Pooled Sovereignty
June 21st, 2012 // 7:06 pm @ Oliver DeMille
The breeding ground for a global system that supports pooled sovereignty is found in the top universities, and it is promoted by the bureaucratic elite in many nations.
Much of what occurs in Washington only makes sense to those who understand this drift toward globalization.
For example, a push for increased government spending, debt and regulation on small business (even in the face of recession and a struggling economy) make perfect sense if the goal is to shift the American economy away from international leadership to global participation—to make the U.S. economy and government more like those of Europe and Asia.
Stimulus, universal health care, less entrepreneurship (through increased levels of government regulation)—all are necessary to create an American economy that can fit seamlessly with the industrialized European/Asian nations.
Another step in this process is to end the use of the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency and replace it with an IMF or other currency.
The IMF has already proposed this change, and international support for it is growing.
Just to be clear, when the dollar replaced the British pound as the world’s reserve currency in the 1970s, the average net worth of nearly every home in Britain fell more than 30% the day after the change.
The British economy has still never fully recovered, nearly forty years later.
If the same change comes to the U.S., we will likely experience a worse economy for the next four decades than we have over the past four years.
Unfortunately, as Forbes reported, “It’s hard for the State Department to imagine an international agreement to which America is not part.” Republican and Democratic presidents since FDR have drastically decreased American freedom using treaties.
This is bad for Americans—good for pooled sovereignty.
Ultimately, there are two types of leadership that can turn this around: presidential leadership, and citizen leadership.
Sadly, few candidates for president (from either party) and exactly zero elected presidents since 1959 have effectively pushed back against this growing threat.
As for the American citizenry leading the charge, find out what percentage of your friends can tell you the details in the Law of the Sea Treaty, the Rome Statute, or UN Agenda 21, and that percentage is about how likely the people are to effectively lead.
In fact, this lack of citizen leadership means there is little incentive for presidents to take action against pooled sovereignty.
Or to put this in practical terms, a half-century with a bad economy is likely ahead.
Unless something changes…
***********************************
Oliver DeMille is the co-founder of the Center for Social Leadership, and a co-creator of Thomas Jefferson Education.
He is the co-author of New York Times, Wall Street Journal and USA Today bestseller LeaderShift, and author of A Thomas Jefferson Education: Teaching a Generation of Leaders for the 21st Century, and The Coming Aristocracy: Education & the Future of Freedom.
Oliver is dedicated to promoting freedom through leadership education. He and his wife Rachel are raising their eight children in Cedar City, Utah.
Category : Blog &Citizenship &Current Events &Featured &Foreign Affairs &Leadership
The Battle of the 21st Century
June 7th, 2012 // 6:51 pm @ Oliver DeMille
Once, science and religion and art were the same thing—the search for, and attempt to live, truth.
Then came the rise of dominant government and its attempts to control all.
In the Western world, religion and science were seen as the tools of power.
Sides were taken, and conflicts ensued. Left out of the battle, art developed in the shadows.
In the Orient, a different reality evolved.
Art and religion were considered the great centers of power, and so the lines were drawn and battles came.
Science, once at the forefront of Eastern culture, took a back seat. It grew, but behind the scenes.
By the early 21st Century, at least from the perspective of government power, science had become technology and art had become symbol.
Today the globe is increasingly divided between East and West.
A world is growing around China, encompassing the Orient and also much of the Middle East and Africa.
Another world is centered around the United States and includes most of Europe and the two American continents.
Russia and India have yet to take sides, and Japan is caught between its natural philosophical and geographical sides.
These two worlds have been based on the battle between religion and science in the West and the clash between art and religion in the East.
Ironically, the growing conflict between the two worlds coincides with the rise of each culture’s historical shadows—put succinctly, if the battle comes down to technology the East will win and if it comes down to symbolism the West will be victorious.
Tocqueville predicted in the 1830s that the world was destined to be divided by the followers of Russia and the allies of the United States.
He said that if the battle came down to military conflict Russia would win but if it came down to economics the United States would prevail.
Today, we can see the rise of China and the U.S. in similar terms.
