimated;"
-- government financing and promoting "every kind of war industry and foreign investing by US firms;" war priorities take precedence over essential homeland needs;
-- America's "Permanent War Economy....has endured since the end of World War II....Since then the US has been at war - somewhere - every year, in Korea, Nicaragua, Vietnam, the Balkans, Afghanistan - all this to the accompaniment of shorter military forays in Africa, Chile, Grenada, Panama," and increasingly at home against its own people;
-- "how to make war" takes precedence over everything leaving no "public space....on how to improve the quality of our lives;"
-- "Shortages of housing have caused a swelling of the homeless population in every major city (because) State and city governments across the country have become trained to bend to the needs of the military....;" the Chicago Coalition for the Homeless (CCH) currently estimates over 21,000 are on city streets nightly, and during winter months it's dangerous;
-- the result is a nation of growing millions of poor, disadvantaged, uneducated, and "disconnected from society's mainstream, restless and unhappy, frustrated, angry, and sad;"
"State Capitalism" characterizes America's government - business partnership running a war economy for greater power and wealth at the expense of a nation in decline, corrupted leadership, lost industrialization, crumbling infrastructure, and suffering millions on their own, uncared for, unwanted, ignored, and forgotten.
Melman stressed that:
"Further evasion is out of order. We must come to grips with America's State Capitalism and its Permanent War Economy." Re-industrialization is essential "to restore jobs and production competence - industry by industry."
"Failing that, there is no hope for any constructive exit," for the nation or its people.
Dwight Eisenhower's January 17, 1961 Address to the Nation
It was his farewell address delivered 30 years to the day before Operation Desert Storm began in which he warned about the "military-industrial complex," citing the "grave implications" of a "coalition of the military and industrialists who profit by manufacturing arms and selling them to the government."
He stated "we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence....by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."
He also said that:
"Every gun that is made, every war ship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, from those who are cold and not clothed," the result of what some analysts call the "iron triangle" of Congress, the Pentagon, and the defense industry that includes producers of sophisticated technology for digital age warfare of a kind Eisenhower never imagined.
In combination, they've addicted America to war, not for threats, but for the power and profits that result. In his book "The Political Economy of US Militarism," Professor Ismael Hossein-Zadeh refers to "parasitic military imperialism," consuming over 40% of the national tax revenue at the expense of unmet human needs.
Morality aside, it's not justified economically. It's wasteful, inefficient, comes at a great cost, and over time is ineffective and self-destructive.
"The control over huge amounts of national resources tends to lead to an undermining of democratic values, a perversion of republican principles and a reduction of civil freedoms, as well as to the political corruption at home and abroad." Moreover, "The constant need for international conflicts makes (America's) military imperialism....more dangerous than the imperial powers of the past."
It's made war-making a giant enterprise "not only for expansionism but, in fact, for the survival of this empire," yet consider the fallout Hossein-Zadeh examined in a July 10, 2007 article titled, "Parasitic Imperialism:"
-- the redistribution of income and resources to the wealthy;
-- the undermining of physical and human capital;
-- the nation's increased vulnerability to natural disasters;
-- economic and financial instability, the result of the growing national debt now totally out of control;
-- less foreign market potential for non-military ventures;
-- the undermining of civil liberties and democratic values; and
-- "foster(ing) a dependence on or addiction to military spending, and, therefore....a spiraling vicious circle of (unsustainable) war and militarism" that's sucking the nation into decline.
America's Post-WW II Imperial Grand Strategy
Post-WW II, America emerged as the world's sole superpower - economically, politically and militarily, given the war's toll on East Asia, Europe and Soviet Russia. In his book, "The Cold War and the New Imperialism," Professor Henry Heller examined it with emphasis on the Cold War, America's containment policy, and its efforts against leftist forces in support of fascist elements on the right at both state and local levels.
The Soviet Union controlled Eastern and Central Europe while Mao's War of Liberation defeated Chiang Kai-Shek Nationalists. Cold War confrontation followed. It pitted US imperialism against an opposing ideology, the aim being which side would triumph or could both co-exist peacefully and avoid conflict.
