Monday, April 15, 2013

4/15/2013 NAMAZU REDO Editor's note: We had so many new readers check in on Sunday for Namazu related features we thought that we might republish some vintage Namazu today so that new readers could find these classics without having to search the site.

Presents the Great Namazu on the American Merchant Marine and Contemporary American Society: The Cause and Blue Print for Revolution

Namazu the Earth Shaker Giant Japanese Catfish Demigod, Music Video Star, and Maritime Analyst


and What Happened to "The American Way"
YANKEE TRADERS             Old Sailing Ships - 2

 I was there when Admiral Perry arrived. That gives me a unique perspective. Once upon a time the American Merchant Marine and the American Navy worked hand in glove. Good old Yankee Traders were sometimes preceded, some times followed, and always protected by good old American Blue Jackets. The U.S.Navy hauled U.S.Marines and the U.S.Merchant Marine hauled the beans and bullets to support the Marines.The Navy preceded the Merchant Marine in places like Japan where the Navy literally opened the trade, but the follow on by the Merchant Marine was swift and sure, trade goods started moving immediately and as trade patterns emerged and evolved, liner service was established. "Yankee Traders" helped open the world to global trade sometimes with charm offensives, and sometimes by kicking in doors, or in the case of Japan, which I well remember, just by showing up on the door step and looking like a three hundred pound gorilla with a sort of friendly demeanor and bit of a smirk. 

 What's happened? Today there are barely 100 American Ships engaged in the real international freight trades. The United States has nearly twice that number of designated military transports manned by "CivMars" (Nav Speak for "Civilian Mariners", or "Merchant Seamen"). These ships are part of organizations like the Military Sealift Command (MSC) and generally are actually the property of the U.S. Navy, or are on long term charter to the U.S. Navy. Of 77 strategic materials that the U.S. has to have to sustain its' economy 66 must come to you by sea, but the United States no longer has the commercial capacity to carry but a tiny single digit percentage of her own economic needs. The American Merchant Marine outside of its' Jones Act protected interstate fleets has all but disappeared from the face of the earth. At the end of World War II over 5,000 merchant ships flew the American flag, today less than 100 are in true international commercial service. The merchant has left the U.S.Merchant Marine. What happened?  



 Frankly how the American flag fleet shrunk has been analyzed to a "fair thee well". The American Admiralty Books "MERCHANT MARINE INTEREST" Section offers a number of titles detailing the decline in very specific detail. To over simplify, it simply boils down to once the shooting is over all sorts of people all around the world are perfectly willing to carry American cargoes for a price. If ships with U.S. bound cargoes are not being attacked on the high seas, and the insurance rates for carrying American stuff and coming and going from American shores are not too high; that price is always lower than what American ship owners operating with American crews can meet.  American seamen I have noticed, will not work for a rice bowl a day.

  America tried for a time to preserve a serious cargo capacity of its own through government subsidies. Of course while protecting American vital interests with a much needed Merchant Marine subsidy system, the U.S. was also lecturing the world on the evils of government subsidy. The  United States is the only country in the world that seems to have a foreign policy against even the appearance of hypocrisy. The true national interest has too often been sacrificed to this concept. There seems to be  virtually no insight into the true national interests on the part of the government of the United States. The United States at least nominally, in the interests of this concept and its preachment to others, stopped subsidizing its deep sea merchant fleet. The U.S. was pretty much alone in that. Almost  no one else did, or did not do it for very long ,and of course the U.S.Merchant Marine all but completely disappeared. Why do the American people stand for this? What has happened to the land that spawned the Yankee Trader?

    Click on the  book cover icon to check out some additional background reading.



 The simple answer is that "Americanism" or "the American Way", the concepts that drove America from its founding until about 1965 was displaced by a host of other "isms"; liberalism, conservatism, libertarianism , socialism, and environmentalism. The old Americanism that drove the westward expansion, built a nation out of a wilderness, linked it with a transcontinental railroad , won two World Wars, and put men on the moon, contained some elements of these various "isms" but was primarily driven by a clear vision and only one real ism, pragmatism. That is not to say that the old Americanism or "American Way" was an amoral force, its' driving energy and entrepreneurial spirit were tempered by a Judeo-Christian ethic that was clear and well understood by the vast majority of the population. 

