In a struggle for America’s soul

“65 years or more of warfare and ethnic-cleansing have gone along with the emergence of Israel as a state in the Mideast, with the US as its primary backer.  Other than Jimmy Carter, nary a card-carrying American liberal of note has had a thing to say about that in all this time, but that might be likely to change soon.”


by Rufus Petersen

For Veterans News Now


For those of us Americans who not only pay attention to the world around us but actually ponder it without entirely accepting it, great changes seem possible while a death grip of inaction is the order of the day. Constantly we are told that we have never been more divided, and that there are two basic camps locked in mortal combat against each other in a struggle for America’s soul.

This is, and is not true. It is certainly what our media would have us believe, and this should bear some examination.

I grew up as a liberal not because I was exactly raised as one but because the times demanded it of young people. This was the 1970’s. My parents stumbled towards conservatism as I in my youth sensed deep fractures in them and society. They went right as I immediately gravitated left and the old adage about how a young person who is not a liberal has no heart while someone over 40 not a conservative has no brain was as true then as it is today.

I questioned none of this status quo (or that the Left itself was perhaps also a status quo) until about the time I turned 30, and through some chance encounters began to explore elements of conservative thought. Concurrently, I’d heard that by their mid 20’s, most people had established their basic belief structure and that from then on there was little growth or change in thinking. I vowed that this was not going to happen to me.

Shortly after this I lost all faith in partisan politics. I did however vote for Bill Clinton in 1992- the last time I ever voted for a Democrat or Republican for President. Twenty odd years later I realize I’ve been weighing the ever-morphing positions of what’s passed as “liberalism” and “conservatism” for the past two decades, picking what I like from one group, doing the same with the others and mixing and matching. The only problem has been that the positions I’ve picked only had relevancy to the world as it was about 40 years ago because the political process has been subtly shifting them at the behest of what is expedient for whichever group at any given moment. This has been going on for more than a century, resulting in significant warpage over time and rendering a distorted view of politics in the long run. Ideas of what it is to be conservative or liberal are and pretty arbitrary and relative, and perhaps they always were. But trying to see the original picture now is nigh impossible.

During the lead-up to the 2012 election I realized that left and right over the past few years had shifted so far to the right that in my very red state where I’d been operating pragmatically as Republican, I was now in the view of all my contemporaries and peers essentially a liberal. While I don’t necessarily accept this state of affairs, the fact remains- gay marriage and any Tomas, Ricardo and Enrique slipping across the border be damned (unreasonable and unquestioning liberal shibboleths, both). Regardless of how I see myself or vote, I know where I’ll be lumped in- no matter how much that I yell that I’m a paleo-conservative, thank you.

Let’s look at a little history and do some jumping around. Abe Lincoln, the President who freed the slaves was a Republican. Thanks to the flying monkeys of Richard Nixon and then Ronald Reagan, close to thirty-five years after that virtually every white person living south of the Mason Dixon line became a Republican. and thirty-five years since then, virtually every black person who votes is still a Democrat, which was definitely not the party of Lincoln, but that which opposed him. Does this make any sense? There was also a time when liberals and social activists went to church, and many Republicans were pro-choice and believed in letting people make up their minds about all sorts of things. George Herbert Walker Bush was one of those people. Odder still is the notion that not too long ago lots of white men used to be staunch Democrats who believed in their own rights as workers, rather than in the rights of their own employers to make hundreds or thousands more than they do. We live in interesting times, but from the point of view of some of us, we appear to be moving backwards.

Liberals, it’s high time you do some soul-searching. Read some history, do some pondering and ask yourself basic questions such as what is and was the definition of a liberal. Is that still you and are you happy about what it is to be a liberal now? And in an ever-changing world, isn’t there room for some change in that right now? Does it make you glad to be part of a group which excludes the interests of white people, particularly poor ones, in what can only be a purposeful way? And above all, do you believe in Empire and Endless War like many of your brethren who do so tacitly because they don’t come out and endorse it? They are going along with it nevertheless. And if you support any politician who supports current war efforts, that is exactly what you are doing. I don’t know about you, but I’ve never heard that liberals were supposed to be about that kind of thing.

