What "protecting the American way of life" really means...
Politicians often try to make a case for something being "required" by trying claim they are "protecting" or "defending" the "American way of life". Is it really about defense? Or is that a newspeak term that means the opposite, whereby offensive actions need to be taken in order to preserve, protect and defend the status quo of what currently is?
Made by @krnel from Source
The other phrase used, of "protecting US interests", is a little more obvious in what they are trying to do. Protecting interests means what? Well, the interests the U.S. in getting what they want, and keeping what they have. The "American way of life" is also about keeping things as they are.
What is the way of life currently life that needs to be maintained, preserved and protected? Well for one, the economy. The economy also depends on transportation. And that requires oil. Oil needs to keep flowing in order for the American way of life to survive and grow.
This means that "protecting the American way if life" is taking on threats that can jeopardize the status quo and current condition that people are accustomed to. America, and all nations, are looking to compete and gain a strong footing in economic power.
America has gained economic dominance in the world, which is highly tied to oil. The petro dollar is what made the American dollar a strong international currency. Nations would and still do sell oil, where they are paid in U.S. dollars. The U.S. needs oil, and gets other nations to use it's currency for payment. This strengthens the U.S. by having oil to keep fueling the economic forces within the country, to keep people and products moving within the nation, and to keep imports and exports moving in and out of the nation.
America needs to maintain a certain level of economic dominance in the world to maintain, preserve and protect it's "way of life". Foreign policy is structures around "protecting US interests". This means to do whatever that benefits the U.S., which is often through engaging in offensive actions to try to keep things in their favor geopolitically. Starting wars is part of what is required to keep the economy going, the oil flowing, and the whole machinery of the modern empire rolling smooth.
Made by @krnel from Source
Other nations want to become more powerful too. They want high standards of living as well. If their economies do better or out-compete the U.S. economy, then America loses part of it's current dominance in the world stage and risks losing it's "way of life" in the short- or long-term. Any nation that poses an economic threat to America has a certain level of hostility aimed towards it.
It doesn't help that those nations, like Russia and China have a history of communism which the U.S. and western nations have battled against for nearly a century. But those two are the main enemies and threats to the "American way of life".
Any power play made by those nations, or others than can weaken their current economic position on the global scale, such as removing access to oil or favoring the other 2 nations with oil, is a challenge to the American dominance hierarchy in the global landscape. These threats that can potentially or currently diminish the status quo "American way of life" are what is being "defended" against. And that usually comes in the form of offensive actions. Military rule is important to keep the dominance and preserve what you have.
Secretary of Defense James Mattis has recently talked about the need for "offensive weapons in space". Again, space is being looked at a competitive are that requires dominance for protecting on the ground. Mattis said that "space is definitely becoming competitive".
Note that the Department of Defense used to be clear on what it's goal was: war. It used to be called the Department of War. But that was too direct. They changed it to the Orwellian Department of Defense because that just sounds more "peaceful". The video below is also uploaded by the "United States Institute of Peace"... go figure.
Mattis argues that the goal to go dominate the space above is two pronged:
One, it's defense. We have to defend what we have in order space... We're going to have to defend what we have.
But also we're going to have to be prepared to use offensive weapons in space, should someone decide to militarize it and go on the offensive. You can't simply play defense... and win.
A Conversation with Secretary of Defense James N. Mattis
(at the 49:32m mark)
It's funny that these "leaders" don't realize how they are doing what they claim they fear others will do, justifying their need to do it because others will do it. They are just ensuring the militarization of space by going to build offensive weapons in space.
"We need weapons there because someone might put weapons there." That's what the other nations are thinking to. And if they weren't, they are now, because the U.S. is saying they are outright going to go build weapons in space. If they have the same mindset as the U.S., then they are going to go build weapons in space just because the U.S. is as they are the "someone" who is militarizing space, whereby others need to defend themselves offensively as well.