War was never an option given each side's nuclear strength under a policy of "mutually assured destruction (MAD)". In addition, post-Stalinist Russia began reforms and expanded its sphere of influence. It wasn't to destroy the West, but to co-exist equally. America and Soviet Russia only competed for developing country allies to keep them from the opposing camp, so neither would be dominated by the other or more vulnerable to being isolated, marginalized, or shut out from world markets and influence.
US Imperialism Post-WW II
James Petras and others have said behind every imperial war is a great lie, the more often repeated the more likely to be believed because ordinary people want peace, not conflict, so it's vital to convince them.
In the 1950s, the Eisenhower administration overthrew two popularly elected governments in Iran and Guatemala, and sought greater influence in Africa and Southeast Asia as anti-colonial movements gained strength.
On January 1, 1959 Fidel Castro's socialist revolution ousted the US-backed Batista dictatorship. He then survived America's failed 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion, but faced decades of US hostility, including an embargo, destabilization, intimidation, and hundreds of attempts to kill him, unsuccessful so Cuba is still free from US dominance, but hardly safe from its northern hegemon.
In the 1950s, America also backed French Southeast Asian imperialism until defeat at Dien Bien Phu drove them out. A repressive South Vietnamese client regime was established at the same time, supported by US military advisors teaching war and repression tactics. Unifying North and South elections were blocked, and direct intervention began in 1961. In 1958, Washington also subverted Laotian democracy and incited civil war. Cambodia as well was targeted but remained free.
Early in his administration, Kennedy intervened, but a new James Douglass book titled "JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters" says without conviction because he opposed using force. After the Joint Chiefs demanded troops for Laos, he told his Geneva Conference representative, Averell Harriman:
"Did you understand? I want a negotiated settlement in Laos. I don't want to put troops in."
He wouldn't agree to using nuclear weapons in Berlin and Southeast Asia and refused to bomb or invade Cuba during the 1962 missile crisis, saying afterwards that "I never had the slightest intention of doing so."
In June 1963 (a few months before his assassination), he called for the abolition of nuclear weapons, ending the Cold War, and moving forward for "general and complete disarmament." In October 1963, he signed National Security Action Memorandum (NSAM) 263 to withdraw 1,000 US forces from Vietnam by year end and all of them by 1965. He said he wanted "to splinter the CIA in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds." He wanted peace, not conflicts. It cost him his life, and future presidents got the message.
Johnson resumed Southeast Asian escalation to establish client regimes and military bases across East and South Asia, encircle China, and crush nationalist anti-imperial movements. The Indochinese war engulfed Cambodia and Laos as well under Johnson and Nixon. It killed three to four million, inflicted vast amounts of destruction, caused incalculable human suffering, got America to sign a peace treaty in January 1973, but war continued until its clients were defeated in April 1975.
Prior to Reagan's election, the "Vietnam syndrome" and easing Cold War tensions and disarmament efforts alarmed militarists to fear defense spending cuts detrimental to profits. A propaganda campaign exaggerated bogus threats, manipulated intelligence to heighten fear, and got the Reagan administration to approve large military spending increases to confront "Soviet expansionism" at a time it was transitioning from Brezhnev, Andropov, and Chernenko to Gorbachev in 1985, followed by perestroika in 1986, glasnost in 1988, border openings and the Berlin Wall's collapse in 1989, then the Soviet Union's dissolution in 1991 - a new threat militarists feared would bring large, not to be tolerated, defense budgets cuts.
In the late 1980s, however, leading figures, including Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Samuel Huntington, and Albert Wohlstetter alleged Third World conflicts threatened US interests in the Middle East, Mediterranean, and Western Pacific, and recommended deterrence to stop them. Joint Chiefs Chairman Colin Powell and Defense Secretary Dick Cheney agreed. Others wanted large defense cuts for a peace dividend, including Johnson's DOD chief Robert McNamara who proposed reductions up to 50%.