An examination of US history shows that liberal presidents from 1917 forward (Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Harry Truman and LBJ all led us into wars not in the interest of the US. Yes, that includes the holy of holies- WWII, “The Good War”, and if you think that conflict was started for us when Japan “sneak attacked” Pearl Harbor then you’ve only been minding the court historians’ records of events- the ones in text books and on TV. This is what the internet is for.

At any rate, Liberals have a rather checkered past for a political persuasion that often sells itself as being a promoter of peace. Contrary to to what we’ve been told, you can’t fight for peace and you can’t kill for peace especially if you are going overseas to defend someone else’s peace. There is no such thing as a “good” war. You can’t preserve health by spreading disease either.

Peace is perhaps not a good thing for arms manufacturers, but when you look at government expenditures on defense spending:



(53 cents out of every tax dollar you pay; more is spent on defense here than the rest of the nations of the planet combined) and you wonder why our government is always scrambling to pay its bills while our unfortunates suffer, a little light bulb should go on in your mind. No, these dots were never connected during the last presidential campaign, and the mainstream media was more than complicit in this, but the truth is that wars cost a whole lot of money.

So does propping up a warlike nation at the other end of the Mediteranean who insist on being a bully and a gangster to all its neighbors.

That alone costs us in the neighborhood of three billion a year. It’s very strange but I just heard this on National Public Radio the other day. Certainly it was the first time I’d ever heard such a figure about our foreign aid to Israel in the mainstream media.

But things are changing.

Barack Obama has hardly been a peacenik (neither has he been a civil libertarian; something that should give liberals pause) but he can see the writing on the wall- those big letters which read AUSTERITY. Of course Republicans have been using that word a lot, but the only ones who seem to be getting on the same page as per ending wars and foreign aid are most notably Chuck Hagel and Rand Paul. Surely this is where some bipartisanship is in order if it ever was. Out of desperation other sensible people in Congress and elsewhere who actually want to engage in problem-solving will most likely emerge from the woodwork in the near future, and say similar things. And they will need a lot of support.

Political correctness is a weapon continually used to keep gentile, non-minority people with their arguments inside established borders– where they can be defeated, unheard or unacknowledged. / (see critiques) Widely promulgated on the Left for three decades, ironically it is now being used by conservatives against the Obama administration to stop the nomination of Chuck Hagel for Secretary of Defense.–politics.html Political-correctness has been used in favor of all minority groups, but its been used most constantly and consistently in the defense of organized Jewry.

There is a lobby in Congress that has until now been completely unassailable, unlike the gun lobby which is taking a whole lot of heat right now for obvious reasons. That’s the Israel lobby, with AIPAC as the one group of the bunch we here about 95% of the time. Just to get an idea of how big the lobby is, I’d like to point out that there is a Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations to coordinate the affairs of the lobby. Have you ever heard of anything similar for any other ethnic group in America? And why are you only hearing about any of this now? It’s because someone determined that you didn’t need to know. For more information see If Americans Knew: and Council for the National Interest:

65 years or more of warfare and ethnic-cleansing have gone along with the emergence of Israel as a state in the Mideast, with the US as its primary backer. Other than Jimmy Carter, nary a card-carrying American liberal of note has had a thing to say about that in all this time, but that might be likely to change soon. No doubt there are many things that a good and authentic Liberal needs to pay attention to (like CONSERVATION- remember that?), but this is a big one that deserves much.

There is no pie in the sky and the world will never be perfect for everyone. But that doesn’t mean that we should give up trying. Isn’t that what being a Liberal is supposed to be all about?

Rufus Peterson, a fifty-something, temporarily faceless, bohemian Paleoconservative artist and writer living in Idaho.

It's only fair to share...Share on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on RedditShare on TumblrEmail this to someone

Related Posts:

All content herein is owned by author exclusively. Expressed opinions are not necessarily the views of VNN, VNN authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians or Veterans Today Network and its assigns. In addition, all images within this post are the full responsibility of the author and NOT Veterans Today Network.
Legal Notice - Comment Policy

Posted by on January 17, 2013, With 0 Reads, Filed under Life, World. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry

FaceBook Comments

One Response to "In a struggle for America’s soul"

  1. Rufus Peterson  January 17, 2013 at 11:33 pm

    Television is one way to miss life, isn’t it- or were you talking about the Council On Foreign Relations?

You must be logged in to post a comment Login