The lunacy of this thinking... all based in fear and just pushing a whole new era of weapons development and military-industrial economy and complex. Trump has proposed a Space Force, and it looks like it's in the works for real. For now, the 1967 Outer Space Treaty stands in the way, but for how long? I think the world is going to get a lot more weaponized than it already is in the coming decades...
Recent post you might also be interested in:
Thank you for your time and attention. Peace.
If you appreciate and value the content, please consider: Upvoting, Sharing or Reblogging below.
me for more content to come!
My goal is to share knowledge, truth and moral understanding in order to help change the world for the better. If you appreciate and value what I do, please consider supporting me as a Steem Witness by voting for me at the bottom of the Witness page.
Excellent article, @krnel. Your mention of "American interests" is right over the target. It was exciting to see someone bring this up....was hoping for a few names of the worst offenders so your audience would have a clearer picture of what these interests encompass.
These interests aren't the average American interests - they're those of the corporate establishment and the revolving-door relationship with the government. This perpetual cycle of movement between gov't agencies (often intel), and corporations - largely the MIC - ensures they remain at the pinnacle of the ruling class. Timely access to key knowledge enables them to engage in priveleged levels of insider trading. "Their people" are waiting to carry out whatever actions necessary to protect their dominion. This includes military action, of course, and a very liberal application of sanctions.
Indeed, the corporatocracy and government often align to ensure monopolies and perpetuation of the status quo. Domination of the spectrum in whatever field.
I have come to think of such terms when heard coning from them to mean the continued domination by their true constituents, the money families. They have a long history of selling out the people that runs all the way back to the founding.
They could be self sufficient with oil and everything else, but the money families want to have a method of extraction from the countries that are currently selling the oil. Got to have that method of enslavement, and not much value to exploit from sand.
I suspect that when they begin saying they want to develop something, it has already been developed and they are working on something way more sophisticated.
Indeed, keep the money at the top, and keep the bottom feeding it with their spending and survival.
I wanted to share with you that you have a awesome fact based post here. The only problem I have is you are miss identifying the system we have with the system that was ordained and established. In truth what we are living with is and always has been a deep state that originated with the titled nobility from Britain.
There are in fact two jurisdiction that are being mixed up. The first one is the original constitution. One can know for themselves this is a real jurisdiction by looking up the original 13 Amendment. In 1871 treason a sedition occurred in the only way such can ever happen. The Cowards never admitted or disclosed the change.
The second one is the one that was developed from 1871, by stealth. A proof of what I am sharing with you can be seen in court houses all across America. It is so obvious that most Americans never see it. The Gold Fringed flags meaning is that our courts are military courts, and we are victims of Stockholm syndrome as a result.
Thanks. It is what it is. How it got here is a mess to figure out, thanks for the feedback to clear that up.
Yep, keep us all dumbed down and playing the game just like we all are! Keep their business running and growing. The business model they have is us, it’s literally having us comply to their needs,... and sadly, we all do :/
Indeed, we feed them, and they grow. We sustain them and keep ourselves under their thumb :/
They are following the same path like British-colonilism. But observing the path of Hitler. War is the medium to maintain the currency strong.
Posted using Partiko Android
Yup, war is the path to full spectrum dominance...
Curated for #informationwar (by @commonlaw)
Our purpose is to encourage posts discussing Information War, Propaganda, Disinformation and other false narratives. We currently have over 8,000 Steem Power and 20+ people following the curation trail to support our mission.
Join our discord and chat with 200+ fellow Informationwar Activists.
Join our brand new reddit! and start sharing your Steemit posts directly to The_IW!
Connect with fellow Informationwar writers in our Roll Call! InformationWar - Contributing Writers/Supporters: Roll Call Pt 11
Ways you can help the @informationwar
Thanks for the support ;)
To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.
Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.
What is the significance of "peace" at the end of the post, when you think one of the necessary actions of the US to maintain status quo is "to start wars"?
Peace, as in peace, goodbye, farewell, shorthand for peace out. Also a state of tranquility, quiet, and harmony; absence of violence.
Vastly cool :-)
is it...