Throughout the 1989 - 1999 period, mostly under Bill Clinton, US-instigated provocations, sanctions, and armed insurrections support involved America in 134 military operations according to the Federation of American Scientists. The most egregious was Clinton's bombing and dismemberment of Yugoslavia, an act playwright Harold Pinter called:
"barbaric" and despicable, "another blatant and brutal assertion of US power using NATO as its missile" to consolidate "American domination of Europe." Worse was yet to come with the election of George Bush, America's worst president in a country that never had a good one and never will as it's now governed.
Long before 9/11, Middle East restructuring plans were based on bogus terrorist, rogue state, and "clash of civilizations" threats by hordes of Islamofascists, including the Palestinian resistance, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and Saddam Hussein targeted in the 1990 - 91 Gulf War, followed by years of devastating sanctions, then ousted by GW Bush in 2003.
Iraq was destroyed, occupied and balkanized. Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iran face similar threats, the common thread being dominating Eurasia through endless conflicts and increased military spending for war profiteering bounties. September 11 assured it, and got Michelle Ciarocca of the Arms Trade Resource Center, in September 2002 to say:
"The whole mind set of military spending changed on Sept. 11. The most fundamental thing about defense spending is that threats drive (it). It's now going to be easier to fund almost anything."
Hossein-Zadeh investigated the growing role of private contractors creating a "built-in propensity to war that makes the US military-industrial complex a menace to world peace and stability, a force of death and destruction," as virulent under Obama as George Bush.
The fallout includes a burgeoning national debt, loss of civil liberties and democratic freedoms, erosion of social services, collapse of the dollar, America already in decline, its coming loss of preeminence as a world power, its potential bankruptcy, perhaps demise in its present form. and the possibility of WW III.
America's Illegal Wars of Aggression - The "Supreme Crime"
All US post-WW II conflicts were premeditated wars of aggression against nations posing no threat to America -
what Justice Robert Jackson at Nuremberg called:
the "supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."
Canadian Law Professor Michael Mandel explained America's guilt in his superb 2004 book, "How America Gets Away with Murder: Illegal Wars, Collateral Damage, and Crimes Against Humanity," his main theme being Jackson's Nuremberg "supreme crime" declaration, as relevant now as then.
Tragically, as Edward Herman observed in reviewing Mandel's book:
"The problem for the United States (and the world) has been that this country is now in the business of aggression and its commission of the "supreme crime" is standard policy, thereby bringing the "scourge of war" across the globe in direct violation of the UN charter."
Its Purposes and Principles state that:
"The Purposes of the United Nations are:
(1) To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace."
Conspiratorially with NATO and Israel, America willfully and repeatedly violates international and US laws, punishes its victims, absolves itself, and since WW II has directly or indirectly murdered millions of people globally, mostly civilian non-combatants.
Barack Obama - America's New Warrior President
America glorifies conflicts and the righteousness of waging them, packaged as liberating ones for democracy, freedom, justice, and the best of all possible worlds. Obama is just the latest in a long line of warrior leaders promising peace by waging war, justifying them by bogus threats, and calling pacifism unpatriotic to further an imperial agenda for greater wealth, power, and unchallengeable global dominance.
In opposition to his announced Afghanistan surge, peace activists gathered across from the White House on December 12 for an "Emergency Anti-Escalation Rally" organized by "End US Wars"- a new coalition of grassroots anti-war organizations.
Speakers included Kathy Kelly, David Swanson, Granny D (age 100 on January 24, 2010) former Senator Mike Gravel (1969 - 1981), and former Representative and 2008 Green Party presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney, among others.
This writer was asked to prepare a short commentary to be read to the crowd. Updated, it's reproduced below:
Obama's Permanent War Strategy
Disingenuously calling Afghanistan a "war of necessity, not choice," Obama ordered 30,000 more troops deployed over the next six months with perhaps many more to follow. In one of his most defining decisions, he's more than doubled the force count since taking office, angered a majority in the country, and continues his permanent war agenda while calling himself a man of peace.