But the idea that China will triumph if the battle is technological while the U.S. will succeed in a symbolic challenge seems counter-intuitive. After all, China is struggling to catch up with the U.S. in things technological and China has millennia of experience mastering symbol.
Still, it isn’t old sources of power that win new conflicts. Innovative power takes the day, and the battle of the 21st Century is lining up to be innovative technology versus innovative symbolism.
Ultimately, it all comes down to leadership. Vision. Creativity. Initiative. Ingenuity. Tenacity. Resiliency. Impact. Hope. Inspiration.
China and its associates will likely fight for its global interests using overwhelming centralized state technological might.
America and allies will push for a democratic world utilizing the massive power of the greatest ideas—chief among them freedom.
Both sides will use both technology and symbol, just like both Russia and the U.S. emphasized both military and economic strength.
But ultimately symbol must overcome centralized might.
The future of world freedom and prosperity depend on it.
Hopefully, the history of this century will not unfold this way, but currently the trends are heading in this direction.
The battle has already begun, and China is aggressively pursuing this course while the U.S. stagnating in a rut of decline.
The sooner America gets its act together, the better.
(An excellent book on how to add symbolic thinking to our analytical world is A Whole New Mind by Daniel Pink.)
***********************************
Oliver DeMille is the co-founder of the Center for Social Leadership, and a co-creator of Thomas Jefferson Education.
He is the co-author of New York Times, Wall Street Journal and USA Today bestseller LeaderShift, and author of A Thomas Jefferson Education: Teaching a Generation of Leaders for the 21st Century, and The Coming Aristocracy: Education & the Future of Freedom.
Oliver is dedicated to promoting freedom through leadership education. He and his wife Rachel are raising their eight children in Cedar City, Utah.
Category : Arts &Blog &Culture &Current Events &Featured
Next…?
May 14th, 2012 // 10:16 am @ Oliver DeMille
THE NEXT BIG TREND: Pooled Sovereignty
by Oliver DeMille
I recently spent two days in a Barnes and Noble reading the bestsellers on current trends and issues. I do this as often as I can—at least three times a year.
Sometimes I emphasize business bestsellers, and other times I focus on political books.
When I was too ill to do these visits for a time, I used Amazon to order the bestsellers every four months. But I prefer the bookstore, because in addition to books it has all the leading periodicals.
How to Read a Book(store) in 4 Easy Steps
I usually find a comfortable chair and stack 20-30 volumes and magazines on the table or floor next to me. Then I skim everything that looks interesting. That’s Step 1.
Step 2 consists of reading the books and articles that really pique my interest. I read them closely, and take notes in my notebook. Step 2 takes at least three hours and sometimes a lot more. If needed, I go back for a second day of reading.
Step 3 is buying the books and periodicals I want to have in my personal library, and Step 4 is re-reading them and organizing my notes from the trip and writing as needed.
On this trip, my travel plans got delayed, so I ended up staying longer than expected. I perused the business bestsellers and added more books to Step 2. Then I skipped to Step 4 and studied three books I’d already read over the last two days.
When I do these bookstore research trips, I’m always looking for something special. I want to see developing trends, new directions, and significant key words that signal where cutting-edge thought is headed. Only once in a while do I find a truly Big Trend, one which promises to remake the future. “Pooled Sovereignty” is just this kind of trend.
Sovereignty Broken Down
Sovereignty is the final say on something, or, having the ultimate power. The American framers were so concerned with the abuses caused by the limitless power of the British government that they established America with split sovereignty.
This meant that the federal government had just twenty powers, all listed and numbered in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. The final say, or sovereignty, over everything else was left to the states, or to the people – and the states were limited in their respective constitutions.
The people were ultimately sovereign.
Moreover, just in case the federal government tried to ignore the Constitution and usurp sovereignty from the states and the people, the framers divided the smaller portion of sovereignty given to Washington D.C. into three branches and established checks and balances to keep too much power from accumulating in any one place.
For decades scholars, students and interested citizens from both Left and Right have warned that sovereignty is centralizing in Washington, that split sovereignty is being replaced by a massive centralized sovereignty—all power in one place.