 Some pundits and prognosticators talk radio and Fox media claim that roughly 48% of the American population seem to comprehend in some indistinct way that the dominance of these isms plus the alternating ascendancy of one of only two political parties, (each in fact captured in large measure by one of the "isms"), is driving the American nation to the poor house.  According to these media mavens the other 51  percent of the population is either already in the poor house and dependent on the government, or fear the poor house and have drunk from the government cool aid and actually think one party or the other can save them if only that party could get complete control of the government. Clearly these recent media pronouncements are reflecting the recent presidential elections. These media guys must think I don't get cable down here on the sea floor , or they have been drinking their own neo conservative cool aid.

Well if there is one thing that living three thousand years can do for you it is give you depth and clarity of perception. So I perceive the problem. What makes me unique among giant catfish is that I can also articulate the the issue. So since the over taxed and unappreciated 48% don't quite get it yet, please allow me to clarify and articulate.


 The Tea Party has coined a term for what happened and for the form of government they think emerged from the last election:

  INEPTOCRACY: in-ep-tac'ra-cy):
     A system of government where the least capable to lead are selected by the least capable of producing, and where members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers".

 I , Namazu certainly agrees that America is now led by the least qualified office holders of both parties ever seen in American history. However I don't share the dim view of the Tea Party Republicans of 51 % of the American people as least capable of producing. As the century proceeds far more than 51% of the population is going to be in deep financial trouble because far less than 51% of the working age population regardless of education, training, or previous work history is going to be needed to produce goods and services.

 As I explained in "NAMAZU FULLY LOADED PARTS 1&2: THE FUTURE OF AMERICA" if  America doesn't really change things in some very fundamental ways it runs the risk of starving to death in the midst of plenty. Remember I predicted a near term boom thanks to expanding to the point of export U.S. natural gas, and soon, "tight sands oil". So while we are about to be handed a golden opportunity to wipe out the deficit, we have to ask where will the taxes come from. Congress doesn't want to tax the rich, or corporations, or about 41% of the population, but the middle class is shrinking, not from taxation alone, but from the combined results of the continuing and expanding applications of several technologies that are reducing the work force. Old businesses are shrinking their work force while expanding production. New start ups are disappointing job producers. Fewer and fewer people are being technologically enabled to produce more and more. The rest are looking for employment.

 As the middle class, the taxed class, shrinks not only do tax revenues shrink because we won't tax the wealthy, or the corporations or the 41% of the population below a certain income level ; the market for all of this production disappears. Unemployed people don't buy a lot of goods and services. Read THE SINGULARITY IS NEAR by Ray Kurzwell for a little background on why I predict that for the rest of the 21st Century an ever increasing number of people from every educational background will only be able to find sporadic and widely intermittent employment. 
If the government continues to insist on relying on the income tax of an ever shrinking middle class it will hasten the demise of the taxed class and starve itself to death. The Tea Party claim that 48% of America "doesn't pay taxes is bunk. The 41% or so who make too little for their income to be taxed by the IRS directly pay sales taxes, road and bridge tolls, gasoline taxes much of which are Federal. Its less than the income tax that the real middle class pays, but local, state, and the federal government derive billions of dollars from these non IRS paying citizens. If the United States doesn't address the real issues soon, their numbers are going to continue to increase but their contribution to tax revenues won't. 

 Obama absolutely can't build an economy from the Middle Class out. An economy needs capital which includes the accumulated wealth of the rich available for investment, and mostly the savings of a middle class. How do you squeeze blood out of a turnip? A pragmatic and workable solution would be to reduce the IRS to a fraction of its size and eliminate the income tax on all but the wealthiest of people, substituting a national sales tax (Value Added Tax or VAT) on every commodity except food,  and medicine /medical care. 

 Everyone would then pay; poor, working class, whats left of a middle class, the merely wealthy, and the really super wealthy in proportion to their wholesale and retail consumption. Corporations would have inescapable taxes as well since all of their supplies and products would  be subject to the VAT. No deductions, no forms for individuals to fill out. Everybody ,and I do mean everybody, pays. However since capital has become invested in the hands of a super wealthy and tiny elite, the IRS, reduced to a handful of agents, and auditors would have the job of monitoring corporate sales tax compliance, and administering a vestige income tax system on the portion of the population that has accumulated most of the Capital. This vestige income tax system would not discourage the rich from becoming richer, but its system of deductions would be based on incentives to invest in activities that promote real economic growth,  never the mere churning of money like the sale of risky mortgages, or junk bonds. 

