I agree with alot of what you say. Not trying to be a smart ass just clear up tinny points:
I always thought most of the other countries in the world subscribed to the idea of NOT following America. We do things differently here in America and it's what has made us the most powerful nation on Earth. Hell, who the fuck doesn't use the metric system besides the good ol' US of A?
The United Kindom and some former commenwealth Nations uses the English system like the USA. We do things differently in this country and we have been looked to as a beacon of freedom from our seperation from the United Kingdom. A document written in 1776, the Decleration of Independence said that all men are created equal and endowed by there creator with certain inalieanble rights among those life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Then came the constitution after independence that defined the powers of the federal government and enumerated certain rights through the first 10 amendments, the "Bill of Rights".
In this country we have a free press. When they lie to us its our fault for buying their newspapers and believing their stories. We have the right to vote, most middle americans have libertarian ideas or leanings but don't understand the libertarian party, the similarity with the word "liberal" which is usually used in the pejorative unfortuanately, by myself included. When I think liberal I think of a politician using the political machinery liberally to achieve there political ends. Of the 2 party spectrum, the Republicans, suprisingly, in theory, are the ones that are for less government size and interfernance, subscribing to the romantic idea (and not far fetched) that Americans can solve their own problems through ingenuety and self-reliance, that a government savior run by arrogant left-wing pricks don't have faith in the average American. This is why they (left wing liberals)have to take it upon themselves to save the people from their backwards, unsoffisticated selves. And during the recession they believe in increasing gov services, even if this means forced treatment and exercizing the law enforcement muscle from time to time to protect poor, uniformed, unwordly or unsophisticated American simepltons from evil people that would exploit them like growers from drug co-ops. Got to keep people employed- people filing for unemployment looks bad, fighting the drug war is one of a mariad of ways of keeping bureacratic law-enforcement types busy, employed, and from their perspective, fighting a worthy cause. This is a government that knows whats best for you.
Of the 2, the republicans offer the most likely potential to stay away from drug prohibition. One example- when Bush was in office- it would appear that National security outweighed the threat of opium production, US comanders on the ground would strike deals with opium growers out of necessity. My theory is that Obama is steping up this effort to be more international- less of an unimformed simpleton (like his predecessor has ben portrayed) helping our Nato allies fight opium production- thus pulling out of Iraq- a place not fully stabalized (we should never had gone in there but leaving the job half done does more harm than good, see aphganistan post- soviets-the Taliban rosebecause the country didn't get the support it deserved for helping end the cold war), now we have no natural buffer against Iran!. Problem is they (the mainstream republican party) do tend to be authoritarian in many respects- i think alot is rhetoric.
The point is America has unique characteristics that must be preserved so that "freedom doesn't perish from the face of the earth". Ron Paul is a republican, a model of the Libertarian end of the republican party. One thing that Libertarians and Greens share for instance is that we are idealistically determined to turn America into a place that is a goverment of the people, by the people and for the people, even if the views are polar oposite in many ways.
Back to the Bill of rights. When a government becomes too overeaching, it is every americans duty to see it is replaced. In the next election for congress this is the time. Even voting independent or for the third party of your choice. Free elections have not been suspended so we don't need violent revolution yet. A vote on a thrird party ticket
is not a wasted vote. I can't emphasize this enough. One should never have to vote for the lesser of 2 evils b/c there are alternatives.
about revelution: The Second Amendement. The one that makes all the other ones possible.
France helped us win our independece and adopted some of our ideals in their revolution, though they suffered from class warfare that fucked alot of things up. In the American Colonies, the wealthy farmers, intellectuals, and less affluent faught side by side. Our constitution has not been replaced. The Decleration of independence still is valid.
The Swiss in the 1800s used the USA as a model for their current political system, with a relatively weak federal government, strong cantonal rights, staying out of foreign intanglements, free gun ownership (of asault riffles) and a mostly non professional peoples militia defending the country (until age 50.)
or something). They are like early America in a time warp. They didn't decriminalize canabis but pragmatically, they legalized safe injection rooms, a heroin Rx program were you can get like 750 mg or there abouts of heroin per shot, safe crack smoking room, and cocaine medical maintenance on the horizon). Heroin was legal because from a harm reduction standpoint the program has been highly effective. Despite all those guns and easy access to IV drugs, Switzerland does not have a high murder rate or gunshot assault rate. Crime decreased after heroin maintenance therapy, and up to 1/3 of those on the program graduate to other treatment modalities or decrease there total dose. 750 mg of pure heroin is a dynamite dose. I think they didn't legalize weed because it was easier just not enforcing it agressively.
Another truth: Drugs are illegal by international treaty in 100% of the world. Singapore and Dubai might react differently than Switzerland, Portugal, British Colombia, cities in Germany like Franfurt, Cambodia, and Bolivia or Colombia, but at this point drugs are illegal on the whole face of the planet.
America was a big influence and continues to be in the war on drugs but is not the only one, believe me. America has steped up its effort to fight opium in Aphganistan of which it receives only a fraction of its supply but its is being decried by countries such as Russia in the UN for doing nothing about poppy eradication.
As Americans we are used to being blamed for doing too much or not enough. I say we, like Switzerland, withdraw from the international realm to a great degree. Like Haiti, for instance, we are going to provide probaly 80%+ of the aid for a thug country that can't seem to get there shit together- ruled by thugs. Undeniably, in the near future I predict as usually is the case we will be decried in the UN for not doing enough in Haiti by a country that has done nothing, when we are in severe finacial straights at home. Maybe the french should be handling this. They have supply ships and a modest expeditionary capability. They even have the French foreign Legion for the dirty work so Les Francais don't have to die in police actions. There the ones that pulled out of the territory in the historical past and left it in disarray and its people in abject poverty and deperation. It was the bleeding heart generosity of the American people that tried to get the ex french colony stabalized and back on its feet several times over the past century.
I'll repeat what I said earlier, drugs icluding cannabis are illegal over 100% of the planet unless there is an obscure island nation in the South Pacific (or maybe the Vatican) that didn't sign the single uniform controlled subtance act of 1961 and subsequent ones. Maybe its legal in an obscure chunck of antartica (provided international law doesn't apply there).
I like Obama the man but he might have to succumb to international pressure. He wouldn't be the first to flip on an issue. Remember Bush Sr., "Read my lips, no new taxes"8)