Next target, Yemen, and its newest, occupied Haiti for plunder, exploitation, and very likely killing unwanted Haitians by neglect, starvation, disease, and face-to-face confrontations if they resist.
As a candidate, Obama campaigned against imperial militarism, promised limited escalation only, and pledged to remove all combat troops from Iraq by August 31, 2010. That was then. This is now, and consider what he has in mind - the permanent occupation of Iraq, Afghanistan and more.
Besides the Afghan escalation, he's also destabilizing Pakistan to balkanize both countries, weakening them to control the Caspian Sea's oil and gas riches and their energy routes to secured ports for export. The strategy includes encircling Russia, China, and Iran, obstructing their solidarity and cohesion, defusing a feared geopolitical alliance, weakening the Iranian government, perhaps attacking its nuclear sites, eliminating Israel's main regional rival, and securing unchallenged Eurasian dominance over this resource rich part of the world that includes China, Russia, the Middle East, and Indian subcontinent.
Like George Bush, Obama plans permanent war and more military spending than all other nations combined at a time America has no enemies. He promised change and betrayed us. Grassroots activism must stop this madness and make America a nation again to be proud of. The alternative is too grim to imagine.
Over 50 years ago, Bertrand Russell (1872 - 1970) warned:
"Shall we put an end to the human race, or shall mankind renounce war" and live in peace, because we have no other choice.
Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at email@example.com.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
Monday, March 1, 2010
Robert Bruce Reckmeyer
Be Prepaired/Encompass Strategies
Abrupt Change 2012: Problems with the Sun
2010 03 01
By Ervin Laszlo
Physical changes in the intensity of solar radiation conspire with human impacts to stress the world system. Astronomers have noted that since the 1940s, and particularly since 2003, the Sun has become remarkably turbulent, with the exception of the last year or so. Solar activity is predicted to peak around 2012, creating storms of intensity unprecedented since the 1859 “Carrington event,” when a large solar flare accompanied by a coronal mass ejection flung billions of tons of solar plasma into the Earth’s magnetosphere.
Solar storms, capable of traveling at speeds up to 5 million miles per hour, could knock-out virtually every major technological infrastructure on the planet: transportation, security and emergency response systems, electricity grids, finance, telecommunications, including satellite and other wireless networks, and even household electronic equipment.
The solar storm of 1859 was the most powerful event of its kind in recorded history. On the 1st of September of that year the Sun expelled huge quantities of high-energy protons in a large flare that traveled directly toward the Earth, taking eighteen hours instead of the usual three or four days to reach our planet. It disrupted telegraph systems all over Europe and North America. Fires erupted in telegraph stations due to power surges in the wires; and the northern lights (aurorae borealis) were seen as far south as Florida.
The next solar storm on record, in March of 1989, melted the transformers of the HydroQuebec Power Grid, causing a nine-hour blackout that affected six million people in Canada. And the solar storms that reached the Earth between October 19th and November 7th 2003 disrupted satellites and global communications, air travel, navigation systems, and power grids all over the world. It also affected systems on the International Space Station.
The solar maximum forecast for 2012 could do greater harm than any before, since human life has become much more dependent on the global energy grid. According to “Severe Space Weather Events: Understanding Economic and Societal Impacts,” a National Research Council report issued in the spring of 2009 by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, another Carrington event would induce ground currents that knock out 300 key transformers within 90 seconds and cut off power for more than 130 million people in the U.S. alone. Its cost could be as high as 2 trillion dollars, and recovery time would be four to ten years. An even worse impact would be felt in China, where the electrical grid is more vulnerable than in the West.
A major solar storm would cause the failure of electric power in most parts of the world. The above cited report of the National Academy of Science claims that this would have catastrophic consequences. People in high-rise apartments, where water has to be pumped up, would be cut off immediately. For most others drinking water would come through the taps for about half a day, but the flow would then cease without electricity to pump it from reservoirs. Transportation systems directly or indirectly dependent on electric power (which means practically all systems) would come to a standstill. Back-up generators would operate at some sites until their fuel ran out. For hospitals that would mean about 72 hours of essential care only services. Without power for heating, cooling and refrigeration, and with a breakdown in the distribution of medicines and pharmaceuticals, urban population would begin to die back within days.