 Everyone being subject to the VAT would then have some control over the amount of tax paid by market decisions. These "controls" would include such measures as avoiding the tax entirely on a transaction by a private purchase of a second hand item, or selecting a cheaper version of the needed item (and thus paying proportionately less tax) , substituting one item for a less costly similar item that will serve the purpose. All such activities would be perfectly legal. Such a system could be phased in with some minimal pain. The super rich would pay the most personal VAT taxes simply because they consume more and are less likely to economize in a middle class manner. The first year that the Vat is imposed it should run concurrent with the income tax that 48% of the population is no longer paying and every dime should go towards the retirement for the national debt. This will be a tough year on the real middle class, their personal down payment on the national debt. Over the next several years the income tax should be eliminated in phased income brackets for the population making under a researched target income and continue to be eliminated until the last income tax subjects are those identified as being in control of a potentially dangerous share of the nation's capital. The remaining income tax would be more of a disincentive program against speculative activity that endangers the economy like that which preceded the most recent bailouts of Wall Street and Detroit. It won't completely stop wild speculative schemes but will impose an up front penalty on them, and such taxes should be put away in interest generating accounts as the down payment on any damage that the government has to come in later to mitigate. 

 Of course none of this works if the Federal Government doesn't balance the budget and stop spending more than it takes in. The test that it is really a fair and balanced and pragmatic approach that probably will work? There is probably no one reading this that totally likes it. Everybody then has flesh in the game, from the super rich to the poverty struck. Everyone will see some part of their ox gored. But America you will either come out of your present crisis together, or you will be ruined individually until there is no society that you would recognize as America left.      


 America has been voting for some time now for divided government out of a sense of self defense. The real majority
are not nearly as far left economically or socially as the present president, or the limousine liberals in Congress from the Democratic party.  Neither are they anywhere near the far right of the Tea Party wing of the Republican Party. In the general election many voters pulled the lever, some while holding their noses, for Obama and then crossed party lines to vote a Republican, again possibly while holding their noses,  into or back into Congress or Senate. The fact is the public fears to a greater or lesser extent both the Democrats and the Republicans.  The parties appear to be controlled by political elites with agendas harmful to "the American Way" as it is vaguely understood by the general population. The population may not yet be able to fully articulate what that "American Way" or "Americanism" is; but to a surprising degree the non political majority have something of an identifiable consensus on many parts of it. Neither party is operating within these parameters. So neither party has the support across the board of the public. 

Waving Flag #3


 Politically correct "Secular Humanism" is not only an important part of liberalism, and socialism, it has crept into all of the other competing "isms" including Conservatism to some extent or other today. Secular Humanism is particularly adept at sloganeering. Perhaps their most successful mantra, bought in some measure or other by even conservatism is "The Wall of Separation Between Church and State." This is repeated often and with conviction constantly in the media and in the legislative halls and courtrooms. It's one of those things that is repeated so often and in such a constitutional context that perhaps as much as 51 percent or more of the population now believes that those words are in the constitution. They are not. 

  The constitutional language merely articulates that the government shall make no law creating an official state religion. The "Wall of Separation " is found in only one place in one of the Federalist Papers. Among the founding fathers it was favored only by Jefferson. It was clearly not favored by the overwhelming majority of the Founding Fathers which is why only the weaker simple prohibition against founding a state religion made it into the Constitution as actually adopted. The founding fathers had problems with the state attempting to enforce religious orthodoxy. However they had no problem with the clergy having freedom of speech, like everyone else and bringing religiously inspired morals, ethics, and insights into the public arena. They also had no problem with state / church cooperation in the realm of social issues close to what Christians call the "Corporal Works of Mercy" which are generally focused on the poor and the ill. 

 Today's media however being totally dedicated to Secular Humanism only refer to the Church-State relationship as being characterized by a "wall of separation"  which they imply means that there must be open hostility by the state directed at the church. Secular humanism is very dogmatic and seeks to be the official state "philosophy" since not being focused on any god except a rather rigid set of liberal beliefs it eschews the title of "religion".  However, the perpetrators of this philosophy are clearly attempting to assume the role once associated with state religions. The perpetrators want the specific beliefs of secular humanism to be the litmus test of constitutionality. How is this different from the veto power of the clergy over secular government in some Muslim states