Pooled sovereignty is even worse. This occurs where international organizations or treaties make the final decisions for the people, regardless of what national governments say. Indeed, some of the most damaging choices being made today are decided without the consent of Congress or the Supreme Court – not to mention the states or the people. They are made by treaties, the United Nations, G-20, World Bank, International Monetary Fund and other international organizations.
Most Americans turn off their thinking when they hear this list of international agencies—but the elite perk up with interest. This is where the buzz is.
The breeding ground for a global system that supports pooled sovereignty is found in top universities, and it is promoted by the bureaucratic elite in many nations. Much of what occurs in Washington only makes sense to those who understand this drift toward globalization.
The Grand Design
For example, a push for increased government spending, debt and regulation on small business (even in the face of recession and a struggling economy) make perfect sense if the goal is to shift the American economy away from international leadership to global participation—to make the U.S. economy and government more like those of Europe and Asia.
Stimulus, universal health care, less entrepreneurship (through increased levels of government regulation)—all are necessary to create an American economy that can fit seamlessly with the industrialized European/Asian nations.
Another step in this process is to end the use of the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency and replace it with an IMF or other currency. The IMF has already proposed this change, and international support for it is growing.
Just to be clear: When the dollar replaced the British pound as the world’s reserve currency in the 1970s, the average net worth of nearly every home in Britain fell more than 30% the day after the change. The British economy has still never fully recovered, nearly forty years later.
If the same change comes to the U.S., we will likely experience a worse economy for the next four decades than we have over the past four years.
Unfortunately, as Forbes reported, “It’s hard for the State Department to imagine an international agreement to which America is not part.”[i] Republican and Democratic presidents since FDR have drastically decreased American freedom using treaties. This is bad for Americans, good for pooled sovereignty.
Ultimately, there are two types of leadership that can turn this around: presidential leadership, and citizen leadership.
We Need You to Lead Us
Sadly, few presidential candidates (from either party) and exactly zero elected presidents since 1959 have effectively pushed back against this growing threat.
As for the American citizenry leading the charge: find out what percentage of your friends can tell you the details in the Law of the Sea Treaty, the Rome Statute, or UN Agenda 21, and that is a predictor of how likely the people are to effectively lead.
In fact, this lack of citizen leadership means there is little incentive for presidents to take action against pooled sovereignty. Or to put this in practical terms, a half-century with a bad economy is likely ahead.
Unless something changes…
We need citizens who study what our government is doing, who read treaties and court cases and executive orders, etc. Without this, the age of American prosperity will continue to decline.
Where to start? The three books I closely studied at Barnes and Noble are an excellent beginning. If you are liberal, try Drift by Rachel Maddow. Conservatives will probably prefer Dick Morris’s book Screwed. If you’re an independent, read them both. In addition, everyone should read How Do You Kill a Million People by Andy Andrews. Just reading these books and the documents they cite would be a great study on current America.
The future belongs to our citizens—and the level of our citizenship will determine what happens in the years and decades ahead. If we are Type B citizens (who vote, go to jury duty, and watch the news), we’re going to witness the decay of American freedom and prosperity.
We need Type A citizens, who in addition to voting and jury duty also deeply study the issues, government documents and decisions our government officials are making. We can only influence things if we know what’s really happening.
And: Next?
The second day at Barnes and Noble, the intercom announced that children’s reading time was starting. I took a break from reading and walked over to see America’s future. One mother brought her small son, and she read a thick book while he enjoyed reading hour alone. I was surprised they went ahead with the reading hour when only one child showed up. I don’t know why others didn’t bring their children, and I wonder what kind of America this boy and his peers will inherit.
I asked his mother what book she was reading. It was titled—no lie—City of Lost Souls. I wish that boy had been joined by an army of his peers—preparing to lead.
All through history, free people have been nations of readers. When the people oversee the government, they remain free. When they don’t…
[i] Quoted in Screwed: How Foreign Countries are Ripping America Off and Plundering Our Economy – and How Our Leaders Help Them Do It by Dick Morris and Eileen McGann, HarperCollins, May 8, 2012.
Category : Aristocracy &Blog &Book Reviews &Citizenship &Constitution &Current Events &Foreign Affairs &Government &Independents &Leadership &Statesmanship
Predicting Elections
April 18th, 2012 // 6:25 pm @ Oliver DeMille
There are various methods and matrices for predicting elections, none of them infallible.