Scientists forecast yet another disruptive event for the end of 2012: breaches in the Earth’s magnetic field. In the past this field protected living systems from the effects of solar storms and coronal mass ejections. Lately the magnetic field has diminished in intensity and holes and gaps have appeared. Scientists in South Africa measured cracks in the magnetic field the size of California, and in December of 2008 NASA announced that its Themis Project had found a massive breach that would allow a devastating amounts of solar plasma to enter the Earth’s magnetosphere.
The fluctuation of the magnetic field could also lead to the reversal of the planet’s magnetic poles. During the course of reversal the magnetic field would become still weaker, and the danger to life from solar and stellar radiation would greatly increase.
Another scientific report of relevance concerns the entry of our solar system into a highly energized region of space. This turbulent region is making the Sun hotter and stormier and has already caused climate change on other planets. According to Russian scientists the effects on Earth will include an acceleration of the magnetic pole shift, the vertical and horizontal distribution of ozone, and an increase in the frequency and magnitude of extreme climate events.
There is solid scientific evidence backing up the prophecy that the end of 2012 will be a turbulent epoch. Will we be ready for the abrupt shifts and disruptions it will bring, and ready to seize the opportunities that will open in their wake? We must now face this question. The answer to it is not yet in, but one thing is certain: we must wake up to both to the dangers and to the opportunities of the “WorldShift 2012” awaiting us.
A Portal Supporting Solutions in Life:
... by understanding the big picture,
... focusing the situation from multiple perspectives,
... and shaping details to obtain desired results!
Encompass Strategies looks at the big picture and aligns all the integral pieces to make a more comprehensive and cohesive approach that supports positive outcomes for all involved. The guiding principle is the concept of Didactic Edification which is defined as the personal dedication to build an integrated and conscious approach that along with focused intention brings forth the desired creation. The empowerment of Didactic Edification operates from a positive point which aligns core values and intentions with actions, and thus allowing creative energy to be utilized in this world. This aligning process is known as Multidimensional Quantum Development. By determining where we are now and how we line up with our world, anything in life can be simplified, focused and intensified. The process can be amplified when we unite as co-creators. Ultimately, anything in life is truly possible.
Please see Our Philosophy to understand concepts that are are the basis our beliefs.
"it's not enough to have lived. We should be determined to live for something. May I suggest that it be creating joy for others, sharing what we have for the betterment of personkind, bringing hope to the lost and love to the lonely." Leo Buscaglia
Encompass Strategies was founded by Deborah Sue Pomeroy Reckmeyer in the 90s. Since the new millennium with considerable years of inspiration, research and dedication and with the joint efforts of her husband Robert Reckmeyer, Encompass Strategies has grown into a full resource that continues to expand and evolve.
We, Deborah and Robert with our children, are an American family living in the modern world trying to survive within the limiting constraints of the current culture. In the last few years we turned our attention from barely surviving to fully thriving beyond all the road blocks that faced us on a daily basis since we came to this dimension. This is our story.
Each of us have individually looked at our lives, since we were small children, realizing that much we have learned does not add up to a workable model. The American dream or a truly happy life seems distant at best.
Both of us were raised by the elites of this world, the intellectual experts, to rise up above the rest as a means to find solutions. The challenge has been to see beyond the accepted cultural beliefs to look for real answers that have remained beyond the common awareness. Questions to life have remained as intellectual exercises within institutions of learning, than a practical solution to day to day living. Therefore as a norm, questions about the meaning of life are rarely asked by the general culture.
Time and time again, these challenges have surfaced in our own lives urging us forward to reach beyond the surface to confront root issues that only can be obtained by going down the rabbit hole to find deeper meaning.