 Because the secular humanist philosophy is basically atheistic or at least agnostic it presents a danger to America's most cherished "inalienable rights". The concept of the United States doesn't start its documented history with the constitution, but with the Declaration of Independence. There the Founding Fathers articulated the concept of "inalienable rights" and noted that these "inalienable rights" were inalienable because man "was endowed by his Creator" with them. What the state gives the state can take away. What God gives no man can take away. In the case of the enumerated inalienable rights in the Constitution their attribution to God for origin was the major argument for their defense by force of arms. So if the secular humanists actually cared about human rights as they claim, they would do what thousands of other American atheists, agnostics, and simply non religious Americans have done for centuries. They would acquiesce to the concept of God so religiously held by the majority of their fellow citizens, as an important legal construct protecting their own rights. By ascribing certain rights as coming from God, even if he is left undefined except as power higher than the state or public opinion those rights including the cherished secular humanists freedom from religion are arguably so protected that if need be, protection by force of arms is justified. In short, if humans wanted to protect certain human rights from any and all usurpation by other men, if there were no God, you'd have to invent him. Make no mistake about it America, the attacks on "God" by the Secular Humanists are really attacks on the inalienability of your inalienable rights

 The attacks of the Democrats on the second amendment right to keep and bear arms are simply their attack on your guarantee in steel of your inalienable rights. So far the old catfish is sounding pretty right wing but hold on, the Republicans, especially the Tea party offer you nothing better.

 So can you trust the Tea Party wing of the Republican party with their religiosity clearly worn on their shirt sleeve? Absolutely not! The beliefs of those who finance the movement are exactly the same as those of the nobility in the Middle Ages who supported "the Divine Rights of Kings".  They don't want to pay taxes , expect to be able to tap into the pockets of the middle class tax payers whenever their mismanagement of their giant enterprises endangers their extravagant life styles. These are simply the robber barons recycled. Their social conservatism has attracted a middle class following, but they are lambs to the slaughter. The party's social positions on abortion and gay privilege may be more in keeping with the majority of Americans, their open referral to God may be more palatable to most Americans than the open attacks of the Democrats, but ultimately they are simply misusing God to justify a devil take the hindmost attitude toward economics that is mixed with a protected and privileged status for themselves. These folks are not the alternative to the bad place that the secular humanists and their democratic party want to take you. The tea party elite, as opposed to their well intended but ill informed rank and file ,only wants to take you to a different location from which they intend to slaughter and eat you. 

 The truth is about 84 percent of America recognizes this to one extent or the other but most often only have a choice of the candidates put up by the two parties to choose from at the polls. There is no real 51/48 split in the American electorate. There is  84% of the electorate with such distrust of government that they are voting to split it in the forlorn hope that the two extremes will cancel each other out in terms of really reckless behavior. It isn't working.


The rights of the people that the right and left are fighting so fiercely over right now are of an economic nature but under pin all of your other rights. They fall loosely under the concept of the inalienable right to the Pursuit of Happiness but were never specifically described by the Founding Fathers. These rights are the freedom to buy, try, sell and fail. The extreme right and the extreme left have captured the apparatus of both parties. In a nut shell, in the American system, everyone has the right to pursue happiness through contemplation of their navel, meditation, joining a religious order or cult, most anything that doesn't interfere with the safety or rights of others. Most pursue happiness through some combination of activities which feature a very large economic component. So we have the right to buy anything that is lawful, try any legal economic activity, sell any possession we may have, and most importantly we have the right to fail. The freedom to fail has been the bone of contention all along. 

 If anyone were to eliminate your freedom to fail they would have to eliminate every other freedom. To totally eliminate failure you can not make a mistake. So in all systems like communism which have tried to eliminate failure, the freedom to buy, try, and sell had to be curtailed in favor of a centrally planned economy. Every one had their assigned role so no one could make a mistake. Unfortunately an awful lot of people while not too fond of freedom to fail are none the less quite fond of their rights to try, buy, and sell. Taking these rights leads to protest, so shortly after asserting the elimination of the right to fail the leftist have to curtail freedom of  speech, press, assembly, and association. The last place where these freedoms are usually exercised in a system slipping into leftist fascism is usually the churches, and the last man left standing with a non government controlled audience is in the pulpit. 

 So religion becomes a target of suppression. The Secular Humanist are leading America right down the primrose path to eventual fascism and 86 per cent of America suspects it, or has figured it out. Their recent attacks on the Roman Catholic Church and Evangelicals demonstrate how far down that path the American nation has already trodden because things are usually pretty far along before they attack religion head on. The left has been marginalizing it for decades. The latest outright demands for compliance with things the Church deems immoral are new and represent a semi final escalation unless reversed. 