But one does come pretty close.
When an incumbent president is running for reelection, the growth rate of discretionary income citizens have during the first two quarters of the election year always accurately predicts the election.
If it increases during the first six months of the election year, the incumbent is reelected.
If not, he isn’t.
There are no exceptions to this rule in recent American history, and the rate of discretionary income so far in 2012 is decreasing. Moreover, most people feel it is seriously decreasing.
For example, though we’ve seen over two years of slight economic growth, which in technical terms means we are in a recovery, over 70% of Americans polled in April 2012 say we are still in recession.
Their discretionary income is down, and they feel it.
This is bad or good news—depending on who you want to win the presidential election in November.
Certainly the race promises to be a tough one where simple statistics won’t sway everything.
But there has yet to be an exception to this formula.
There is always the potential of some major surprise—positive or negative—in world affairs or economic events.
And even some predictable surprises are possible, like a shocking Supreme Court decision on health care, economic collapse of another European country, massive increases—or reductions—in oil prices, major mistakes by one of the candidates, a history-changing international incident, or something else.
In short, “It’s the economy, stupid…unless something unexpected happens.”
Or, maybe, it’s the economy regardless of what happens.
Because whatever happens or doesn’t happen, when most households feel their pocketbooks shrinking they want change, and the closer we get to an election, the more drastically things would have to improve in order to change their minds.
Or their votes.
Common wisdom says it’s way too early to predict who will win the 2012 race for the White House.
The thing about statistics is that they can tell us a lot about the past but are seldom deemed reliable in foretelling the future.
Calculations and forecasts have proven a poor substitute for patience.
November 6 (or whenever we actually find out for sure who won) isn’t that far away.
Still, at least a few Beltway insiders will tell you (with a smile or frown, depending on which side of the aisle they support) we are in an election year and most households are feeling the pressures of less discretionary income…
If this turns out to be the reality in yet another presidential election, as tight as the 2012 race seems to be, it will make a believer out of me.
Time will tell.
***********************************
Oliver DeMille is the co-founder of the Center for Social Leadership, and a co-creator of Thomas Jefferson Education.
He is the co-author of New York Times, Wall Street Journal and USA Today bestseller LeaderShift, and author of A Thomas Jefferson Education: Teaching a Generation of Leaders for the 21st Century, and The Coming Aristocracy: Education & the Future of Freedom.
Oliver is dedicated to promoting freedom through leadership education. He and his wife Rachel are raising their eight children in Cedar City, Utah.
Category : Blog &Current Events &Featured &Government &Politics &Uncategorized
The Summer of 2012
April 10th, 2012 // 8:37 pm @ Oliver DeMille
What to Expect as the Year Heats Up
The temperatures are rising for summer, not just literally but also in politics, economics and culture.
There are several important trends that are sure to influence the months ahead, and indeed the summer of 2012 promises to be both historic and memorable.
Each of us should consider these significant trends and keep an eye on how they develop:
1. There is a great debate occurring in the United States about the proper role of government.
One side argues that the government should do whatever it can to make a positive difference in the world, the other that it must be limited to its constitutional roles and leave everything else to the private sector.
Both believe in an important role for government, but disagree on its scope and especially its scale.
This debate is making its way through the entire 2012 election, but it is actually bigger than politics.
It is cultural, and it literally permeates our societal views on economics, education, health care, business, transportation, information, technology, entertainment and beyond.
The disagreement gets to the very heart of how we define freedom in our society.
In this debate about the ideal role of government—especially the federal government—the two big parties are widely divided.
The summer contest will cause more Americans to consider this great question: What is the proper role of government?
Is it to do what the Constitution says, or to do whatever it deems desirable at any given time?
2. Between these two sides, independents find themselves frequently frustrated with the ideological stances of both major parties.
Independents want the government to do better in some things and to be more limited in others.
Independents are less of a bloc than either conservatives or progressives, so it isn’t clear how they will vote.
3. There are three major branches of the Republican Party: the Establishment (which often calls itself the Rockefeller Republicans and is labeled Nixon Republicans by its opponents), the Tea Party or Right Wing populists, and the Reaganites or old-style conservatives.