We both decided a long time ago that there had to be more to life and a better way to live. In today's world the common assumption is that we have advanced beyond the primitive man, yet we are falling short in so many aspects in life (education, health, wealth, etc.) across the board. One has to wonder what is really going on and how we are missing the mark so blatantly.
The truth is that there are no cohesive connections to each part of our lives. We advance as experts down narrow paths that seemingly appear unconnected to any other path. Our focus has become a myopic vision that has lost the ability to see how everything is entangled and understand the ultimate effects.
We do not even realize how the divisions and compartmentalization are causing more and more harm to our wellbeing and our future. Time and time again, we realize life is built on a foundation of sand, and all falls away too easily. Something has to be done and be done soon. There is no magic bullet or a savior to solve all the broken aspects in our lives. The answers lie with each one of us.
No longer can we afford to wait for the world to change. The time has come to remake our lives and our world. Realize that the broken compartments of our life are causing the demise. To face the real problems before us, it's vital we put everything on the table. Until we look at every aspect in our life holding nothing too sacred to explore and go through each part, we cannot 'fix' the problems we are facing in the world today.
When we step back to see how all the pieces fit together, we begin to reweave everything into one complete picture. Only then can we realize how all the entangled aspects affect one another and make better and better choices in each and every moment. Only then can we create a world that works for each of us.
By establishing this foundation, we can begin to understand our own uniqueness and the uniqueness of all else that surrounds us. We can learn what is supportive of our life and growth, and in turn what is toxic and threatening to our survival. We as people are becoming more and more toxic, just like the world we see. Change starts with cleaning our own selves and our own lives and allowing the world to unfold before us.
By not accepting the world we see, we begin the process of choosing the world that truly works for our personal wellbeing and the wellbeing of those we love. By working with others and respecting their position, beliefs and choices, we begin establishing a more cohesive world that works for all.
Our personal journeys, Deborah’s and Robert's, encompass many aspects of life. Our strategies have helped us align our own life for the higher good of our family and the world we perceive.
Through our personal journeys, we have decided that there is more to life and a better way to live. We have put everything in our world on the table. One by one we have decided what was for our betterment and what was too toxic for our family. In the end, we have concluded that some things are worth enduring to move to a higher position, but others are not worth the effort. We have made hard decisions and have drawn strong lines within our world, and even with those we love dearly.
The world we grew up believing is not reflective in todays world. There has to be an expansion of our understanding and how we are living our lives. This is the new NORMAL. We are raising the bar and expanding our viewpoint.
Part of the process is creating a circle of trust and a wise counsel. Another part is creating a secure environment that supports our wellbeing. This environment includes: our thoughts, our relations, our home, our community, our family, our friends, our food, our air, our water, our music, our entertainment, and everything that we come into contact with on a regular basis.
Only looking back can we see clearly how each step perfectly has allowed us the opportunity to grow and expand more and more. Some days we only see one step ahead of the other to navigate the current challenge. At other times, things fly perfectly into place. This process is ever evolving and is continually testing our dedication, our determination and our faith. We are diligent to find the right path and the best possible answer for each individual situation.
We went through every aspect of our life:
Energy Environment Air & Water Wellbeing Education Community
Power Shelter Food Relationships Government Local Resources
Conscious Creation Preparedness Sustainability Authentic Living Focused Intention Responsible Action
We confronted how we process life and the tools we utilize:
Healing Victom Mentality Learning Affiliations Circle of Trust Healthy Dynamics
Beliefs Stress Habits Addictions Wise Councel Bliss
Perspective Understanding Communication Intuition Intuition Divinity
We faced our limiting beliefs and began to redefine truth:
Community Family Life Truth Higher Self God
Agendas Systems Dynamics Entanglement Material Energy
Ancient Origins Sacred Languages Multidimensions Vibrational Harmonics Quantum Physics Conscious Creation
We faced our demons and shadows to discover a stronger position:
Childhood Trauma Family Dynamics Divorce Illness Inner Psyche Abandonment
Dogmas Failing Systems Single Parenting Unhealthy Relations Dysfunctional Families Abuse
Religious Misconceptions Breakdown in Communication Legal Issues Learning Disabilities Special Needs Infidelity
We looked at things once marginalized to test for real truth (not accepted blindness):
Conspiracies False Flags Evil Angels Multidimensional Beings God
Disease Mind Control Dark vs. Light Fallen Angels Esoteric Teachings Divine
Genetics Aliens Miracles War of the Angels Lightbody Miracles
The list goes on and on. No way is this list complete or right for any other person, and is here as an example of part of our process. The point is to be all inclusive addressing everything in our lives and in our selves. Life speaks to us, so look for the things that come into our experiences and be curious why.