  So are the Republicans better? No. At best they are a useful counter weight to rapid progress of the Secular Humanists for the time being. They don't want to eliminate your right to fail, not at all, and they certainly don't want to cushion it any. They want to eliminate the right to fail for the political elite and the seriously rich by freedom of taxation for themselves, and the right to dip into the public tax purse when their life styles are threatened by their mismanagement of other people's money in the massive enterprises they control and manage. These people look at cooperative public/government programs that middle class tax payers pay into like Social Security, and Medicare to potentially cushion any economic failure at somewhere above starvation level as intrinsically evil, since they are expected to contribute and don't need the programs. The fact that there is no needs test to receive benefits doesn't impress them, they feel they can do better on their own. This is especially true if the rest of you would simply roll over and play dead on cue granting them the kind of access to your tax money that they have come to expect.

 The economic elite hate welfare and want it reformed, but please not the corporate welfare programs. They view your right to fail to be unlimited as to consequences, no cushioning, starve quietly and don't disturb the elite with your death throws. They view their own right to fail as limited to perhaps a fall from grace sufficient to have to give up the private jet for while until there is a Federal Corporate bailout. So for a couple of decades now the electorate has been trying out serial power change, and most recently divided government waiting for common sense to finally rule the day. For that to happen the general population has to try something different. More on that later. Lets apply these insights to the original subject of the essay the decline of the blue water American Merchant Marine.


 The Democrats have no problem with government subsidies for the poor. Subsidize the poor decently enough and you can round up a sizable percent of the population at convenient centrally located government housing and bus them to the polls where they will reliably pull the lever for the party delivering the subsidy. By contrast subsidies to American ship builders and ship operators smack of corporate welfare. However the work force for the ship operating and building industries is largely blue collar and union. Most vote democratic, but not uniformly, working people can be annoyingly socially conservative by the standards of the elite of the Democratic party. So subsidies for an American Merchant Marine so vital to our national security and helpful to our economy were only nominally supported. 

 The Republicans may have represented the Captains of Industry including the shipping company owners and the shipyard owners but the ship owners weren't nearly as interested in subsidies to maintain a minimally necessary Merchant Marine in the National interest. What the ship owners wanted was cheap labor and ship costs. Open registries, known by American seamen as "monkey flags" created the opportunity for American ship owners to decouple from American built ships and American labor. The shipyards were told they could prosper on Cold War driven Navy construction as the nation advanced towards a 600 ship Navy. The American merchant flag all but disappeared from the sea and today a 300 ship Navy is a ceiling not a floor. The deep draft ship yards are closing. 

 The American blue water merchant marine died in a perfect storm of neglect brought about by "ownership" of both political parties by wealthy elites. The ship owners were chasing cheap labor, had a public image of being anti subsidy to maintain, and Democrats while pro union, were anti corporate welfare and the subsidies went to companies not individual labor union members. Both sides seemed to agree that America needed its merchant marine, but neither side could ever come up with any thing like a national shipping company because their over lords simply had other interests that they wanted their respective political parties and office holders to attend to. The American Merchant Marine died because it had no sponsor among the billionaire backers of both parties. The American Merchant Marine was only the financial interest of its tens of thousands of employees. Those middle class people the government levies taxes against, but who don't give millions to political candidates. Those voters who only get to choose between candidates of two parties who are selected as candidates mostly by appealing to the politically funding elite of either party. The constitution does not provide a role for political parties. Other minor parties do exist, but rarely emerge into the public conscientiousness because they do not attract that top 2% of the socioeconomic ladder to buy them massive media campaigns.

 It is absolutely vital that the United States have enough of a traditional blue water merchant marine to augment the Navy in time of armed conflict and to carry a sizable portion of our commerce at those times when no one else will. Most sane and sensible higher wage countries also face the need for a viable blue water merchant marine and an inability to compete with third world labor forces. The usual solution is the formation of a national shipping company. 

 These are actual for profit corporations designated as the beneficiary of cargo preference laws which reserve certain cargoes to the national shipping company. These national shipping companies also receive certain tax payer funded subsidies often in exchange for incorporating certain features useful to national defense in their ship designs, and agreeing to make their ships immediately available to the national government in times of emergencies. Relatively little tax money is actually spent on these national shipping lines, they are often self sufficient in operating expenses based on actual freight earned. Capital is raised by stock sales. Since the National shipping company by definition may call on the government for a bailout if it falls into extreme circumstances most investors find it a relatively safe investment. Cargo preference laws insure full freight earning holds. What a hybrid, it offends certain principles of every "ism" you can think of, except one, pragmatism. Many of these national shipping companies work. Yet they smack of something that many of us believe is our present real, underlying, sick system, crony capitalism.