Mixed into these is a fourth group, the neo-cons, who emphasize America’s role as the world’s sole superpower.
In the 2012 political environment, the one person who speaks with credibility to all four groups in the Republican community is Representative Paul Ryan.
What this means for the future is unclear, but at this point Ryan is the most uniting figure in the GOP.
Moreover, Ryan is credible to a large number of independents. Senator Marco Rubio is also credible to all these groups as well as many independents.
Expect to hear more from these two men over the course of the summer and well into the fall.
4. While the Democratic Party is also divided into at least three major groups (liberals, progressives and proponents of various—and at time conflicting—special interests), all three are united behind President Obama in the 2012 election.
Many non-Democrats may find it surprising that the liberal wing of the Democratic Party is less enthusiastic about President Obama than the progressives and many proponents of special interests.
The reality is that the President has governed more as a progressive than a liberal, and is therefore seen as centrist by many on the Left.
Again, this is a shock to many who get the majority of their news from conservative sources.
The Obama campaign must choose whether to swing left or to the center in the 2012 election, or find some way to appeal to both Left and Center.
This will be a major theme of the summer. So far the campaign has pivoted left and emphasized the message of class division.
It remains to be seen whether this will be the gist of the campaign or simply a feint to be followed by renewed centrism.
5. The campaign of 2012 is being framed by both sides as an attack on each other.
President Obama’s major message isn’t a vision of the future but rather an attack on what Republicans have done, what the Ryan budget means for America, and how we must avoid a return to what he calls the failed Republican policies of the Bush Administration.
So far the Republican message has followed the same playbook: it isn’t yet about a vision of the future but instead emphasizes the failures of the Obama Administration.
Americans are notoriously focused on the future (David Brooks called “Futurism” the American religion), and the winning candidate may well be the one who effectively connects with American voters on a shared vision for the future.
If this does come, it likely won’t happen until fall. The summer may shape up to be deeply negative—at least in political circles.
Attack ads have worked so far in the election, and this will likely continue.
The sooner a top candidate can effectively pivot to a moving positive view of the future, the more support such a candidate is likely to garner from independents.
6. This summer’s Supreme Court decision on Health Care may turn out to be bad for President Obama’s campaign.
If the Court upholds the law, the Republicans will make it a rallying point for the November elections.
If the Court strikes it down, the Obama Administration will probably look vulnerable and ineffective.
If the Court rules the entire law unconstitutional, it could hurt the Republicans as twenty-somethings are taken off their parents’ insurance and other changes occur.
But if the Court simply strikes down the individual mandate, it will most likely hurt Democratic candidates.
7. The Ryan budget may be the crystallizing division in the 2012 debate and election.
Likely most Democrats will be against it, most Republicans for it, and independents will determine America’s future as they analyze and decide whether or not to support it.
Every American should study this budget.
8. Iran… Need I say more? What happens in the Middle East could have drastic impact on fuel prices, inflation and employment rates, all of which will significantly influence the year ahead.
9. Debt crisis? Credit rating? Inflation? Jobs? Credit availability? Small business regulations? Economic upturn or recession? It is unclear where the economy will go in the coming months.
Welcome to the summer of 2012. Temperatures are rising, and the months ahead will make a real difference in America’s future.
In this sputtering economy, will most Americans enjoy a summer of vacations and good times or will a growing frustration heat up as we approach election day?
Whatever happens this fall, our summer will have lasting impact on the history of the United States and our world.
***********************************
Oliver DeMille is the co-founder of the Center for Social Leadership, and a co-creator of Thomas Jefferson Education.
He is the co-author of New York Times, Wall Street Journal and USA Today bestseller LeaderShift, and author of A Thomas Jefferson Education: Teaching a Generation of Leaders for the 21st Century, and The Coming Aristocracy: Education & the Future of Freedom.
Oliver is dedicated to promoting freedom through leadership education. He and his wife Rachel are raising their eight children in Cedar City, Utah.
Category : Blog &Citizenship &Constitution &Current Events &Featured &Government &Independents &Leadership &Politics