After years of dealing with many issues, we have concluded that our current system in America does not support the highest good of the individual citizens. We as a nation have not created: the best educational system for the children, a health system promoting wellness, industry for our advancement of all, products to improve life, a government for the common good, a military to protect our citizens and a system that promotes the best interest of the individual. Even our understanding about life, history, education, health and who we are are limited and far from the truth.
Like all industry, each supports the industry itself. A few thrive from the bottom line, while so many others fall short barely surviving. Ultimately, this is not a workable system that benefits the people that make up this country or even the world. Too much is being sacrificed to maintain a system that does not support the individuals in their experience and growth. This is the time to change the current way we are living, the system that we are operating under and the truths we hold dear.
When we realized the depth of the situation, we dedicated our path to include sharing our experience so that others can question their own lives. Our journeys moved beyond our personal family to to sharing what we see so clearly and the practical changes we are in our lives. There is more to life and a better way to live. We have the dynamic capability to Thrive Right Now. To move beyond surviving is to embrace the limiting beliefs that have kept us stagnant for too long. By peeling the internal union, confronting each stage of our resistance we begin the process of releasing our journey to a deeper level.
The key is to investigate what is truly important to our individual lives and step by step create the life that we want to hand down to our children.
What is the value of education?
What does wellness mean to us?
What is the responsibility of the government & its citizens?
What is our chosen profession?
What is our family life?
What are our values, traditions & beliefs?
What communities do we participate and belong within?
Where do we live?
What do we support?
What is worth fighting for?
What is life and the meaning of this experience?
What is true, real and what is illusion, denial?
What are we passing down to our children?
For each of us, we have different understandings, beliefs and reasons for all we do. Life does not have to threaten the other for us to thrive. Once we create a world that respects others and their positions, we can move into an existence that supports individual freedoms, responsibilities and growth, instead of living in fear and trying to control others to protect ourselves.
When we begin to look into our individual lives, we start defining the big questions about life in general. A clear picture begins to form about what aligns with who we are and what we are doing.
The world is shifting its paradigm from the material world of concrete matter to one of quantum physics that all we see is an expression of energy. When we stretch beyond the limitations of the material to the energetic level, we embrace the full spectrum of our harmonic frequencies. Life reveals itself as in tune or out of tune with who we are. We begin to understand how we resonate our personal vibrations that affects our experiences. We also realize how our environment has the potentials to affect our harmony or disharmony.
When we create a life where we are in tune with our inner higher self working beyond this dimension, we become multidimensional within this time and space. This is building a strong foundation from the seat of our soul, our central core of existence. When we work energetically with all that is in our existence, we realize the quantum nature of our world and how energy affects everything. As we navigate life embracing each experience as an opportunity to gain greater clarity into our truest essence, we live within the realm of developing untold possibilities. Here at Encompass Strategies we call this process of Multidimensional Quantum Development.
By dedicating ourselves to living a life which builds up our individual selves to incorporate every aspect within our inner being (our psyche) and our outer world (our experience), we integrate our lives to operate from a conscious level. We call this Didactic Edification. The goal is the create a Quality of Life Assurance Plan, an individual plan that supports the unique super position that each of us holds in this dimension, to ensure we move beyond surviving to Thrive Right Now no matter what life throws our way! By approaching life as a challenge that we can rise up and stretch beyond, we understand that we can navigate any situation in confidence believing we have all that we need to be successful in finding the best options to create the life we know in our heart.