 That really is our present default setting serially changing crony capitalism. The Democrats come in and favor their sponsors until the Republicans expose enough of their activities to alarm the American populace. Then the Republicans gain power and shift the corporate/government hog trough to their sponsors. And the process repeats itself. Yet in many (not all) national shipping companies we see a sort of crony capitalism program that works. Why are these crony capitalism programs effective? The successful ones start from a consideration of the public interest; the nation really needs a merchant marine. Then the framers in the legislative assembles review the reality, namely that real national registries can't compete against open registries which allow anyone to register a ship with no real connection to the flag state and select crews from the global labor market, as well as buy  and insure ships on the global market. So a very realistic decision is made to use public tax money and legislative power to set up these quasi public national shipping companies. But stock is sold to the general public, and the criteria for participating business organizations is generally that such companies be national corporations not friends of the administration or legislature though being such a friend probably doesn't hurt. Over sight is two fold. The government usually maintains unusual elements of oversight due to its role in creating the shipping company, and the stockholders generally maintain the typical levels of oversight that stockholders collectively usually do. 

 Successful National shipping companies illustrate something important for America's future. Some ideas of the far left, far right, crony capitalism, and every shade in the middle or edges of the various isms may work on any specific problem. In seeking solutions to national problems our guiding principals must not be any "ism" except pragmatism. The primary discussion items that should start any legislative or executive discussion of a course of action by government addressing a problem should be ; "is it moral and ethical?", "will it work?".  If these two questions can be answered in the affirmative the next question is; "How can we craft it to work best?"

 The question of is it ethical or moral implies that there must be some societal consensus on morals and ethics. I submit that America does have a very large consensus on morality and ethics. Over 76% of Americans are regular church attending contributing members of Christian Churches. The next largest religious group in America is Jewish and both have the ten commandants in common.Think of the ten commandants as the list of prohibited activities and attitudes. The government can't enforce attitudes (Thou shalt not covet they neighbors.....). But if one acts on the these dangerous attitudes by stealing ( Thou shalt not steal) one risks a criminal sanction for the act. If one acts on a covetous attitude by seducing another's spouse one risks serious civil sanction if the offended spouse sues. The separation of church and state make it impossible for government to sanction against blasphemy, or enforce weekly worship. However societal attitudes still make public blasphemy ill advised. Such utterances are even politically incorrect with the secular humanists who basically hate religion. Because of the sheer numbers of believers in American society blasphemy is still considered an ill intended, ill advised, utterance contrary to the public peace.  The ten commandments are also well known by the majority of Muslims  in this country. So when it comes to the prohibited actions, and dangerous attitudes there is very wide spread agreement among a very large segment of the population. Among the 24 % of America that are not formally affiliated Christians, many are former formally affiliated Christians, or were raised in formally affiliated Christian families and are quite familiar with the Juedo-Christian moral ethical code. The positive guidelines for decent behavior and attitudes are most succinctly described in the sermon on the mount ("Blessed are the peacemakers", etc.). Modern biblical scholars note that most of the sermon on the mount incorporates earlier rabbinical teachings that are not so centrally located and described in the Talmud. So America has somewhere between about an 86 to 90% consensus on a basic , codified, cite-able system of morals and ethics. 

 The secular humanists who seek to impose their narrow minority view as a state religion, like to cite shades of difference between the majority as reason for insisting there is no consensus on morals and ethics. That sets the stage for their argument that their view should therefore guide all law, which of late it certainly has. Buts lets reexamine just one common argument from the secular humanists exploitation of shades of difference in an otherwise pretty solid consensus. For example, the secular humanist argue that a vast majority are in favor of abortion on demand. This is simply not true. When the population is surveyed in depth on the issue it emerges that more than 76 % are in favor of the regulation of abortion, and then they vary on how much and what kind. To have 76% of the population wanting some degree of regulation of an act is a far cry from the claim that the overwhelming majority side with unrestricted abortion on demand. When questioned on partial birth abortion over 90% of the population sees clearly that this is simply infanticide and oppose it. The actual public "consensus" on abortion on demand is nothing like the description that secular humanists push in their captive media. But any time the public consensus is nuanced they claim it is on their side. Many of the 76% of those who favor regulation of abortion would allow it under circumstances that vary with the individual respondent.  So since the actual public majority consensus allows for abortion under certain circumstances, the secular humanists declare victory and drive their view into judicial policy. Its fundamentally dishonest and undemocratic but its what America has been living with since sometime in the 1960s when the Secular Humanists started gaining in their drive to become the de facto state religion. The rest of the religions didn't know there was a race and assumed the issue was settled that there would be no such thing.  

 So how did Moses depiction find its way into the U.S. Supreme court's architecture (far more difficult to remove than a plaque containing the ten commandants), and so many other court houses across the nation? To the founding fathers Moses was a "law giver", and legal commentator and a very important one. The founding fathers felt that law should be just and moral, and ethical and in their world there was a well received codified and citeable moral ethical code well understood and adhered to by a vast majority of the population. Anyone who will look past the Secular Humanists propaganda today will see that this consensus code is still alive and well with the vast majority of Americans across many class and racial lines today. To understand better this relationship between the majority American ethical/ moral code I suggest reading "THE GENESIS OF JUSTICE by Alan Dershowitz.  
(Editors Note: Link to Book Below)                                              
Now some of you no doubt are asking yourself what's a catfish know about the Bible and why would he cite stuff in it ? As I've mentioned before I'm 3,000 years old and read a lot. In 3,000 years of reading human screeds I'm well aware that the World's best selling book of all time is the Bible. If  you haven't studied it you can't call yourself educated. It is central to Western civilization, which has been extremely influential to global civilization in the last 500 years. But then you humans rarely live even one hundred years and few are real students of history. So do yourself a favor and listen to the old catfish. You are being manipulated by both political parties and the new invisible state church none of which have your best interest, the national interest, or your consensus moral and ethical code in mind. America must return to the "American way".


 The way back to "Americanism" or  the "American way" can only be through the electorate. Both houses of Congress, many state houses, municipal governments and the White House are hopelessly lost. The "American way" defined is:

1. Moral and ethical along Juedo-Christian lines though often nuanced, it lends itself to citation and has a consistency that is reliable. It is assessible for understanding and in fact is largely understood by the the overwhelming vast majority of the population. The heart of it can be contained in about three written pages; the Ten Commandants (the "don'ts") and the Sermon on the Mount (or "Beatitudes", the "dos"). Reference to it in considering legislation is not adherence to a state religion, simply conferral with the majority of the population's moral ethical reference. It is not established in law. That would be the only constitutional violation relative to this code, it has a place in public debate.

2. Pragmatic, so much so that it can accept ideas from anywhere that are constitutional  moral and ethical , if they are seen as highly likely to actually work .

3. Neighborly, Americans are are not content with devil take the hindmost economics. They have always been willing to help a neighbor in distress. They are unwilling to see the government own the means of production. Everyone knows from history that is a bankrupt idea. Our system is REGULATED CAPITALISM. 

        Basically the Democrats want to eliminate the right to fail by eliminating economic and political freedoms. They have already crossed over the line involving the government directly into the running of a publicly held corporation, with the President of the United States asserting the right to hire and fire executives. They have crossed the line into religion by claiming the right to determine what activities outside of church attendance are "religious" and have imposed on Church run hospitals compliance and demands for money for activities deemed immoral by the affected dominations  The Democrats have taken bold strides into the real socialists camp, a desolate failed place.   

 The Republicans want to eliminate any of the neighborly cushions society has erected to cushion the fall of those down on their luck, until you reach the economic power level of a "Captain of Industry" then they want absolute assurance against failure by government bailout. Most of the electronic and a lot of the print media is aligned with the Democrats. Talk radio and a few magazines are dominated by the Republicans.  You can't believe anything the media tells you. They are the biggest part of the secular humanist movement to create a state religion by assembling a coherent anti religious / anti American consensus philosophy to guide all legislation and legal opinion. As I warned in "Namazu Fully Loaded Parts 1 &2 ,The Future of America" we are headed into a time when despite a soon to be oil driven temporary recovery, forces are in motion for a permanent change in the basic underpinning of society. Plain and simply, each year it takes fewer and fewer people to produce more and more wealth. By mid century most people will have to get by on very intermittent work at best. The smart thing to do for everyone is to thicken the cushion to reflect the on coming reality. If we fail to help keep up the purchasing power of the population, no one will be able to buy the products of increased production and the system collapses. As far left as it sounds these are the facts. We have only a very short time to devise a system that isn't a welfare state that rewards indolence, and isn't the present form of crony capitalism, but assures a population utterly lacking in opportunity for regular full time work a decent living. This is the challenge of the immediate future that no one is addressing. 