See our personal solution for our own journey:
The Reckmeyer Family Quality of Life Assurance Plan
Bottom line: By taking back the power over our individual lives, we begin to shape our own lives to be more authentic and in tune with the deepest part of our essence. This self discovery is a revealing process that allows us the opportunity to embrace life to the fullest experiential level. As we develop a stronger position within the seat of our soul, we strengthen our navigational skills to bring forth the richest experience that is true and real for our individual selves. This is letting the most brilliant light shine through our soul into this dimension.
Encompass Strategies.com was created by Deborah & Robert Reckmeyer as a portal dedicated to sharing what we have personally learned through our experiences and from our unique position in this world. We believe that the purposes of our journeys are to define our viewpoints, to share our experiences as one example of many, to work with those valuing our gifts, and ultimately, to grow into our fullest selves.
Thrive Right Now is moving beyond surviving by being awake, conscious and continuously mindful to enlighten our being and expand our experience through our secure footing in this world. This is a process of building the life we desire deep within our soul. By using Multidimensional Quantum Development we know the right solutions, Didactic Edification, to build our desired experience in life.
KEYS TO THRIVE RIGHT NOW
Move beyond surviving by going through every ASPECT OF LIFE to reflect our BEST INTENTIONS:
getting back to basics (securing a strong foundation)
prioritizing life (building right combination to be ready)
being ready no matter what life brings (being flexible and movable with flow of life)
Every aspect of life has an EFFECT on our WELLBEING. Ultimately when we understand that EFFECT, our CHOICES become SIMPLE:
what supports our highest wellbeing (strengthening us - life)
what is toxic to our existence (weakening us - death)
what is neutral with no effect on our essence (not affecting us)
THREE ESSENTIAL STEPS
The Formula for WELLBEING is to achieve these THREE ESSENTIAL STEPS in every ASPECT OF LIFE (in the internal and the external):
clean & clear to detoxify (releasing all blockages in free flowing energy)
secure a strong & nourishing foundation (connecting our core essence with all else)
repair & rebuild to fortify (allowing for free flowing energy)
Encompass Strategies.com is not here to give answers, but instead to spark further research into your own individual journey. Let us be an example, one way of many ways. The key is to move beyond surviving by looking past the surface to find your best individual solution. Ultimately this self realization is the only way that is the right way for you and your life. This is enlightenment, DNA activation, consciousness, being the Buddha, living with Christ, the way of the wizard, and so on.
Many people have called it many things. Following our own bliss will bring forth the journey that enlivens our own life. Life takes on true meaning and passion brings forth the creative depths of our soul.
We finally move beyond surviving. We secure a strong foundation. We face our deepest darkest fears and release all that has kept us from ourselves. We heal all that has ailed us for too long. We live life from the center of our being while blocking all that would harm us and allowing all that makes us stronger.
This is where we Thrive Right Now!
Deborah Pomeroy Reckmeyer
Thrive Right Now Store has been created with products that we feel support Multidimensional Quantum Development and Didactic Edification. These are key items that we are personally using to create a holistic, balanced life and support our wellness as we navigate our daily routines. Products are only tools. We are the ones that make anything for our betterment or our toxicity. All things start with the wellness and wholeness of our personal situation, this is our foundation. From a supportive strong foundation we can detoxify, clean and clear. Once we create a less toxic and cleaner environment, we can repair, rebuild and fortify. The choice is ours to make. Part of the journey is to make the most informed decisions. Do your own research and come to your own decisions.
All Our Products support the Formula for Wellbeing by addressing the Three Essential Steps to Thrive Right Now:
Clean & Clear to Detoxify
Secure a Strong & Nurishing Foundation
Repair & Rebuild to Fortify
A Family of Research Websites and Blogs have been created and are dedicated to understanding Truth in this world. Since each of us come from our own super position, not all will speak to everyone. If something resonates, do your own research and come to your own conclusions. If not, let it go and move on.