 In the unprecedented time looming just ahead how will the United States intelligently cushion the right to fail? Not eliminate it, not ignore it, how will you, the American people intelligently cushion it? You already have in place the necessary mechanisms for intelligently regulated capitalism. There is no need for armed rebellion. The electorate must simply recapture the legislative and executive branches at the ballot box and install pragmatic office holders guided by the real "American Way". How do you do that given that the two major parties are owned by warring factions of the "top 2%"?

 Fortunately for you, after 3,000 years of historical observation I do have a suggested plan for action for you.

1. Change your voter registration to Independent. This signals both parties that they can not count on your vote, they have to earn it by addressing your requirements for government. 

2. Vote regularly and independently. If one party controls the house vote for the opposite in the Senate. Vote for independents and third party members whenever you feel they make sense to you. Stop considering a vote for someone not affiliated with one of the two big parties a waste. That vote for "neither of the above" will stop these runaway parties from claiming any "mandate" to continue to push things in the direction demanded by their fat cat financial backers.   

3. VOTE FOR THESE TYPES OF MEASURES: There are several things that are needed now for the nation to survive the coming ever worsening job shortage. Some are already the norm in Europe including in some countries that are not failing. 

a. Workers of the future need to select a field and strive to stay within in it and seek continuing education and training between intermittent jobs to constantly make them more attractive for the few coveted full time career positions. Such education and training should be heavily government subsidized to keep it dirt cheap or free.  Vote for candidates who support government subsidized post secondary education , training and retraining for adults.   

b. This is already law in quite a number of European states that in fact are not on the brink of failure. Such seniority as determines lengths of vacation time, should be based on time in a given industrial or commercial field and transfer with the individual worker between companies. Medical benefits are maintainable between jobs and travel with the individual to new jobs.

c. Vacation periods must mandated and longer, with 30 days a minimum to generate more temporary vacation relief work for the less senior workers in any given field. Thirty days is a fairly uniform standard in the EU.

d. As the necessary work force gets smaller, retirement age must be reduced not increased. Younger workers in an intermittent work force need a chance to gain experience  There must be ample movement permanently out of fields of endeavor to generate rotation into permanent full time positions which will be scarce.    

c. In a work force where most people during a major portion of their careers are stuck in intermittent temporary jobs with sometimes lengthy periods of unemployment, adequate income during those periods must be assured. Unemployment benefits should increase not decrease, and be available for longer periods. Benefits should be increased and lengthened while attending full time education or training relevant to the citizen's career path. 

d.  In order to settle the debt and pay for all this there will have to be a lot more tax revenue. It can not continue to be raised by taxing an ever shrinking middle class. To increase revenues, improve fairness, and spread the burden vote for candidates who favor phasing out the IRS and replacing the income tax with a national sales tax ("value added tax" or VAT) on everything except food, medicine, and medical care.

 What I'm suggesting to you is far from the direction of socialism with an official state religion (Secular Humanism) that the Democrats are trying to install. It is also far "left" of anything the Republicans are pushing. But what I am suggesting to you in these particulars of an intelligently regulated capitalism is reality based. This "slow" or "remarkably job free" "recovery" is no fluke. We are literally rushing into a technology driven period that will reach true crisis proportions by mid century where intermittent temporary employment will be the norm for the vast majority of working age people. These suggestions adopted soon will deliver the United States to mid century with the least pain, and better position it for what comes after that which is more of the same.  The work force required to produce vast wealth in the form of goods and services continues to shrink globally.  What you do in the second half of the century I don't know. But these suggestions if adopted soon will deliver you to the half century mark in pretty decent shape. After that the game begins to change really dramatically as the proportion of people who may participate in productive work continues to shrink at a quickening pace. Somewhere along that line to the future event horizon, maybe early in the 22nd century if we haven't followed the advice of Mother Theresa and "leaned to share" civilization will collapse in the midst of potential plenty.   Take a lesson from our failed merchant marine policies and other nation's successful National Shipping Companies, drop the "ism's" and opt for intelligently regulated capitalism the "American Way", now.  

 After 3,000 years of observation of human society these suggestions are the best the old catfish can do for you. But believe me when I tell you, you are better off following the advice of a giant catfish than the public pronouncements of any American politician or office holder presently having access to a microphone. With apologies for rambling I'll sign off now.

Best Regards,

No comments:

Post a Comment